Nepal and Bhutan News and discussion

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 03 May 2009 23:01

Nepal army chief sacked; CPN(UML) withdraws support to govt

Following the government's decision to fire him, a defiant Gen Katawal rejected it saying the Prime Minister had no authority to remove him, according to a private radio.

mohan · Post by **mohan** » 04 May 2009 00:12

Kritavarman wrote:Seriously, for the future of India, we need Nepal as a part of India, and the time is ripe to act

Sir,

Why? I don't understand the rationale for these knee-jerk, jingoistic statements that fail to recognize or respect the very concept of sovereignty.
As a primer, I request you to read a very erudite post by Shiv in the thread started by Shirish - http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... f=1&t=4881. - and the entire thread actually.

India has, as a political nation, survived and prospered over the last tumultuous 6 decades because we are not imperialistic. That is not an idea we should give up so easily just because of significant, but (in the case of Nepal), relatively minor upheavals compared to their recent past.

Assimilating a foreign country by manipulating local politics is hardly a long term solution for peace - in that country or ours. Besides, as Brihaspati was implying (atleast the way I read it) in another thread, the notion of national boundaries is an post-renaissance (western) model which is now slowly fading.

Cultural nationalism, on the other hand, will thrive. We need strong political borders, a strong, well equipped armed forces that protect them, and a clear strategic plan that ensures that these borders are protected - and we have had differing degrees of success in each of them. However, at a macro, generational timescale (IMO), the battle we have to fight and win is the battle of ideas - there is no point in protecting the borders of a country that has no internal cohesion - case in point, Pakistan.

Nepal, perhaps, is an immediate test case of how well the existing Indian establishment deals with, and directs this situation.

Interesting times...

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 04 May 2009 00:28

frankly, I don't understand this haste to engulf every country that formed a part of ancient India within a political blanket.

the big long term reasons aside, there are immediate practical reasons why a truly friendly country is a little more preferable to incorporating it in India right at this moment.

a future global power would need friends and allies who share their worldview and would support us on the global stage, countries like nepal and bhutan are perfect for that.
the US "maintains" a host of such countries in the pacific ocean IIRC, who count as a votebank for them in the UN !

inclusion, if it happens, would have to start with an economic union.

mohan · Post by **mohan** » 04 May 2009 01:05

Rahul M wrote:frankly, I don't understand this haste to engulf every country that formed a part of ancient India within a political blanket.

the big long term reasons aside, there are immediate practical reasons why a truly friendly country is a little more preferable to incorporating it in India right at this moment.
.........

inclusion, if it happens, would have to start with an economic union.

Well said!

vsudhir · Post by **vsudhir** » 04 May 2009 01:53

Fair enough.

Fear is that whilst we make haste slowly, there is real danger of our periphery going up in flames of conflict, civil war and exported strife.

If tomorrow Prachanda or Haseena or the Burmese junta or Rajapakse were to invite the PRC (or USA, as the case may be) to setup mil bases on their territory abutting India, what are Dilli's options exactly?

Heck I have 0 doubt the CPI(M) politburo would gladly invite the PLA to setup mil bases inside West bengal if they could get away with it.

I guess the problem isn't so much a hunger to swallow other lands as much as a fear/concern over demonstrated incompetence by the present set of rulers in Dilli in managing our interests with any degree of finesse or forethought. I know, sounds unfair but I guess thats what is bothersome.

Muns · Post by **Muns** » 04 May 2009 02:13

It's in India's interest's to ensure that a strong border in the north of the country exists to ward off any possible adventurism from the dragon to the north. Mao's policy of the palm being Tibet and Nepal as one of the five fingers still finds some resonance among the communist leadership.
Not to mention that a secure Nepal is vital to India's continual water supply...It would be disastrous to hear of intervention alike to what we hear of increasing talk of the Chinese Damming and diverting the Tsanpo/Brahmaputra to its arid interior after invading Tibet. If not damming, Nepal's potential for hydro-electric power forms a vast untapped resource.

After restricting travel to Mount Kailash and Mansarovar, could we bear to hear the same talk of Pashupatinath? I do feel that India has strong cultural and religious ties to the Himalayan republic...in the case of the Madhesis, perhaps even more so.

The Madhesis of the eastern Terai have been discriminated on the bounds of descending from Indians for a long time now. They make up approx 30% of the pop of Nepal but have long being crying for equal rights when it comes to voting or even citizenship. It might be a gateway for India to make greater roads into Nepal. Nepal's president and vice president are both of Madhesi origin...with the vice president creating an uproar when he took his vows of office in Hindi as oppose to Nepali.
It may be in India's interest's to support the Madhesis in the Terai, being the bread basket of Nepal. Madhesis are pro India and integration of Madhesh should they choose should be something we Indian's should aspire for....not turn away for caution of what the world might think..
Perhaps the army general could be swayed to this cause....

Reactivating the railway line to Janakpurdham could be a vital 1st start. As the place King Janak's kingdom (Ramayan)...it serves as another important pilgrimage site to Nepal among many others and a point for increasing trade and people.

negi · Post by **negi** » 04 May 2009 03:04

It was just a question of time I could see it coming ; thanks to dynastic rule in India we shall see the same repeating itself in NE

. Nepal like our other neighbours has rightly turned to Beijing imo it is fed up with a so called responsible neighbor which has only MOU's and treaties to offer unlike the PRC which will build roads,dams and other infra at a war footing in the region.

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 04 May 2009 09:58

Nepal head tells general to stay

The President of Nepal, Ram Baran Yadav, has ordered the head of the army to remain in office despite his dismissal by the prime minister.

President Yadav said the sacking of General Rookmangud Katawal, who refused to integrate former rebel fighters into the army, was unconstitutional.

The Communist UML party pulled out of the government saying the majority Maoists acted unilaterally.

The withdrawal leaves the Maoists with only a slender parliamentary majority.

"Being the head of the state and the supreme commander of the Nepal Army I order you to continue with your duty," the president told General Katawal by letter.

The dispute between Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal and General Katawal centres on a plan to integrate thousands of former Maoist rebels into the army - a move resisted by military commanders.

Correspondents say the row could undermine the peace process which ended the civil war in 2006.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 04 May 2009 10:55

vsudhir wrote:Fair enough.

Fear is that whilst we make haste slowly, there is real danger of our periphery going up in flames of conflict, civil war and exported strife.

If tomorrow Prachanda or Haseena or the Burmese junta or Rajapakse were to invite the PRC (or USA, as the case may be) to setup mil bases on their territory abutting India, what are Dilli's options exactly?

Heck I have 0 doubt the CPI(M) politburo would gladly invite the PLA to setup mil bases inside West bengal if they could get away with it.

I guess the problem isn't so much a hunger to swallow other lands as much as a fear/concern over demonstrated incompetence by the present set of rulers in Dilli in managing our interests with any degree of finesse or forethought. I know, sounds unfair but I guess thats what is bothersome.

The periphery going up in civil war or ridden with strife will really not affect India, except that there is a possibility of refugees pouring in.

The PRC is asked for assistance by the neighbours since, except for Nepal, China is no neighbour of the countries and so there is no threat in being to them. Further, China's aid has no moral strings to it and China does not care as to what type of govt it is giving aid to and tomtom that they are not interested in interfering in the internal affairs of the govt and the country.

Compare that with Indian assistance and aid ore even diplomacy.

Take the case of the SL issue. India has reasons to be concerned with it. However, it should have been done more diplomatically and through the normal channels, rather than despatching two bigwigs to hector the SL govt. We love grandstanding and ride the high horse and then go out like a damp squib!

In Nepal, we 'brokered' the formation of the govt. Whatever for? Do other countries broker our govt formation when there is a hung Parliament? No, they don't. They merely ensure hung Parliament, by funnel money via the hawala route and then sit back and watch the fun!

A Deshmukh · Post by **A Deshmukh** » 04 May 2009 15:43

Nepal PM Prachanda resigns

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 04 May 2009 17:10

The Military Coup That Wasnt

Tells you what happened in Military Commanders' meet.

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 04 May 2009 18:03

Nepal govt blames India for debacle

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 04 May 2009 18:04

Chiron wrote:Nepal govt blames India for debacle

WTF?

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 04 May 2009 18:39

Lots of India bashing

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 04 May 2009 18:59

The Maoists will not take this lying down. India will have to keep a close watch against any misadventures from them with the help of tarrel than mountain fliends.

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 04 May 2009 19:05

The entire belt from Pashupati to Tirupati is Maoist infested. GOI needs to take swift military action coupled with developmental projects in the infested regions. The people in the belt should be made stable and economically viable. Just like in J&K, India should deploy at least 100,000-200,000 men in the Red corridor.

The region should be systematically cleaned of Mao's influence. The EJ-Maoism nexus needs to be defeated. PRC's influence will go down automatically.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 04 May 2009 19:06

The Maoist leader, who had earlier said he had learnt the ABC of Marxism in New Delhi's prestigious Jawaharlal Nehru University, where he was a doctorate student in the 80s, blamed the "bureaucrats" in New Delhi for the fall of the Maoist government.

Another anti-Indian alumnus of the Necropolis of Learning.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 04 May 2009 19:11

India has been 'advising' the Maoists not to sack the chief, for reasons unknown. That much is true and that constitutes 'interference'. Interestingly, the blame is placed at the door of Indian babus, a class hated universally and hence a convenient punching bag, instead of 'India' as a county.

It is best to let the Maoist game play out and wait for common sense to return to Nepal, even if that takes long. Unless of course, PRC makes real moves to consolidate its position, which is so far not happening. This is because, Maoists, like their rapist goon/mass murderer cousins here will soon have to go begging for investment from the same 'capitalist satans' and perhaps even have to rape/murder a few of their own countrymen to clear land for the 'investors'. That's when Nepalis will realise the bankruptcy of their ideology and start thinking fresh..

The Stalinist traitors have called for the issue to be resolve 'democratically' a strange call coming from a bunch of mass murderers and despot worshippers to another bunch.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 05 May 2009 00:06

Suppiah wrote:India has been 'advising' the Maoists not to sack the chief, for reasons unknown. That much is true and that constitutes 'interference'. Interestingly, the blame is placed at the door of Indian babus, a class hated universally and hence a convenient punching bag, instead of 'India' as a county.

We should have at least kept quiet on this one. Specially when a majority of the nepali political parties were on their own and coincidently already taking the Indian POV without being prompted.

Sometimes I wonder which lobotomized "foreign policy expert" is advising this lame govt.

The "role" played by yechury and his comrades during the formation of the maoist govt in nepal and his extra constitutional efforts on behalf of the weak mms govt has never been properly explained.

If the Indian commies can hobnob with and support nepali maoists, then they should be investigated for their support to the Indian maoists.

We will continue to pay a very heavy price for letting the commies interfere and set Indian foreign policy. We tamely handed over the plot to the chinese helped by Indian quislings.

satya · Post by **satya** » 05 May 2009 01:24

Current Nepalese Army Chief is widely popular,well respected and held in high esteem by average Nepali for he kept RNA neutral and didn't use the massacre of Royal Family to grab power. He along with other senior generals are perceived as nationalists by average Nepalis and was considered to be one of main factors forcing the last King of Nepal to resign and people's respect for him has increased not decreased .
Any attempt by Maoists to portray this as some sort of conspiracy hatched in India won't receive much support except hardcore supporters of Maoists who are not in majority . Maoists too needed a reason to pull out of govt. for they have nothing to show in performance .

India has excellent opportunity to change the course of Nepali foreign policy if it plays its cards right , Prachanda isn't exactly most popular he once was and he has his own set of rivals in politburo who didn't like his preferential treatment for his family ( installing his siblings in party's senior posts and iirc in polituburo itself ,another NoKo in making ! ) .
So let's not jump to conclusions for there are many more acts to come before the curtain fall in this drama .

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 05 May 2009 01:31

Nepal's Army Chief Rookmangud Katawal, shown during the Basant Panchami festival in January, was dismissed by Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal. The move threatens to worsen relations between the military and the coalition government.

Anabhaya · Post by **Anabhaya** » 05 May 2009 01:43

The ball is in Prachanda's court. Poor him - had to end up losing his job for firing somebody.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 05 May 2009 02:19

A Deshmukh wrote:Nepal PM Prachanda resigns

I still don't get it. Why did he have to resign? Because of domestic opposition to the sacking? Is the opposition so strong to actually force him to resign? What machinations is PRC doing in this?

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 05 May 2009 02:30

tsriram wrote:
A Deshmukh wrote:Nepal PM Prachanda resigns
I still don't get it. Why did he have to resign? Because of domestic opposition to the sacking? Is the opposition so strong to actually force him to resign? What machinations is PRC doing in this?

He is going to to what he does best.

Kill, butcher opponents, terrorise and subdue more opposition so that this time around he will emerge much stronger than he was.

He has resigned just to consolidate his position and gain the high moral ground.

The Army chief retires in about three months or so. In normal course, the deputy whom prachanda wanted anyway will succeed the incumbent and troublesome army chief.

Unless...

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 05 May 2009 02:54

Thanks Chetakji.

In that case, he might get back to being the 'rebel' instead of the powers-that-be. In that sense, why would he leave all the official machinery which he could use to his own advantage? After all, even with the president reversing his decision, all he needed to do was wait three months anyway. Why go through all these hoops and loops in the interim and sit tight?

skher · Post by **skher** » 05 May 2009 03:52

tsriram wrote:Thanks Chetakji.
Why go through all these hoops and loops in the interim and sit tight?

Zimple.Pawar carrupts.Yand aabzolute pawar carrupts abzolutely.

So far...the Maoists haven't not been able to convert their fractured mandate into any foreseable avenue of become the sole power centre in Nepal.No soviet republic has established even after one year......so had he not pulled some stunt like this quickly, some sharpened khukris would have found their place in his back,and decision would have implemented by the successor in his place.

The Army chief retires in about three months or so. In normal course, the deputy whom prachanda wanted anyway will succeed the incumbent and troublesome army chief.

Unless...

The deputy is now unlikely to enjoy a smooth transition...his links have been made too obvious.

Unless what.....a coup? That would probably mean another four years of civil war.

the current general is popular and the general populace would perhaps welcome such a change.But he could have done so much earlier and without contest.Clearly,he is not interested.

not sure whether the deputy commands enough influence to do so.....perhaps the reason why prachanda wants him for the job.

It was just a question of time I could see it coming ; thanks to dynastic rule in India we shall see the same repeating itself in NE . Nepal like our other neighbours has rightly turned to Beijing imo it is fed up with a so called responsible neighbor which has only MOU's and treaties to offer unlike the PRC which will build roads,dams and other infra at a war footing in the region.

If a free hand is given to our PSUs,all of this can be done in six months.
I think for the past five years have a cautious wait and watch policy- we all had to wait and watch for deposition of this govt.'s "advisors".
So we have been "monitoring" the politcical flux in newly democratic nepal and "hab kebt oll aur obshuns oben".

PRC is doing the same as of now or would have already constructed a Lhasa-Kathmandu extension of the Tibetan railway by now.PRC would have loved to watch India have fun while blaming it for interference.

But even in such a dire situation,it would have been very reassuring to know that "wir hat kebt oll aur obshuns oben".

India needs new coalition. Schnell.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 05 May 2009 11:23

B Raman uvacha

It is not clear why Prachanda decided to force a confrontation with the COAS at this stage instead of waiting till September, when Gen.Katawal is due to superannuate. One possible reason for his hasty action is that Gen Khadka, who is believed to be not opposed to the integration of the PLA into the Army, is due to superannuate in June. It is suspected that Prachanda wanted to make him the chief before his superannuation and give him a two-year tenure so that the integration of the PLA into the Army could be brought about without any further opposition from the Army. His plans were thwarted by the President.

Prachanda's resignation is to India's advantage. With Paras out and now Prachanda out on the streets...the two main obstacles to Maoists complete takeover of nepal - army and the other parties are still intact.

It is possible that Prachanda and by extension PRC has missed an important window to impose their will on Nepal. They cannot do much beyond fighting pitched street battles with the nepali security forces now.
if UPA comes back with outside commie support, they may get another chance.

I have always argued that with the king out, nepal is looking more and more like any other naxalite infested bihar or chattisgarh state. nepali politics will go through many many such manthans before settling down to organized democratic rule.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 05 May 2009 11:25

The army chief is the god son of the late king Mahendra.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 05 May 2009 12:35

This would be a god sent opportunity to get Nepal back into India's fold, the specter of letting Nepal become a proxy of China was almost a reality, another sterling contribution of the disaster of the Govt of last five years.

Those who look at Nepal as issue of conflict between Maoists and other central forces are missing the real picture. This is a battle between China and India. If you look at the recent moves by Prachanda it is clear that he was planning to sell Nepal lock stock and barrel to the Chinese and was barely restrained by the Nepalese institutions including the Army.

If we dont get Nepal irreversibly into our fold now (a la Sikkim) we can safely assume that the next hand the Chinese will play will be all theirs for sure.

Airavat · Post by **Airavat** » 05 May 2009 13:48

Live Mint

General Rookmand Katawal, the army chief, was fired on Sunday in a dispute over the integration of former rebels into the military envisaged under the peace accord. The Maoists sent 23,000 fighters into camps under the 2006 peace accord that provides for their rehabilitation and a chance to join the army. The Maoists objected to the army carrying out a recruitment campaign this year that brought 2,800 new service personnel into the armed forces.

President Ram Baran Yadav late on Sunday overturned the government’s decision and told Katawal to remain in his post, Mahara said. Meanwhile the government appointed Lieutenant General Kul Bahadur Khadka, Katawal’s second-in-command, as the new chief of staff. The peace process is in danger of being derailed, according to Mahara. “The President’s order is unconstitutional and illegal. We will organize protests in both the parliament and on the streets,” he said.

PTI reports that India's Gorkha recruitment plans could be affected

"Currently there are about 1,500 vacancies for Gorkhas from Nepal in the 35 battalions of 800-men each from the seven Gorkha Rifles regiments. But this crisis has led us to a rethink. It would be difficult to carry out the recruitment rallies at Dharan in eastern Nepal and Pokhara in central Nepal, which are the two recruitment centres for Gorkhas," sources said.

About two years ago, at the height of Maoists insurgency in Nepal, India had stopped its recruitment rallies in the Himalayan kingdom.After the Pushp Kamal Dahal 'Prachanda' led Maoists were voted to power in the first democratic elections last year, he had stated that Gorkhas from Nepal should not get recruited into the Indian Army.

nsa_tanay · Post by **nsa_tanay** » 05 May 2009 15:38

Any 1 , been to Nepal recently ? did they put up heardings saying... "Welcome to the Gateway of China"

Link

RSS leader in Kathmandu
Post CommentLarger | SmallerSuman K Jha
New Delhi:

With the BJP expressing "relief" over the Nepal Prime Minister resigning on Monday, the RSS was watching the rapidly changing situation in the Himalayan kingdom keenly with one of its senior leaders, Indresh, already camping in Kathmandu. Indresh, according to sources, is likely to meet a "host of leaders" there. Former RSS spokesperson Ram Madhav also toured Nepal a fortnight ago though it's not clear who all he met during his stay there. Madhav refused to elaborate on his Nepal tour but said the "Maoists were working against the spirit of democracy".

A section of the saffron brotherhood, however, believes that Nepal Army chief Gen Rookmangud Katawal took a stand that is not only pro-Nepal "but also pro-India". Yogi Adityanath, representing Gorakhpur - that has age-old ties with what was once the only Hindu kingdom - said "Katawal should be thanked for his stand".

The BJP, however, made light of the charge that Katawal was "pro-India". BJP vice-president Yashwant Sinha on Monday said "such charges were being made by forces that were essentially anti-India". Sinha also launched an attack on the UPA Government for "outsourcing its foreign policy to the CPI(M), particularly to Sitaram Yechury", that has resulted in "India's clout in its neighbourhood getting considerably eroded in the last few years". "Hoardings like 'welcome to the gateway of China' have suddenly appeared at the Kathmandu airport,” he said.

sum · Post by **sum** » 05 May 2009 22:14

"Currently there are about 1,500 vacancies for Gorkhas from Nepal in the 35 battalions of 800-men each from the seven Gorkha Rifles regiments. But this crisis has led us to a rethink. It would be difficult to carry out the recruitment rallies at Dharan in eastern Nepal and Pokhara in central Nepal, which are the two recruitment centres for Gorkhas," sources said.

Didn't we have more than enough Gorkha aspirants from the Darjeeling-N.Bengal belt?

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 05 May 2009 23:03

Sanku wrote:This would be a god sent opportunity to get Nepal back into India's fold, the specter of letting Nepal become a proxy of China was almost a reality, another sterling contribution of the disaster of the Govt of last five years.

Those who look at Nepal as issue of conflict between Maoists and other central forces are missing the real picture. This is a battle between China and India. If you look at the recent moves by Prachanda it is clear that he was planning to sell Nepal lock stock and barrel to the Chinese and was barely restrained by the Nepalese institutions including the Army.

If we dont get Nepal irreversibly into our fold now (a la Sikkim) we can safely assume that the next hand the Chinese will play will be all theirs for sure.

We need to tread very very carefully here. Nepal will never be in our fold. At best we can hope for it to be neutral. The chinese have already made major inroads and negated any residual influence we may have had, if any.

Prachanda is not a fool to have resigned and also blaming India as the only reason. His revolution is incomplete as yet. He will have greater freedom to act from the outside and will continue to blame India all the while. The nepali jantha will lap it up.

If nepal comes under the chinese orbit as it is bound to if f*****s like yechury and his comrades run foreign policy, nepal will screw you by asking you for a safe corridor to the sea which you have to provide to a land locked country. china will have free access to nepal through bangladesh as well as access to the sea through the nepal corridor. Indo nepal border cannot be closed as no Indian govt will have the political will to do so. Indian maoists will rip the gut out of India.

There is already a festering and long standing anti India resentment in nepal among all classes of their society because of ham handed and condescending policies followed by all previous Indian govts, especially the last weak mms govt who let the commies wolves into the nepali pasture. It all fell neatly into the chinese lap and even helps out the chinese greatly as far as their plan in tibet goes.

BJP has been traitorously idiotic and insanely irresponsible by agreeing to support a gorkhaland, for one measly seat for jaswant singh. The west bengal commies are terrified because this is exactly how they brought in the bangladeshis and held power for thirty odd years

You are looking at festering a gurkha eelam. With a chinese and paki knives at your throat

http://beacononline.wordpress.com/2009/ ... ter-nepal/

OPINION: Anti-India feelings – Demand for Greater Nepal

The anti-India sentiment triggered by Bollywood film Chandni Chowk to China which was banned in Nepal [because it claimed Buddha was born in India and not Nepal] has stoked fresh demands for the recovery of the land acceded to India by Nepal nearly two centuries ago. As India celebrated its 60th Republic Day on Jan. 26, students staged a noisy protest outside the Indian Embassy in Kathmandu asking for the restoration of Greater Nepal. Led by a Nepali literature professor, Phanindra Nepal, the United Nepal National Front is asking India and Britain to separate certain areas from four Indian States and return them to Nepal since they were part of Nepal’s territory in the 19th century.

The roots of the movement for a Greater Nepal go back to the 19th century when Nepal fought a series of grim battles with the British who had turned their eyes towards the Himalayan kingdom after colonizing India. After several exhausting Anglo-Nepalese wars, Nepal narrowly averted conquest by agreeing to sign a treaty that however stripped it of almost one-third of its territory. The infamous Treaty of Sagauli signed in 1816 saw Nepal concede territory in Sikkim, Darjeeling and Siliguri which lie in India’s West Bengal State, and territory that now lies in India’s Himachal Pradesh and Uttaranchal. Nepal also lost tracks of fertile land in its southern terai plains but recovered that from the British later for helping the East India Company in1857 to put down the Indian rebellion against the colonial rulers.

gandharva · Post by **gandharva** » 06 May 2009 03:59

Neighbourhood in turmoil
K Natwar Singh Posted online: Tuesday , May 05, 2009 at 0024 hrs

When I became External Affairs Minister in 2004, the first country I visited was Nepal. I met the ex-king and put it to him why democracy and monarchy could co-exist? His assurances were both fluid and short-lived. He was surrounded by flunkeys who had reduced sycophancy into a sinister art form. The King’s obduracy and lack of foresight made the success of the Maoists inevitable. Our concerned agencies too were caught on the wrong foot and were hopelessly wrong about the rise of the Maoists. They were even more off the mark about the outcome of the elections which gave Maoists a spectacular victory.

Prachanda is a determined individual and has an agenda which gives us no comfort. He wants the Maoists’ Peoples Liberation Army to be amalgamated with the regular army.

These are not mature acts. Experience will perhaps temper his enthusiasm. He has since sacked the commander in chief of the army and then quit. We are pouring a thousand crores into Nepal. Yet China is more active in Nepal than we are. Prachanda feels quite comfortable with that.

http://www.indianexpress.com/story-print/454513/

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 06 May 2009 04:07

The Maoists will lose in Nepal if Tibet becomes independent and aligned with India. A strong and independent Tibet will fix both PRC and the maoists in Nepal.

Vishal_Bhatia · Post by **Vishal_Bhatia** » 06 May 2009 07:17

I once had a conversation with a guy who kind of knows some scoop with regard to India's foreign policy initiatives.

He said the last Nepalese king was flirting a bit too much with the Chinese, and hence we allowed Prachanda to come to power. The deal was that Prachanda can make all the noise in the world he wants but will know when to let us call the shots.

Now if the above is true, in this current crisis, Prachanda crossed the line we set for him, and hence we ousted him. Note that this is my guestimate.

IMHO, Nepal is not going anywhere (but in our fold); geography and demographics matter.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 06 May 2009 12:04

chetak wrote: We need to tread very very carefully here. Nepal will never be in our fold. At best we can hope for it to be neutral. The chinese have already made major inroads and negated any residual influence we may have had, if any.

Prachanda is not a fool to have resigned and also blaming India as the only reason. His revolution is incomplete as yet. He will have greater freedom to act from the outside and will continue to blame India all the while. The nepali jantha will lap it up.

Prananda is a over hyped standard nitwit from JNU who is a cihper without the Chinese support, also all the anti-India stuff is overhyped. THere is no province of India where the "anti-India" feeling does not exist at some point or the other.

Todays HT talks of Prachanda tapes
Playing day after, the Prachandagate tapes

"You also know we were just 7,000 to 8,000. But our strategy was to convince them that we were 35,000,”

This is but one example of the hype that the Maoists had.

Nepal was always for all practical purposes an outpost of India, open borders Gukhas fighting in Indian army etc. The terai is full of Bihari's and there is a massive conflict between the two sections of Madhesai's and Gurkhas. Most of fertile Nepal is Madhesai and the commies have no hold there.

We make too much of the differences and to little of essential commonality.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 06 May 2009 12:09

Vishal_Bhatia wrote: He said the last Nepalese king was flirting a bit too much with the Chinese, and hence we allowed Prachanda to come to power. The deal was that Prachanda can make all the noise in the world he wants but will know when to let us call the shots.

I think the Chinese their Indian friends CPM etc pulled a fast one on us. They courted the Neaplese King (who was happy to be courted by Chinese too, being the essential crook and for reasons of real politic to be not completely beholden to New Delhi) used that fledgling interest in the Chinese to be install their puppet.

I think it was a pretty simple game, only that the UPA govt had CPM as it part and the less said about its "leadership" the better.

Anantz · Post by **Anantz** » 06 May 2009 12:40

chetak wrote:BJP has been traitorously idiotic and insanely irresponsible by agreeing to support a gorkhaland, for one measly seat for jaswant singh. The west bengal commies are terrified because this is exactly how they brought in the bangladeshis and held power for thirty odd years

You are looking at festering a gurkha eelam. With a chinese and paki knives at your throat

Please stop speculating on something you have no idea about! Gurkha Eelam is it? I think the only one talking about that is you, and all the commies. The Gorkhas simply want their right to self-determination in a land which belongs to them. As far as equating this movement with Bangladeshis, go and learn the history of the region. No one brought anybody into this region except for the Bangladeshis. Darjeeling never belonged to Bengal, it was a Gurkha dominated region belonging to Sikkim upto the 18th century, it passed on to Nepal after that, and was later annexed into British India from Sikkim again. The region was a partially excluded district inhabited by Gurkhas, Bhutias and Lepchas till 1954 when it was fully absorbed into West Bengal. So for your kind information, Gurkhas are the original residents there, right from the pre-independence times in. AS far as BJP siding with the Gorkhas, nobody opposes such move when the Congress sided with TRS during the 2004 elections, now that BJP sided with Gurkhas it is foolish? If Uttarkhand, Jharkhand and Chattisgarh can be created why not Gorkhaland for the marginalised Gorkhas of the region who are treated as second class citizens and labeled as foreigners by Ministers of West Bengal in their own home land?

Finally, as mentioned by people on this forum before, stop connecting the Gorkhaland movement in India which is an internal demand raised by Indian citizens within India, to something happening in a foreign land. The both are not related, except by people trying to defame the Gorkhaland movement.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 06 May 2009 12:45

Anantz wrote: Finally, as mentioned by people on this forum before, stop connecting the Gorkhaland movement in India which is an internal demand raised by Indian citizens within India, to something happening in a foreign land. The both are not related, except by people trying to defame the Gorkhaland movement.

Well said Anant. Also what are your views on bringing Nepal into india with/or without an article 370 like charter?