A plethora of literature explains how armed conflicts terminate in nonviolent political settlements. However, little is known about how and why nonviolence functions as a mechanism of conflict transformation. Using the case study of the 2006 April Uprising (Jana Andolan II) in Nepal, this paper shows how the nonviolent struggle was a vehicle for the termination of the armed conflict that ravaged the country for a decade (1996–2006). The collaboration between the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) and the Communist Party of Nepal Maoist (CPNM), erstwhile enemies, led to nonviolent collective action, driven by the convergence of interests of these two key actors towards fighting a common enemy: the royal Palace. The paper argues that the nonviolent struggle also transformed strategies, attitudes and behaviour of key actors, including the CPNM, which ultimately transformed conflict issues into peace issues and induced structural changes in the long run. Thus the processes of actor transformation, issue transformation and structural transformation catalysed by the April Uprising explain why and how the nonviolent struggle functioned as a catalyst for the termination of the armed conflict.
BaralL.R.2012, Nepal — Nation-State in the Wilderness, New Delhi: Sage.
3.
BhattaraiP.2014, ‘Third-Party Coordination in Conflict Resolution: Views from Third-Party Practitioners in the Maoist Armed Conflict of Nepal and the Moro Conflict of the Philippines’, doctoral thesis, University of Otago.
4.
BhattaraiP.2015, ‘Nonviolence and the April Uprising 2006: The Dynamics of Political Transformation in Nepal’ in MesquitaP.B.D. ed., Kingian Nonviolence: Application for International and Institutional Change, Rhode Island, USA: Center for Nonviolence and Peace Studies, University of Rhode Island: 135–155.
5.
ChamlagaiA.N.2006, ‘Maoist Insurgency: An Ideological Diagnosis’ in BaralL.R. ed., Nepal: Facets of Maoists Insurgency, New Delhi: Adroit Publishers: 13–30.
6.
ChenowethE. & CunninghamK.G.2013, ‘Understanding Nonviolent Resistance: An Introduction’ in Journal of Peace Research50: 3: 271–276.
7.
CPNM1995, ‘Strategy & Tactics of Armed Struggle in Nepal’, The Communist Party of Nepal Maoists: http://www.ucpnm.org/english/doc2.php, accessed 24 April 2017.
EckK.2010, ‘Recruiting Rebels: Indoctrination and Political Education in Nepal’ in LawotiM. & PahariA.K. eds, The Maoist Insurgency in Nepal: Revolution in the Twenty-First Century, New York: Routledge: 33–51.
10.
GaltungJ.1990, ‘Cultural Violence’ in Journal of Peace Research27: 3: 291–305.
11.
GoN2007, The Interim Constitution of Nepal 2063 (2007), Kathmandu: Government of Nepal (GoN).
12.
HachhethuK. & GellnerD.2010, ‘Nepal: Trajectories of Democracy and Restructuring of the State’ in BrassP. ed., Routledge Handbook of South Asian Politics, London and New York: Routledge: 131–146.
13.
HartzellC. & HoddieM.2003, ‘Institutionalizing Peace: Power Sharing and Post-Civil War Conflict Management’ in American Journal of Political Science47: 2: 318–322.
RandleM.2002, ‘The Dynamics of Nonviolent Action’ in RandleM. ed., Challenge to Nonviolence, Bradford: University of Bradford Press: 75–91.
28.
RobertsA. & AshT.G.2009 eds., Civil Resistance and Power Politics: The Experience of Nonviolent Action from Gandhi to the Present, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
29.
SchockK.2005, Unarmed Insurrections: People Power Movements in Nondemocracies, Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press.
30.
ShahS.2008, ‘Revolution and the Reaction in the Himalayas: Cultural Resistance and the Maoist “New Regime” in Western Nepal’ in American Ethnologist35: 3: 481–499.
31.
SharmaS.2004, ‘The Maoist Movement: An Evolutionary Perspective’ in HuttM. ed., Himalayan People's War: Nepal's Maoist Rebellion, Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press: 38–57.
32.
SharpG.1973a, The Politics of Nonviolent Action, Part 2, Boston: Porter Sargent.
33.
SharpG.1973b, The Politics of Nonviolent Action, Part 3, Boston: Porter Sargent.
34.
SijapatiB.2009, ‘People's Participation in Conflict Transformation: A Case Study of Jana Andolan II in Nepal’, Occasional Paper, Future Generations Graduate School, Kathmandu.
35.
SubediD.B.2013, ‘From Civilian to Combatant: Armed Recruitment and Participation in the Maoist Conflict in Nepal’ in Contemporary South Asia21: 4: 429–443.
36.
SubediD.B.2014a, ‘Dealing with Ex-Combatants in a Negotiated Peace Process: Impacts of Transitional Politics on the Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration Programme in Nepal’ in Journal of Asian and African Studies49: 6: 672–689.
37.
SubediD.B.2014b, ‘Post-Conflict Recovery and Peacebuilding in Nepal: Exploration of Economic and Social Reintegration of Maoist Ex-Combatants’, doctoral thesis, University of New England.
38.
UpretiB.R.2009, Nepal from War to Peace: Legacies of the Past and Hopes for the Future, New Delhi: Adroit.
39.
UpretiB.R.2010, ‘Reconstruction and Development in Post-Conflict Nepal’ in UpretiB.R., SharmaS.R., PyakuryalK.N. & GhimireS. eds, The Remake of a State: Post-Conflict Challenges and State Building in Nepal, Kathmandu: NCCR North-South and Kathmandu University: 129–150.
40.
VayrynenR.1991, ‘To Settle or to Transform? Perspectives on Resolution of National and International Conflicts’ in VayrynenR. ed., New Directions in Conflict Theory: Conflict Resolution and Conflict Transformation, London, Newbury Park, New Delhi: Sage Publications: 1–25.
41.
ZartmanW.I.2001, ‘The Timing of Peace Initiatives: Hurting Stalemates and Ripe Moments’ in The Global Review of Ethnopolitics1: 1: 8–18.
