Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it. From a strategic perspective, India has been guilty for not looking beyond her borders thinking erroneously that the external events in the world would not impact India. How wrong India has been!
Not only have external happenings influenced India most directly, but have also caused great losses to her not only in the past thousand years, but events in Tibet-China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Myannmar have impacted Indian interests in our recent past and we have paid the price of being a quite onlooker. Only in the Bangladesh issue did India intervene decidedly, whereas in Sri Lanka a lack of a clear cut objective resulted in a humiliating situation. The British in India turned a blind eye to the threat by the communist cadres of Mao Zedong, and Zhou Enlai, even when the communist army was on the brink of complete annihilation by Chiang Kai-Shek'stroops in Jiangxi Province in October 1934. When this band entered the Yunan province bordering India, a timely action could have wiped them out. When Mao'sforces encroached upon non-Chinese areas of the Tibetans and the Hui and were ambushed by them on several occasions. The British has ample opportunity to end the communist threat, knowing that the Tibetans being Buddhists and the Hui being Muslims were culturally very different from the Han Chinese. Infact, the Hui do not eat pork?the main stay of the Chinese meat diet, and refrain from eating dog, horse, and other animals considered delicacies by the Chinese. The British stayed put and allowed the communist threat to survive, perhaps because Chiang Kai-Sheks? military advisor was the German Hans von Seekt. In 1977, when Golam Azam of the Jamaat-e-Islami was permitted to return to Bangladesh, and in 1982 when Bangladesh changed from a secular nation to an Islamic one, India did not intervene effectively. When Nawaz Sharief removed Pervez Musharaff, the General was in Indian air-space and for all practical purposes coordinated the military coup from within Indian air-space. Had India'srulers reacted strategically and decisively at each turn of events history as we know it, could well have been very different.
Once again we are faced with a similar chain of events. This time it is in Nepal?the world'sonly or last Hindu kingdom. From the way that things are turning, it seems that the present-day rulers are more than happy to systematically ensure the slide of Nepal into an ultra-communist state.
Once again we are faced with a similar chain of events. This time it is in Nepal?the world'sonly or last Hindu kingdom. From the way that things are turning, it seems that the present-day rulers are more than happy to systematically ensure the slide of Nepal into an ultra-communist state.
In the guise of reducing King Gyanendra'spowers, the Nepalese Parliament on May 18, 2006 declared that the royal family has to pay taxes, scrapped the royal advisory council, and declared Nepal was no longer a Hindu kingdom, but a secular state?a demand very much in the anti-Hindu tone of the communists. The Kathmandu Post even carried a banner headline titled, ?Nepali Magna Carta is born?. One to understand the relation between the progress of Nepal, and the need to de-Hinduise the Nepali state, when one correlates state building activities and revolutions in our neighbourhood. When Pakistan was born it became an Islamic republic, when the Shah of Iran was overthrown, Iran became an Islamic republic, similarly, ten years after the formation of a secular Bangladesh, it too was made into an Islamic republic. Afghanistan too under Karzai is an Islamic republic. The British monarchy is actually a protector of the Christian protestant faith, whereas the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is an Islamic nation as well. The King of Nepal is not only the head of state, but is actually very much part of the Hindu religion. He is considered by some to be an avatar of Vishnu, and hence his kingdom in a way become the kingdom of Vishnu. Therefore, the demand to de-Hinduise the Nepalese state, even though is not an anti-Hindu demand, yet it is antithetical to the very identity of Nepal and aims to transform Nepalese culture in one go.
Is it not strange that the Nepalese Maoist started their campaign to oust the monarchy in 1996, at a time when the communist influenced third front government was in power in India? And it is not even stranger that the de-Hinduisation of the Nepalese state has taken place in 2006, when a communist supported government is in power in India? Since 1996, over 10,000 people have been killed in the Maoist conflict.
Nepal has been a monarchy for most of its known history. A brief experiment with multi-party politics in 1959 ended when King Mahendra suspended Parliament and took charge. In 1990, Democratic reforms were initiated in 1991 after popular protests, but with frequent governmental changes, democracy has really not taken shape in the kingdom. The most serious threat to Nepal is from the Maoists who ironically are backing the Girija Prasad Koirala government. But the ultra-Leftists are demanding more pound of flesh with each increasing day.
It was the Paul von Hindenburg?the 86 year old German president?who appointed Hitler in 1933 as Chancellor of Germany and that changed the course of history. Similarly, the octogenarian Girija Prasad Koirala, is not in the best of his health, and without a strong democratic setup being put in place, the weakening of the military, and the monarchy in sudden and abrupt proclamations have sown the seeds of the Maoist take over of Nepal. Tomorrow, if the aged Prime Minister passes away, it is obvious that the in the chaos among the multi-party Parliament to gain control over the government, the Maoists would find an easy road to takeover Kathmandu and from there the whole of Nepal! In the gaga on reducing the king'sauthority, no one is questioning as to why the Maoists have yet not given up their arms! What should happen is that India must send in her forces to strengthen the Nepalese military. In this transition period the defense of Kathmandu must be reviewed and the Maoist cadres must lay down their arms and renounce the path of violence. The Maoist leader Prachanda must come out of hiding and take part in the democratic process. The Indo-Nepal border must be sealed to ensure that the Maoist strength is not increased by enthusiastic cadres and ammunition being smuggled from India.
Without economic growth, the euphoria will end soon, and so will Nepal'sexperiment with multi-party democracy. A democracy cannot be created and made to exist artificially.
Nepal with a per capita of $1,500 (PPP) may not remain a democracy for long, if the Maoist threat is overlooked. India must rise up to the occasion and question, what will she do if the Maoists takeover Nepal and the Red flag flies on either side of the Himalayas? How will India handle the thousands of Nepalese citizens working in India? What will be the effect of the Maoist presence in Nepal on the minds of the Nepali Gurkhas in the Indian Army? How will China use a Red Nepal to its advantage? What repercussions will that have on India'sfight against the Indian Maoists and Naxals, especially since after the Maoist takeover the Naxals?boosted by this?may well increase their activities in India? It is important to take pro-active steps now. For it is not without a reason that the Maoists have demanded that the Royal Guards?an elite military force?guarding the king be removed and the military be renamed from the Royal Nepalese Army to just the Nepalese Army. India must ensure the continuation of the monarchy in Nepal, take steps to protect the monarch, look into the defense for Kathmandu, ensure a step-by-step approach to Nepali democracy beginning not by the weakening of the king but by the strengthening of Nepal'sdemocratic institutions, and de-arming of the Maoists under the neutral presence of the Indian army.
Leave a Comment