India's Hypocracy: Supports Terrorism in Nepal

[Guest guest]

India's Hypocracy: Supports Terrorism in Nepal

"The most surprising position in the case of Nepal has been taken by

India, which often blames Pakistan and Bangladesh to have inspired

infiltrators for terrorising India...But India is playing double

standard in Nepal's fight against terrorists."

Nepal's Political Situation Requires Proper Perspectives

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0512/S00100.htm

By Michael Putin

It is quite unfortunate that certain foreign ambassadors, mainly from

India, USA and UK are having active political engagements and making

statements on each and every turn and twist in Nepalese politics and

issuing their own dicta, which is done against the norms of

diplomatic decency. Countries like USA, UK and any other country, for

that matter do not tolerate such interference in the internal affairs

of another country. They are, in fact, having double standards in

case of Nepal's internal matters in general and in dealing with

Maoists.

 

The most surprising position in the case of Nepal has been taken by

India, which often blames Pakistan and Bangladesh to have inspired

infiltrators for terrorising India. The same India commits itself in

all regional and international conventions against terrorism. In the

Declaration of 13 th SAARC Summit held November 2005, member states

including India has the obligation not to play double standards in

the fight against terrorism. But India is playing double standard in

Nepal's fight against terrorists. India allows Maoists to use its

soil. For example, in November 2003, India allowed Madav Kumar to

meet Maoist leaders in Lucknow, whereas on 30 December 2003, Indian

security personnel detained Ishwor Pokharel, Standing Committee

member of CPN (UML), at the Indira Gandhi International Airport in

New Delhi to question him for his alleged meeting with Maoist leaders

in India. However, in November 2005, India permitted the meeting of

the leaders of seven political parties with Maoists in New Delhi and

openly supported their so-called understanding. A layman cannot

understand, being an emerging power of Asia, how India can exercise

the same standard in dealing with terrorists and party leaders. This

Indian approach has complicated the resolution of Nepal's Maoist

problem and the western countries are blindingly supporting the

Indian position as if they cannot follow independent policy on Nepal.

 

It should be noted here that no foreign nation has ever made another

nation. They have their own interests and they are not trying to help

Nepal purely for benevolent reasons. When we are unable to stand on

our feet, rely too heavily on foreign nations to deal with our own

problems, do not display our unity even on certain fundamentals of

national interest and undermine our own national institutions, the

foreigners would, of course, meddle in our affairs and treat us as a

second-or-third-rate nation. This is the right time to stop it.

 

It is the vision of national reconciliation that the country has to

embrace to move ahead in unison. Thankfully, we have an ancient

institution, monarchy, which can and should serve as the focal point

of national reconciliation. His Majesty has already urged all

political parties, either over-ground or underground, to take

patriotism as the point of convergence and consensus to resolve all

outstanding problems of the country by ourselves and within the

country itself. But instead the political parties did not respond to

this call responsibly.

 

Very recently, the Government of Australia has expressly welcomed the

proclamation of His Majesty the king to hold municipal elections in

February next year and the general elections by April 2007. This step

has been described as the opportunity to return to democracy. The

Australian Government expressed the conviction that democratic

activities would get re-energized through successful electoral

processes and that the path taken by Nepal in this direction was a

correct decision. The political parties have to embrace this

opportunity and shun any actions that may be detrimental to the

interests of the Nepalese people.

 

It is irony that political parties call themselves democratic, but

they vow to boycott elections, the very soul of democracy. Political

parties often cite the security situation not favorable for

elections. If elections can be held in Afghanistan, Iraq and Kashmir,

why not in Nepal?

 

The most absurd development in Nepalese politics is the so-called

alliance of seven political parties with Maoists, whom they termed as

terrorists and fought against when they were in power. It becomes

obvious that the so-called mainstream political parties in Nepal have

no distinct political doctrine. They seem to be ready to do anything

to come to power even if it is against the norms of democracy. It is

also evident that political parties have practiced double standards

as this has been done by western countries in tackling insurgency in

Nepal. Terrorism as defined by these countries incorporate those who

support and harbour terrorists. This is clearly spelt out in the UN

Security Council's relevant resolutions and also in the international

and regional conventions on terrorism. The statement made by UN

Secretary General on the pact between Maoist and seven political

parties clearly violates with the spirit of these resolutions and

conventions.

 

In the ultimate analysis, the recent irresponsible move by the

political parties is against the values of democracy and basic norms

of politics, which, if not checked in time, will invite sinister in

the country, leading to its virtual collapse. The King being the

ultimate custodian of the Constitution, the guardian of Nepalese

people and the symbol of national unity cannot remain silent

bystander and has to take even bolder step to make the situation

under his control. People have full confidence upon His Majesty's

capability to deal with this grave political crisis in the country.

In fact, people always remain behind the King. Political parties who

claim themselves as representatives of people have severed their

relationship with people by extending helping hands with terrorists.

Rather, they have been lured by the strategic move of the terrorists.

Both parties and Maoists all now begin to target their so-called

movement against the King. Now, His majesty has the two extreme

options available: either to surrender to the terrorists or totally

crush terrorists and its supporters with his long-term approach and

establish genuine democratic system in the country. First option will

not guarantee even his and people's existence. So the second option

is the only and obvious response to the present political stalemate.

Though it will take time to fully understand the situation by

currently misguided international communities, His Majesty's move

will definitely have international backing as time goes by. The

latest support can be cited of Delhi's demonstration of December 1 in

favour of the Royal Step.

 

It may be possible that political parties would like to show the

people and the international communities that the King has failed to

keep his promise to hold elections. Since political parties could not

garner support, they perhaps expect stern actions from the Government

against their support to terrorists so that a tense environment is

created for massive insurrection to their benefit. Such actions will

also give them an opportunity for avoiding elections. Therefore, it

is absolutely necessary for the Government to conduct elections at

any cost and reactivate democracy. This will help the Government

defeat any sort of dirty move by parties and terrorists against the

monarchy, the people and the country.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0512/S00100.htm

ENDS

 

--- End forwarded message ---