N. P. Upadhyaya Nepali
Kathmandu: Whether Indian regime is repenting
over its past notorious deeds or is yet to understand the gravity of the
prevailing Nepali political situation has become very difficult to contemplate.
Self defeating speeches are being made by those
who remained instrumental in damaging Nepal around 2005, if one were to recall,
is puzzling in that one school of thought which ruined Nepal prefers to go
along with the present set of Nepali leaders perhaps concluding that whatever
is left of Nepal could further be damaged which in turn would allow the former
British colony to dictate its terms on Nepal for indefinite period. The bid is
in progress as of Tuesday afternoon, July 31, 2012.
The other set which is equally dangerous but
apparently has come to its senses and begun denuding those Nepali “partners”
with whose support this secret paraphernalia damaged Nepal and catapulted its
politics back in 2005-6. S. D. Muni has
taken the lead. Sense prevails now among the perverted brains?
Let’s come to the point.
Professor Sukh Deo Muni, the lone expert on
Nepal, took the front row in exposing his own disciples-Dahal and Babu Ram
Bhattarai through a recently published book wherein he stated that he, read
Muni, managed a very dangerous agreement to be inked in between the Nepal
Maoists duo, then residing and enjoying the Indian hospitality, and the Indian
Prime Minister’s Office in June 2002 wherein Nepal’s heroes and builders of
“proletarian change” fame promised not to cause any harm to Indian interests
but instead will surely pounce upon Nepal to which they successfully
accomplished as per the “written agreement” which apparently assumed the force
of a Treaty a la 1950.
This treaty must have
remained valid as of now for the same set is steering the country.
Muni in his story published in the book “Nepal
in Transition....” further hints at the fact that it was he who brought BRB and
Dahal closer to the RAW machinery to which we have mentioned already in these
columns some three weeks ago.
The gist, as much as could be grasped, Muni is
now hell bent on exposing his own obedient students for some hidden purpose.
But what ails him now?
Analysts recall that it was this Professor who
at a Kathmandu press meet had bluntly said that “Indian foreign policy on Nepal
needs a grand change”.
What could it mean? Muni is presumed to be
close to the South Block-RAW hardliner branch which charts Nepal policy.
But Muni is not what he poses to be. He is yet
killing the prestige of Nepal. Only, Tuesday afternoon, Muni told a “special”
gathering of intellectuals that King Tribhuwan had told Pundit Nehru to get
Nepal merged into the Indian Union which had just itself been freed from the
rigorous British rule, if that saved his honour and throne back in Nepal.
This talk is simply rubbish and specially made
to let the heads bow down of the ever sovereign Nepalese nationals. (We have
been told that none of the nationalist participants raised questions to Muni to
authenticate his claims. Nepali nationalism going down hill).
It can’t be like that. If King Tribhuwan wanted
to save his throne then why should he approach Pundit Nehru for the Muni’s
manufactured merger? By the way, his throne was quite safe in Kathmandu. The
Ranas had already come to their senses. Nehru definitely helped King Tribhuwan
but on his terms.
Yes! At best what had happened, as Muni
mentions, is just the opposite.
The fact is that King Tribhuwan and Nehru did
talk on how to preserve the Nepali sovereignty because Nehru was bit concerned
with the increasing influence of China. Nehru in essence preferred Nepal to
remain an independent and a sovereign nation so that she could not confront
China directly from this part of Himalayan Asia. At least the presence of an
independent Nepal will act like a deterrent in between the two giants. Nepali
sovereignty in effect became a natural tool for India to save her own territory
because China would never dare to attack India by entering through the landmass
of an Independent nation.
As of the airy talk of Professor Muni, during
the talk he said that “I have no evidence to prove what I said but yet I will
disclose it as and when I have the proof”. He is correct as he was not present
when Nehru and Tribhuwan could have dared to talk such an absurd. May be Muni
was then a milk sucking child.
But the rumours in Kathmandu have a different
story to tell to rebuke Muni’s blasphemous remarks. .
After the Nehru-Tribhuwan talk, the latter told
the former that “I will have to talk to my son because he is the heir apparent
first and then I will communicate to you”.
When the father and son met, King Mahendra got
the details of his father’s talk with Nehru and went into a deep thought.
After a few minutes of silence Mahendra said to
his father in a manner as is demanded in a Royal family, “Thik Cha Teso Bhaye
Buwa Hajur! Ani Nehru Lai Hajur Ley Teso Bhaye Sodhi Baksiyous Ki Nepali Jhanda
Dilli Ko Kun Thau Ma Gadney Ho”. ( Its literal translation: Ok then Respected
father! When you meet Pundit Nehru, ask him as to where should the flag of
Nepal be fixed in Delhi as Nepal’s Capital).
This explanation appears to be closer to the
truth and authentic.
Mind it that both father and son were not in
good terms. Even if Tribhuwan may have said so and wished for (it can’t be
imagined even) then Mahendra would have rejected the “self manufactured”
proposal tooth and nail.
What if some Nepali intellectuals claim that
Mahatma Gandhi too from his inner heart preferred to hand over the entire
colony to the British as Nehru and Jinnah were creating troubles for him? Will
the Indian nationals tolerate these Nepali airy talks? Perhaps not. Indeed, the
Indians understand the value of nationalism. Analysts admire Indian national's
sentimental attachments towards their motherland.
Now back to our analysis.
As if this were not enough, the all time Nepal
hater, Ambassador Shyam Saran just the other day beamingly claimed that “India
has been influencing Nepal in particular cases”.
In the process of his speech that
he made in New Delhi, Saran-the one who managed the Indian hospitality to then
Delhi residing Nepal Maoists, unashamedly said further that
“I wouldn’t say that India has no influence in Nepal but such influence should
be used in a proactive manner and that was what we did in 2005 during the
12-point understanding and in the case of then army chief Rookmangud Katawal in
2009. The secret of 2005 movement thoroughly exposed.
Damaging Nepal how could be a
proactive influence only?
This does mean that India drafted
the 12 point agreement and made the then agitating Nepali leaders, the
Indo-pendent ones, to sign the Indian draft, under coercion, for the ouster of
Nepali monarchy primarily.
But isn’t it that the Nepali
leaders inked the deal voluntarily? A portion of shame should be felt by those
who put their signature(s) on the self-defeating deal.
To recall, Saran was insulted by
then ruling monarch, perhaps to which he deserved, when the former was in
Kathmandu together with Dr. Karan Singh during the ultimate days of the 2006
movement-indeed now could be taken as an India sponsored one.
The King took Dr. Singh to the
luncheon table leaving Mr. Saran outside the dining room alone to listen to the
ear pleasing sounds of the forks and spoons and smell of the delicious foods.
It was this insult, a blunder
indeed, that brought untold sufferings to the Nepali people in general and the
King in particular. The ‘wounded lion’ pounced upon Nepali Royalty immediately
after his Delhi return which became evident from his hurriedly summoned press
meet at the Indian Foreign Ministry. The King was made to enter into the nearby
Jungles. After all, Saran was India’s Foreign Secretary.
The same Shyam saran now approves
that his country did intervene on the issue of then Nepal Army Chief being
sacked by Nepal PM Prachanda on May 3, 2009.
In saying so he does tell that
Nepal President acted as per the instructions of the Indian Minister Pranav
Mukherjee who told Dr. Yadav, (sic), “Don’t sack him…he is our Military Chief”,
and our President back home reinstated the same evening the sacked Nepal Army
Chief, Rukmangad Katwal. Nepal PM Prachanda resigned May 4, 2012.
What Kul Bahadur Khadka had said
a fortnight back in Naya Patrika daily has come to true. Khadka, the Maoists
preferred and appointed Nepal Army Chief whose tenure in office lasted for only
five hours, to recall had replaced Katwal.
Doesn’t this mean that Nepal
President acts only when he gets the needed instructions from India? This
mockery of Nepali State and sovereignty? Theorists John Austin, had he been
alive, would have laughed at the distortion of his hypothesis on State and
Sovereignty.
By extension this also proves that
both Katwal and Dr. Yadav were very close to the Indian establishment. Saran’s
assertion proves this.
Expose India campaign this time
has best been accomplished by the Indian nationals themselves. Thanks India.
Not bad. After all truth can’t be
hidden for long. It is a human weakness.
No wonder thenP. K. Hormis
Tharakan, the former RAW Chief in his fresh story published in the Indian
Express, Jul 25 2012, has made Himalayan efforts in denuding Nepal Maoist’s
people’s war veterans, Chairman Dahal and Babu Ram Bhattarai that these two
distinguished Nepali nationals were close to the Indian regime and remain yet
faithful towards the former British Colony-the present day Republic of India
born 1947.
In support of Chairman Dahal, he
even blames his own country that India miscalculated in assessing Chairman
Dahal as an anti-Indian to which he was not. Too much love boomerangs.
Hormis claims that Dahal is a
pro-India man by stating that it was the latter who managed the ouster of the
anti-Indian lobby from his party very recently.
Hormis is perhaps referring to
the new splinter of the Maoists party led by Mohan Baidya.
Hormis out of excitement, as if
has won the Nepali battle and already captured Nepali State, forgets that the
more he wrote in favor of Dahal and Bhattarai, the more he was exposing his own
former surreptitious instruments which is what he claims or at least gives such
an impression in his Indian Express article dated July 25, 2012.
Now the question is that whether
Saran, Muni and lately Hormis were eulogizing their “trusted men” in Nepal or
it was a calculated campaign to discredit their former cohorts? Is India
thinking that they now need new horses in Nepal?
Yet the heart of the analysts
goes in favor of our own Nepali nationals who have been in a very ugly manner
exposed by the Indian veterans of the 2006 Nepal change now controlling Indian
secret agencies. Nothing remains a secret now.
To sum up, how the cadres of the
Nepal Maoists led by Chairman Dahal will take such dirty exposure of their own
party top-hats will perhaps determine the future strength of Mohan Baidya panel
which enjoys apparently the secret backing of the entire nationalist forces and
more so of the Northern neighbor and that too perhaps unconditionally.
Acute dearth of nationalists.
Even if some then they too were impotent. Shame on us all.
Courtesy:
Telegraphnepal.com
Aug02, 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment