The Last Hindu Kingdom Bites the Dust
This shows how India gifted Nepal to China. While most in the mainstream media gloat about the victory of democracy, free and fair elections, etc nobody wants to see behind the curtain.
India gifts Nepal to China
Balbir K Punj
The UPA Government can now flaunt one more ‘achievement’ along with inflation, deceleration in rate of growth and industrial production, and minority appeasement. The latest addition to this list is the gift of Nepal on a platter to China. With Communist China under virtual global siege for its horrible record on human rights in Tibet, the success of armed Maoists in Nepal should come as a heart-warmer for China’s President Hu Jintao.
The Indian Communists who keep the UPA in power are, of course, delighted. Mr Sitaram Yechuri has hailed the Maoist victory even as his comrades in Nepal are preparing to assume office with an anti-India agenda, including the revision of the peace and friendship treaty.
The attack that Maoists mounted on an important railway station in Bihar and looted the armoury, killing six policemen, last weekend, even as Maoists in Nepal were celebrating their electoral victory, is a straw in the political wind. Mr Yechuri is trying to mislead us by claiming that the victory of Maoists in Nepal through the ballot box will send a message to Maoists in India to give up their insurgency and take to democratic methods. In reality, it will be the other way round.
Due to the UPA’s dalliance with the Communists for retaining power — and before that with Maoists during the 2004 elections to gain power — Maoists have gained influence over the last four years. This finds expression in periodic attacks on security forces at key points along the ‘Red Corridor’ the Maoists have set up through the forested areas of Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Jharkhand and Bihar up to India’s border with Nepal. The attack on Jhajhar railway junction on the Patna-Howrah mainline is not the first such incident.
The path the Nepal Maoists, once they are in power, will follow is already well-known. The monarchy, which has served as an anchor for Nepali society, will be dismantled. Instead of being a Hindu kingdom, which gave that country its unique identity, Nepal will be made a ’secular republic’. The ’secular’ character is likely to mean anti-Hindu (as in India) and a ‘republic’ under Maoist domination may turn out to be another Cambodia under Pol Pot or a North Korea. Not only will Nepal’s links with Indian society, culture and history be snapped, the Maoists will demand the scrapping of existing treaties with India. They will try to force India into giving more concessions — for instance, unrestricted transit of goods.
At the same time, we can expect the Maoists to cry on China’s shoulders and accuse India of denying Nepal its basic needs. China has already built a highway up to Kathmandu. We have to view the Maoist political programme in Nepal in the context of China’s own strengthening of its strategic capabilities in Tibet, the ethnic cleansing it has achieved in Lhasa and the claims Beijing has been making on Indian territories all along the Himalayas. This will provide us with an idea of the serious situation that will now arise for the security of the country in the wake of the Maoist triumph at the political level and the withering of the Nepali state as we have known it for centuries.
Apologists of the UPA are now saying that the rout of the Nepali Congress was unexpected and that Government was all along strengthening its clout in Nepal — by persuading King Gyanendra and the Maoists to end their confrontation and revive the political process. This may be true. But New Delhi’s fatal mistake was to accept the Maoist demand to end the monarchy. It was a ‘heads I win, tails you lose’ situation for Maoist leader Prachanda who managed to keep Indian influence at an arm’s length when it still mattered.
India could have helped the non-Communist political forces in Nepal to convert the absolute monarchy into constitutional monarchy. The demand of the Maoists to scrap Nepal’s Hindu identity had shocked even their allies in the interim Government. But the Maoists were able to dictate terms, partly because the setting up of the constitutional machinery was not made incumbent on disarming the insurgents.
As a result, the Maoists retained their armed strength and threatened to withdraw from the interim Government every time their non-Communist allies in the interim Government stood up to them. Holding the election while armed Maoist cadre were freely moving about amounted to making a mockery of the democratic process. But New Delhi did nothing to raise this issue with the UN and other bodies that took on the task of overseeing the fairness of the election.
For a long time our security agencies have suspected that the flow of arms to Maoists in India had a Nepal link. Now the collaboration between Maoists in India and Nepal will become an open affair. Indian Maoists will draw inspiration from Prachanda’s ’success’ and the methods used by him to achieve this success.
This is not to say that the other actors in the political drama in Nepal are innocent victims of Communist machinations. The monarchy lost much of its sheen after the mysterious palace massacre in which King Birendra and his family were killed. King Gyanendra, who subsequently assumed the throne, could not connect with the restive people of his kingdom. The mainstream Nepali politicians proved to be a querulous bunch devoid of any larger vision, leave alone the ability to implement it. Mr GP Koirala, who became Prime Minister in the interim Government, was too ill to lead his party and fight an electoral battle against Maoist leaders much younger than him.
It is surprising that India, which had a stake in the outcome of the Constituent Assembly election, chose to turn a blind eye to these developments. It has now paid the price, both for its inaction and lack of imagination in its Nepal policy. Surprisingly, the Government showed great alacrity in persuading the King to climb down in 2006.
Some people in India are now hopeful that once in power, the Maoist leadership will appreciate the reality of Nepal’s geographical and cultural links with India and the depth of its economy’s dependence on this country. They forget that Nepal’s politicians have mastered the art of playing the victim of ‘Big Brother’ India every time their unreasonable demands are rejected by New Delhi.
With Beijing finding an ideological brother in power in Kathmandu, what is needed in New Delhi is a Government that can be firm when required while being flexible to Nepal’s reasonable demands. But what we have is a Government that is dictated to by India’s Communists. These very Communists are also playing China’s game as is witnessed in their reaction to what is happening in Tibet.
India still can save the only Hindu kingdom but it assuredly won’t happen as long as the UPA is in power. It is unrealistic to expect India to save Nepal’s cultural and traditional linkages when it has been busy destroying these in the land of its birth. A year past, and Nepal’s descent into becoming China’s official satellite state would have accelerated.
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically each day to your feed reader.
Punj has covered only a minor aspect of the Nepal coup. The truth is that Nepal is the latest color revolution instigated by the missionary-state dept combine. That is why Marxists are hell bent on attacking the Hindu cultural fabric of Nepal and also why Nepal was declared a secular state,
——————————–
India must speak out
Tarun Vijay | 17 Apr 2008
Ian Martin is a favourite cultural czar of the strong western Christian lobby who considered it prudent to station him during the tumultuous period when a new Christian dominated country like East Timor was being carved out of Indonesia. He was secretary general of Amnesty International and has also served in Bosnia-Hercegovina. His best known book is Self-determination in East Timor.
As was in vogue during the liberation theology days in Maharashtra’s Talasari area where Marxists and the Jesuits carried out a joint programme authored by the World Council of Churches, Martin is dividing Nepal into smaller identities. He is also working with the Maoists to ensure they stay in power and their aides are fully integrated into Nepal’s Army, Armed Police Force and the Nepal Police. There is great resentment against this move among the loyal Nepalese forces which are disciplined and well-groomed and have recruited members after rigorous tests, interviews and verification of antecedents.
On the contrary, the new entrants to these forces – the Maoists – are simple rogues who were inducted into the Maoist PLA either through compulsion or by selling them false dreams. Their induction into the regular Nepalese army will not only seriously affect the morale of the patriotic forces but give an immense boost to the terror outfit of Maoists to retain their hold on the governance and administration through newly-inducted Maoist soldiers in the state force.
Martin has been issuing statements and giving interviews each day like an extra-constitutional head or the correctionist interceptor. And instead of limiting himself to the monitoring of elections, he is becoming a self-appointed initiator of ’security reforms’ and ‘inclusion of marginalised sections’. The Maoists have compromised with the pride and self-esteem of the nation by demanding in their 23-point Comprehensive Peace Agreement that elections be held under UN supervision. This implies that the Nepalese people are not capable of holding elections to their own constituent assembly.
The UN Security Council established the United Nation’s Mission In Nepal (UNMIN) under Resolution 1740 (2007) for one year with a clear mandate to monitor the Maoist ceasefire and assist elections to the Constituent Assembly. But under Martin, UNMIN has made people wonder about its real motives. Martin began direct talks with the rebel Madhesi groups, gave special interviews and issued press statements about including “marginalized” groups like Dalits and Janajatis (tribals) even as UNMIN staff shut their eyes to the vandalism of the Maoist youth wing – the Young Communist League.
Even before the process of verifying Maoist “soldiers” could be completed, Martin said he would ensure that all Maoists were confined to their respective cantonments. He also said those who killed Maoist workers in Terai would be punished though he had nothing to say about the murder and mayhem the Maoists indulged in. Martin has been accused of advocating press censorship in Nepal, prompting a journalist to ask him why UNMIN is raising the issue of press “ethics” and appealing to “exercise press freedom in accordance with professionalism”. He was defensive rather evasive in his answer.
He said in his briefing to the Security Council that ‘’… most important for the completion of UNMIN’s arms monitoring mandate (is) that there is progress towards decisions about the future of those Maoist combatants whose status is verified within the framework of decisions about the future of Nepal’s security sector”. Martin admits in the next paragraph that “views and expectations about the future of the security sector differ greatly and it would be unrealistic to expect quick and easy decisions”. Working on this “line of thought”, he builds up a case for extending his tenure and said at a press conference on November 6 last year that UNMIN was expected to assist on issues regarding Nepal’s security, including a managed transition of the Maoist army from temporary cantonments and restriction of the Nepal army inside barracks.
He not only equates the regular Nepal army with the rogue band of the Maoists but emphasises a greater role for himself through providing “assistance” in the security sector and “greater advisory support for promoting public security”. Back in July 2007, Martin had said “only Nepalese actors can rise to these challenges”, but in January this year, he began lobbying for an extension by praising the political groups – ostensibly the Maoists – who have been violating every single UN guideline for transparent conduct of the elections. In fact Maoists have left no one in doubt by issuing at least two public statements implying that the UNMIN is working at their behest. Baburam Bhattarai, second-in-command at the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), has also issued a veiled threat to send UNMIN packing if it “doesn’t behave”.
Under these circumstances the security scene in Nepal remains uncertain.
Nepal turned red and the peoples’ verdict should be respected. Who else knows it better than the Indians who have learnt to accept such major turnarounds with an unmatched grace and an élan that is rare in this part of the world. So Nepal’s new rulers have nothing to fear from Delhi. But do we have the same confidence in Kathmandu’s new rulers?
The driving philosophy of the Maoists in Nepal was born in deep hate and intolerance. They hated those who were not on their side and physically eliminated their opponents. So far the tally says 15,000 were killed by the so-called Peoples’ Liberation Army formed on the pattern of China’s PLA by the Maoists. They are such dedicated followers of the dreadful legacy of Mao Tse Tung that they are ashamed to have any relation with their own motherland’s culture, religion and civilisational traditions and would rather call themselves proud inheritors of an alien legacy which is being revisited by the younger generation in China. Mao’s biographies have been either deleted or shortened in Chinese text books and the entire Cultural Revolution period has finally been recognized as a gross mistake.
But in this part of the underdeveloped, illiterate or semi-literate, corruption-laden land of weak and spineless politicians, Marx, Mao and Stalin are still gods of a leftist extremism, a fossilised cult of the bygone era. Like old moth-eaten files suddenly being dusted in a sleepy Naxalbari, communally hardcore, Maoist targets continue to be Hindus, Sanskrit schools and Nepalese Brahmins. None of the non-Hindus have been found to be anti-revolutionary. Clearly Capitol Hill and the House of the Saudis work better for their flock than the gestures of large-hearted, pot-bellied Delhi. Since India has remained mired in the same secular talibanism of the Left and the left-out variety and there are hardly any credible protests from nationalists against such gross human rights violations, the barbarism of Maoists continued for 10 years. The leader of the gang, Prachanda, became a hero for Delhi’s glitterati, invited to address special media events as a red revolutionary.
Now he is the new monarch in Kathmandu with special absolute powers. As was announced by his party, Nepal may soon have a presidential form of government. India was prepared to face this eventuality, which is a culmination of collective sins on part of all the parties who say they care for Indian interests. The last 10 years were the most crucial for India-Nepal relations as well as Nepal’s domestic politics. India either bullied Nepal or simply ignored its plight. The Nepal watchers and big mouth friends were more interested in writing long reports and giving speeches in their backyard than forming any effective strategy to bail Nepal out from its crisis. Indian Marxists helped their ideological comrades quite openly and since the UPA government came to power with CPM help, their actions made it clear that they will be happy to see Maoists ruling Kathmandu.
It just happened.
Now South Block thinks it is prudent to engage Maoists and have them included in the mainline political flow rather than keep them at bay and invite further animosity. Prachanda will soon be officially invited to India and our new envoy-designate Rakesh Sood, fresh from his Afghanistan stint, shall be able to manage equations with the new palace owners who don’t find any dichotomy in raising slogans about a proletariat revolution with a Rolex shining on their wrist.
What are the threats that loom large on our radar if Prachanda chooses to show that he means Maoist business? Communists have never shown that power makes them sober and appreciative of a different view point. From Kannur to Singur and the blood-stained ‘red corridor’, the story is that power whets their appetite to be more lethal and spiteful.
Nepal should not become a hotbed of superpower rivalry. This time China has gained clearly and with Tibet already in its control, it has reached the borders of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. Besides, Martin would be helping the “harvesting agencies” of the proselytisers. India can’t afford to be a mute spectator to the growing threats in her immediate neighbourhood. Martin should be sent back immediately and Maoists need to be engaged and monitored closely. So far Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee has acted well though belatedly. If one goes by his patriotic speeches in the Asia Society, we may have reasons to trust his diplomacy.
Most depressing.
Is China really Communist? Why do people keep referring to it as communist, when all their communist ideology has been expurgated and outsourced to India?
Nehru-Gandhi family won’t rest in peace till they completely screw us.
In 10 years time from now,we can hear of Nepal as a Christian country!
These UPA yrs of Sonia misrule will most probably be registered in history as wasted years. Everything is getting stalled or brought to ruins through the mendacity of few. Well, people get the govt. they deserve.
NDA would have done nothing too.
NDA wasn’t perfect, but I doubt they would hand over Nepal policy to Yechury and comrades or stopped all arms shipments to Nepal. UPA is guilty of benign neglect if not outright complicity.
Sandeep,
You must check this out. Seriously…
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/Islamic_schools_turn_kids_into_beggars/articleshow/2973355.cms
The issue of origin of soniya gandhi is important. The present government is doing everything against the nation. Ram setu, now Nepal.Reservation for muslims, sacchhr’s committe, and what not.
What a shame? The only Hindu country in thw world goes…So eneymy no.1 China, has gained a lot ground to hurt our freedom now on. With Nepal firmly in their hands and that two wit idot Prachanda as their caretaker in Nepal, India is in for a lot of trouble.
I just cant understand, that why dint the Govt. Of India, Invade Nepal when the Maoist insurgency was on?
But, the UPA govt. recalled the army from the N.East states too….
The Left in India must be flogged in public for their anti national stance, How can we have 60 traitors sitting in the Parliament passing all information to the Chinese????
The Left parties must suppressed….