For many months now, it has been clear to Nepalis that their republic, the youngest in the world, would miss its 28 May deadline for drafting a new constitution. That much of the optimism and energy surrounding the April 2008 election, the first after a decade of conflict, had been lost was evident in the run-up to end-May. With political consensus proving elusive, and the peace process moving at a slow crawl, matters came to a head in early May, as the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) enforced an 'indefinite' countrywide strike. The stated intention was to pressure Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal to resign, paving the way for a national unity government headed by the UCPN (Maoist), marking the party's return to power after a year in opposition.
Saying they were bringing 'revolution' to the heart of the country, the Maoist leaders termed the strike 'Jana Andolan 3', after the people's movements that took place in 1990 and 2006, the latter of which heralded the beginning of the end for the Nepali monarchy. Needless to say, this was a controversial categorisation, and one refuted by many. In a show of strength, the party bussed in more than 100,000 people from across the country to the Kathmandu Valley. As people poured in, hoisting party flags, the party leadership organised temporary shelters in public and private schools, shopping malls and abandoned buildings. Those unable to find shelter simply set up camp on the street.
Embarking on this 'revolution' on 1 May, International Labour Day, the Maoists enforced the strike for nearly a week. It was only on 8 May, after six days of complete paralysis, that the party called off the blockade, caving to pressure from the international community and a countrywide public outcry at the devastating economic and social impact. The party leadership also realised that the situation was not progressing as planned, with Prime Minister Nepal refusing to step down even as counter-protests gained strength. But despite the extremity of the shutdown, the country's political dynamics remained unclear, with the three major parties in a state of stalemate, and the nearly four-year peace process at an almost complete standstill. As the wrangling at the national level continued inconclusively, the mood on the streets of Kathmandu during the strike, and the opinions of those participating in both protests and counter-protests, were indicative of the seemingly intractable polarisation that has come to grip the country – even as the writing of the constitution was to have come to a close.
Military discipline
Although the general strike was enforced throughout Nepal, its focus was inevitably on the capital. In the days before 1 May, the mood in Kathmandu was one of anxiety at the scale of unrest that could erupt with the expected massive influx into the valley. Yet though the feeling of being on the cusp of a downward spiral remained throughout the week, a defining characteristic of the protests was the organisation and discipline exhibited by the protestors, something that could be contrasted with the mayhem that visited Bangkok a few weeks later as the anti-government 'Red Shirt' protesters battled the Thai army. In retrospect, the movement was clearly well coordinated, both within the party and on the streets. 'If the cadres were told to sit, they sat,' said one passerby at the May Day gathering. 'If they were told to stand, they stood.'