India and Nepal: Vital geo-cultural aspects

April 26, 2006

Subramanian Swamy

Organiser

April 30, 2006

"In the 1960s, King Birendra was a student at Harvard when I was

teaching economics there, and soon became his good friend."

Nepal thus is not a special case for us anymore even if it is a Hindu

kingdom. It is a part of the general problem of the Hindus under

siege, encircled by the anti-Hindu forces.

As I have been repeatedly writing in these columns, Hindus are under a

camouflaged siege and hence most Hindus do not even realise it. To

lift this siege, Hindus need a new mindset based on an implementable

Agenda. It is not enough anymore for the Hindus to be just pious, or

religious or observe rituals to defend their faith. Hindus have to

awaken to the reality of this siege and become organised with a

mindset to repulse the threats.

The siege is manifested in terrorism, illegal immigration, religious

conversion, and the geo-political encirclement of the present day

India by hostile forces. Everyone of these threats is directed at only

one targetthe Hindus and the Hindu foundation of India.

The developments in Nepal also have to be seen and understood as a

part of this siege that the Hindus face today.

So when we seek to formulate India's Nepal policy, it cannot be just a

question of whether we support the Nepal King or not, or we favour

democracy or not. The core question to the answer is whether the

policy will safeguard India's national security and the fundamental

interest of protecting her ancient culture.

India that is Hindustan, is and shall of course forever remain an

ancient nation of the Hindus and of those who accept and are proud

that their ancestors were Hindus.

India is not a new nation founded by the British imperialists or

foreign marauders who came before them. Instead, the territory of

Akhand Hindustan is the cradle of the Hindu civilization of a people

indigenous to it, with a small fusion of foreigners who came

sporadically to this land. Just as Ganga remains Ganga even if other

rivers merge into it, India remains Hindu in character, even if other

cultures have influenced it. India today may be of composite culture,

but the core and distinguishing feature is `Hindu'. If the Muslims and

the Christians of India accept and cherish this fact and also that

their ancestors were Hindus, then Indian identity is established, and

we all would become one family and equal legatees of Hindu

civilization. The moment a Muslim or Christian owns this heritage, we

cannot doubt his or her patriotism. At the same time those Hindus who

believe in the Aryan-Dravidian race theory are not real Hindus but

stooges of foreigners. The Hindustani identity is thus established.

But through terrorism, illegal immigration, religious conversion, and

encirclement of India by hostile forces, this identity is sought to be

undermined with a long run aim to Balkanize India much as Soviet Union

and Yugoslavia had been and unravelled.

Nepal thus is not a special case for us anymore even if it is a Hindu

kingdom. It is a part of the general problem of the Hindus under

siege, encircled by the anti-Hindu forces. Bhutan is under threat from

the ULFA, an anti-India terrorist organisation, Bangladesh has come

under the influence of Al Qaeda, Srilanka is under attack by the LTTE

dominated by Christians and Jaffna Church, and of course, Pakistan

which has become the hothouse of all Islamic terrorists. Hence, India

is geo-politically surrounded by forces which target the Hindus and no

body else.

It is with this perspective that we should formulate India's policy on

Nepal. Such a policy should enhance our national security, protect the

Hindus by ensuring that our neighbourhood is freed from sanctuaries

breeding anti-Hindustani terrorists, and also further the cause of

democracyin that order of priority.

In Nepal there are three main forces on the groundthe King, the seven

party alliance of political parties, and the Maoist terrorists. The

King is anti-democratic unlike his predecessor, King Birendra. In the

1960s, King Birendra was a student at Harvard when I was teaching

economics there, and soon became his good friend. During Emergency,

Birendra helped me to escape from India when there was a MISA warrant

out for me, and I had been declared a proclaimed offender with reward

for my capture. In 1978, Morarji Desai as PM had asked me to go to

Kathmandu to persuade King Birendra to agree to elections even if on a

non-party basis. After some friendly arguments with me, King Birendra

saw the logic of democracy as an international trend and ordered

elections. Thereafter there was peace in Nepal till 1990, when

political parties launched an agitation for party-based elections. I

had chance to go then to Kathmandu with Chandrashekar and address a

public meeting organised by the political parties. I thereafter spoke

to King Birendra, and again he saw the logic of public sentiment, and

agreed to party-based elections. Peace returned till last year. Today

it is no more just a question of restoring democracy.

If it was just a question of democracy, the solution would have been

simple. Unlike in the past, there is no agreement in Nepal amongst the

three main forces on what would constitute democracy. For the seven

party alliance [sPA] democracy is just the revival of the dissolved

Parliament. For the Maoists, it is a Constituent Assembly for a new

Constitution and for adopting the concept of `people's democracy', a

euphemism for dictatorship by the Maoists. The King has proclaimed

fresh elections in April 2007 but left unclear the terms of it. So

restoring democracy cannot be a solution till there is agreement on

it's form and structure.

Today, however, the Nepal question for India is multi-dimensional. In

one dimension it is how to crush terrorism before it spills over

dangerously into India. In another dimension, it is how to cleanse

Nepal of anti-Indian foreign intelligence forces who are abetting a

coup d'etat. Finally, it is how to make Nepal join the family of

democratic nationswith or without the King.

But the foreign-dominated UPA government with a spineless Prime

Minister whipped into action by the communist parties of India acting

at the behest of their foreign benefactors, are forcing India to

support the Maoists to take over amidst chaos, for a spurious concept

of democracy. This is disastrous for India.

What then should India do?

I suggest three steps:

Define our priorities as ending terrorism first, then cleansing Nepal

of anti-Indian forces, and then adoption of an Indian type

quasi-federal Constitution for restoration of democracy.

Seek a Mutual Defence Treaty with Nepal, and post two divisions of the

Indian Army in Kathmandu. Offer Indian advisers to the King.

Use our emotional links with SPA to de-link it's alliance from the

Maoists, and to nullify the 12-point SPA-Maoists agreement signed in

the fifth-column enclave called the Jawarharlal Nehru University in

New Delhi.

Engage China to cooperate in this policy. Mutual interests and

compulsions will ensure that such cooperation from China will be

forthcoming. And tell the US: "Please stay away. We can manage."

I urge my new `old' ally, the BJP to make Nepal a debatable issue in

the Parliament.

http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=128&page=12

This is an information resource and discussion group for people interested in the World's Ancient Vedic Culture, with a focus on its historical, archeological and scientific aspects. Also topics about India, Hinduism, God, and other aspects of World Culture are welcome.

Remember, Vedic Culture is not an artificial imposition, but is the natural state of a society that is in harmony with God and the environment.Om Shantih, Harih Om

India calling card India phone card Vietnamese dating Learn vietnamese Vietnamese Vietnamese visa