1. The Indian Hand

By Nishchal M.S. Basnyat

"So, we went to Lucknow to meet Maoist leaders. We walked and talked with them openly. We strolled through the crowded streets and stepped into a small teashop, talked some more, and then we went back to their place. I was surprised to see that they weren't worried the slightest about who they were and how much they were wanted by the Nepalese people". These were the startling words from a late night conversation in Brussels with one of Nepal's most prominent politicians. He was recalling how he met both leaders of the Nepalese Maoist Movement, Dr Baburam Bhattarai and Prachanda in India.

The answer to Nepal's internal strife is so obvious we don't see it. Albeit an overdone patriotic adage, India does hold the key to Nepal's future, not only in terms of mainstream politics, but also with regard to the intensifying Maoist peril. While acknowledging that the Nepalese Maoist movement is a deep-rooted, homegrown revolution that will take years to overcome, we must also confront ourselves with the palpable fact that India hasn't stopped sprinkling salt on Nepal's political wound.

There are significant ways India is indirectly aiding the insurgency in Nepal. First, India is a safe haven for Nepalese Maoist Leaders. It is an irrefutable fact that India is harboring Nepal's terrorists. The Royal Nepalese Government, including the Royal Nepalese Army, has repeatedly urged India to incarcerate Maoist leaders. While India plays politics by promising to hunt down Nepal's terrorists, Indian politicians and government officials meet secretly with high-ranking Maoists like Dr. Bhattarai (an incident that was highly publicized). The recent meeting in New Delhi between political leaders and Maoists was yet another example of India purposely refusing to arrest Maoist Leaders.

Second, it is not difficult to track down and capture Maoist leaders. If our brilliant politicians like Girija Koirala and Madhav Kumar Nepal can approach them with such ease, if our journalists and media houses have contacts with them, and if even foreign journalists have an effortless time finding them, are we to understand that an intelligence agency belonging to an emerging super power cannot hunt down Nepal's Maoist leaders? Even a privately funded "bounty-hunting" team could track them down in India. So, why not do so with a highly coordinated and well-funded intelligence service, such as that of India?

Third, where are the arms coming from? We would have to be too naïve to think that all of the weapons Maoists hold come from post-battle lootings from the Royal Nepalese Army or Nepalese Police. They certainly don't come from Bangladesh, Bhutan, Pakistan or Tibet. The long border we have with India is an "ammunition pump" for Nepal's terrorist movement. We are not talking about smuggling minute amounts of pistols and bullets. These are massive amounts of weapons, large enough to equip thousands of Maoist foot soldiers. And then you might ponder over the question of who is selling them. The Indian Maoists and other such groups that are supporting Nepal's Maoist revolution are far too weak to possess such resources. Think however, what happens to antiquated Indian army weapons. They are expensive to destroy and expensive to store, while profit can be made from selling these unwanted weapons. Consequently, I lean toward the idea that corrupt generals from notorious surrounding states like Bihar are secretly selling antediluvian and unusable arms to Nepalese Maoists. Previous research done by Nepalese journalists with the help of ex-Gorkha soldiers from India has revealed the astonishing link between splinter groups of the Indian army and Nepal's Maoist movement. It even claims that factions of retired Indian Army officers are providing 3 to 4 day training "capsules" to Nepalese Maoist recruits.

Fourth, most of Nepal's Maoist leaders are Indian-educated. How can we ever gauge the connections that a leader like Dr Bhattarai must have garnered in the campuses of Jawaharlal Nehru University during his PHD years? How can we measure the number of acquaintances that Chairman Prachanda has with groups like The People's War Group (PWG), the Maoist Communist Centre (MCC) and the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) even before Nepal's so-called "People's War"? Today, Nepal's Maoist movement has joined the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM) and is being provided aid, security and arms by pro-Maoist parties in India. There are Indian fingerprints on Nepal's insurgency since its very infancy.

Fifth, even after requests from the Nepalese government, India hasn't handed Nepal many of the Maoist leaders arrested in India. The most shocking news came after the arrest of Mohan Vaidya alias 'Kiran' (one of the top five Nepalese Maoist leaders). He was granted the status of a 'political prisoner' by an Indian court, which will provide him leeway and facilities that other normal prisoners will not receive. How can Nepalese Maoist leaders, who have so much blood on their hands and are acknowledged by India as 'terrorists', still receive such flexibility in punishment?

Sixth, the Nepali population in India is adding fuel to this Maoist fire. The major organizations close to the Maoists that are active in India are the All India Nepali Unity Society, the All India Nepali Students' Association, the All India Nepali Youth Association and the All India Ethnic Society. Even the once neutral Akhil Bharatiya Nepal Ekta Samaj (ABNES), established for unity and betterment of the Nepali community in India, has been delving into dissident revolutionary activities. While the Indian government assures Nepal that it is doing its best to help, it turns a blind eye on open Maoist activities throughout the country. In the words of Prachanda during his speech at the Second National Conference of CPN (M) in February 2001, "…the success of the Nepalese People's War and revolution cannot be imagined if Nepalese dwelling in India are separated from it…"

Seven, Indian Maoists have already infiltrated the Nepalese "People's War". During the Muga/Dhankuta attacks in 2004 where several high level Royal Nepalese Army Officers were killed, there were reports that Indian women were behind the beheadings. The Terai region has become a safe haven for Indian Maoists, similar to how Nepalese Maoists have found a safe haven in India.

So, now you must be wondering how India would benefit from perpetual turmoil in Nepal. Just think of the economic benefits. Remember companies like Kodak that moved their factories from Nepal to India? They did this primarily because Nepal was too unstable. Think about the divergence of tourism from Nepal to India, or the hindrance of tourists that have already traveled to India and who wished to visit Nepal. Think about Nepalese businessmen going to India for investment opportunities or poor Nepalese laborers that migrate to India looking for work. Think about the multinationals that utilize cheap labor. For them India is a far better business investment than Nepal because of the insurgency. Like it or not, India is cashing in on Nepal's agony.

We must get past the "big brother, small brother" mentality we have regarding India, however, we must also recognize to what extent India has cheated us. While we burn tires on the streets of Kathmandu and parade for the name of democracy at home, we overlook the fact that India holds Nepal's cure to terrorism. While a brother kills a brother at home, India facilitates those responsible for mass murder and heartless torture. It is true that, at home, we don't even have a democracy. But in today's Nepal, where guns speak louder than words, we have to think about the safety and security of the nation before we start protesting for democracy. This is not a call to divert blame from one faction to another. However, we are directing our anguish and aggravation toward the wrong path, and by doing so we are simply hurting ourselves and impeding any sort of development in the country.

cont.....At a time when we're being cornered and attacked from all sides by Maoists, it is important to keep in mind that it is still possible to win this war. However, we must be willing to confront our "big brother". It is about time we grasp the extent to which India is crippling our nation.

While China and Pakistan feed the Royal Nepalese Army with fresh ammunition on one side, the Maoists are being fed by India from the other side. How long are we going to protest against ourselves? How long are we going to close down our own schools and our own shops?

While our "astute" Nepali politicians journey to India for blessings from the Indian government, Dr Bhattarai will be giving his interview to the BBC Nepali Service from the comfort of Indian soil. While we read the grotesque news of more brothers being killed at home, we will switch on the TV and see Krishna Bahadur Mahara, the Maoist Spokesman, giving an interview to CNN, comfortably strolling through a University Park in India. How long are we going to be blind to the obvious? It's time to put the clues together. The solution to Nepal's grave difficulty is not with the King, nor is it with political parties. In fact, the answer doesn't lie in the country at all. The true pragmatic solution to our misery lies somewhere across the border, in India.

Nishchal MS Basnyat is currently a student at Harvard University. If you have any comments, please respond: nbasnyat@fas.harvard.edu

http://www.nepaleyes.com/read.php?topic=opinion&id=43

POSTED BY – AHMED KARIM ZAMAN

RELATED ARTICLE –

‘India not doing enough on Nepal’

------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Nepal's War of Independence Intensifies

By Krishna Singh Bam, USA

The thorough confusion surrounding the latest memorandum of understanding between the Seven-Party Alliance (SPA) and the Maoist rebels can now clearly be traced to the perplexity of its Indian sponsors.

Indian newspapers were the first to pronounce the "talks near Delhi" as having faltered, if not completely failed. True, the SPA and the Maoist rebels have reaffirmed their commitment to last November's 12-point understanding. This time, on paper at least, they have agreed to form an interim government through a national political conference for the restoration of democracy. Such a government ostensibly would work to establish a nebulous "full-fledged" democracy through an equally esoteric constituent assembly.

The duplicity is so obvious. The SPA and the Maoists have long claimed to be the sole representatives of the Nepalese people. Based on this delusion, both entities have ruled out talks with the royal government, which they refuse to recognize. Logically, therefore, a national political conference becomes redundant. Who remains to be brought into the conference? Certainly not that boisterous bunch masquerading as civil society! In any case, these individuals already have a co-sanguinary relationship with the two main political formations.

On the surface, the SPA is reluctant to accept Maoist supremo Prachanda's offer to form a joint interim government and people's army, primarily because of the legitimacy issues that would raise. Despite all their hype that the royal regime is in utter international isolation, the SPA recognizes that governments and organizations still deal with the government. American, British and Indian delegations continue to hold substantive talks with government ministers.

In reality, the legitimacy issue is the least of the SPA concerns. Each constituent is suspicious of the motives of the Maoists. The mainstream parties cannot forget how the Maoists, who have unleashed much of their violence against party cadres, rushed to hold talks with the first palace-appointed government. The Maoists, for their part, remember the haste with which the Nepali Congress and the Unified Marxist Leninists acted in unison in an effort to brutally suppress the insurgency in the early phases.

The suspicions within the SPA have only deepened the dilemma. The Nepali Congress cannot forget how the Unified Marxist-Leninists ditched the mainstream alliance to join the palace-appointed government in 2004. The UML cannot have overcome so easily the humiliation inflicted by the Nepali Congress's last-minute refusal to accept Madhav Kumar Nepal as the consensus candidate for prime minister.

For public consumption, at least, a gesture of goodwill was required. Hours after the SPA-Maoist memorandum was released, the rebels agreed to the opposition alliance's demand and withdrew a crippling blockade of Kathmandu. By reversing an action that was rapidly eroding their public image, the Maoists clearly made virtue out of necessity.

The wily comrades did not stop at that. By ceding the protest arena to the SPA, which has called for fresh protests in the weeks ahead, the Maoists have cleverly absolved themselves from responsibility for further disruptions and dislocations in the capital.

What next for Nepal? Nothing much until the Indian government – or at least the influential section that sees the Maoists as a welcome addition to its destabilization strategy – makes up its mind on the question of the monarchy. The split in the Indian establishment over its Nepal policy is becoming more palpable over time. Non-communist sections of the ruling alliance in New Delhi have become more vocal in opposing Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's pandering to the communist parties. This unnatural coalition could not have evolved a coherent policy on Nepal.

For someone whose enthronement was accompanied by politically inspired campaigns of calumny, perpetuated in large part by Indian satellite news channels, King Gyanendra evidently cares little for the haughtiness emanating from across the southern border. The monarch, after all, knows that India would have acquiesced in his takeover had he named Surya Bahadur Thapa or any other India-friendly politician as chairman of the council of ministers. To what effect? Allow New Delhi to continue its nefarious game? The inclusion of Tulsi Giri and Kirti Nidhi Bista, hardly known for obsequiousness vis-a-vis India, more than the king's chairmanship of the government, is really what has unnerved New Delhi.

A year after the royal takeover, Nepal remains mired in utter paralysis. Undoubtedly, the government has lost much of the tacit support Nepalis were willing to give the palace. The parties, beholden to India, have been thoroughly unable to make decisions in the best interests of the country. The Maoists, too, have squandered much of their credibility. Having launched their "people's war," among other things, to free Nepal from the stranglehold of India, the top rebel leadership have established themselves as willing pawns of New Delhi.

King Gyanendra, for his part, remains committed to the roadmap for national renewal he enunciated in the address to the nation on Feb. 1 2005. The reason behind the royal conviction is not too hard to spot. From the palace's perspective, this battle is one of life and death for independent Nepal.

For far too long, India has only sought to tighten its stranglehold on Nepal in the guise of supposedly good intentions. If democracy were the principle concern of New Delhi, it would not have been so faithful to the destruction of the political career of B.P. Koirala, Nepal's first elected prime minister. Conventional wisdom has it that King Mahendra's personal dislike for B.P. was responsible for the Koirala family's subsequent exile or incarceration. Clearly, it was B.P .'s assertion of Nepalese sovereignty and independence that had alienated his one-time patrons in India. B.P. or any other democratic leader with nationalistic credentials was too dangerous for India. B.P. subsequently narrated in his memoirs how then-prime minister Surya Bahadur Thapa scuttled his efforts toward a rapprochement with the palace. The Koirala family, with few exceptions, has learned the moral of the India-versus-B.P. story well.

FULL TEXT –

http://bangladesh-web.com/view.php?hidDate=2006-03-20&hidType=
EDT&hidRecord=0000000000000000095931

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Nepal Maoists, parties sign pact

Kathmandu: Joining forces against King Gyanendra, seven political parties and the Maoists in Nepal on Sunday announced an agreement to launch a fresh agitation next month against his autocratic rule and find a political solution to the decade-old armed conflict by holding polls to the Constituent Assembly.

Interim government

The seven-party Alliance for Restoration of Democracy also urged the rebels to end the blockade of roads connecting Kathmandu and the rest of Nepal. The Maoists and the Alliance agreed to form an interim government by holding a national political conference of the agitating democratic forces and to establish full-fledged democracy by holding elections to the Constituent Assembly, the parties said in a joint statement.

Nepali Congress central member Shekhar Koirala said the Maoists agreed to withdraw the three-week-long economic blockade. But a rebel statement on this is yet to come.

Peaceful protests

The intensified agitation programme starting on April 6 includes a four-day general strike and civil disobedience movement, besides a massive public rally in Kathmandu on April 8. The leaders of the Alliance called on the people to participate in their peaceful movement to restore democracy and return sovereign power and state authority to the people through elections.

The parties also called on the international community to support their initiatives to end absolute monarchy and find a political solution to the insurgency, the joint statement said. They reiterated their commitment to reinstate Parliament and form a powerful all-party government, which will hold a dialogue with the rebels.

The parties have also agreed to continue a dialogue with the Maoists to seek common ground.

Pact signed by Prachanda

On behalf of the seven-party Alliance, Nepali Congress spokesman Krishna Sitaula and party treasurer Mahanta Thakur, Nepal Communist Party UML's senior politburo members Jhalanath Khanal and Bamdev Gautam, Janamorcha Nepal President Amik Serchan and CPN-Unity Centre leader Prakash inked the agreement while CPN-Maoist chief Prachanda signed for the rebels. — PTI

Haven't had the chance to read the second article, read the first one by Nischal...it has very less credibility and based more or less in allegations and conspiracy- has little evidence, much speculation.

Also went to their website to read other articles, couple of them were interesting. Like the widow wearing sindur etc., thats quite revolutionary for remote Nepal- and I'm glad she stood for what she believed. But the writer didn't mention what she believed in, or why she did so.

Out of curiosity- all the interviewers/writers were Ranas and Basnyats..Rana circle of trust? :D La Rana haru le ni desh ko Bikash garne bhaye :P