Low Graphics Site
White bar
.: Latest News :. .: News in Pictures :.
Daily SectionMarker

Misc SectionMarker

Horoscope Recipes Weekly SectionMarker

Weekly SectionMarker



Pakistan's Internet Magazine
Herald
Dawn GroupMarker

Archive, Search, Feedback & HelpMarker

Weather

Dawn Classified



FrontPage National International Local Business KSE Forex Sports Editorial Opinion Letters Features Today's Cartoon TV Guide Cowasjee Ayaz Irfan Hussain Review Dawn Magazine Young World Images Dawn Group Subscription To Advertise

DINA
Previous Story DAWN - the Internet Edition Next Story

April 27, 2006 Thursday Rabi-ul-Awwal 28, 1427


Delhi’s king-size blunder



By Seema Mustafa


NEW DELHI: Nepal’s King Gyanendra had no option but to bend, without appearing to crawl, before the might of the people. The threat to gherao Kathmandu by the seven-party alliance, the Maoists and the people of Nepal had not worried just the king, but also the United States and India who were fearful of the protest taking a violent turn against the monarchy as well as its perceived supporters. Contingency plans were drawn up, instructions to embassy staff for quick getaways issued, while hectic negotiations continued with the king in an effort to find a solution that would be acceptable to the democratic parties of Nepal.

The repercussions will have long term implications for India. And till today it is not clear what kind of strategic inputs determined the initial responses of the government under Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Democratic India turned into an ardent champion of the monarchy without any warning, leading to the as yet unanswered question: in doing so was the government acting in the interests of India? Or was it, as the ever active grapevine seems to suggest, a response tailored and modulated by the Americans who forgot the spelling of democracy in their desire to keep the Maoists out of any power formation in Kathmandu? For them their choice was clear: an oppressive, unpopular king was preferable to the Maoists, and India as the new ally for promoting democracy around the world, was more than happy to agree.

The last week has bewildered the Indian establishment completely. When the people poured out into the streets in a protest that soon acquired the dimension of a revolution, it was assumed even by advisers to the government here that New Delhi would support the people of Nepal in their struggle. It was, thus, a bit of a surprise when suddenly “maharaja” Karan Singh was rushed out of Baisakhi celebrations in Jammu to catch the first flight to Kathmandu as an emissary of Prime Minister Singh. The intention was clear to those more cynical about the government’s intentions: a maharaja was being sent to strike a chord with King Gyanendra in a clear indication that India’s policy remained monarchy-centric.

The worst fears came true, and it was apparent that New Delhi had decided to completely ignore the demands of the SPA and the Maoists, in its desire to protect the monarchy. Prime Minister Singh was totally in command at this stage, and soon after Dr Karan Singh’s visit, King Gyanendra came out with the decision to “allow” a return to democracy after the SPA informed him of their prime ministerial candidate.

It was so autocratic an announcement, and so far from the demands of the protesters, that it was greeted with a stunned silence that turned almost immediately into a loud anti-King and anti-India sentiment. By this time it was clear that King Gyanendra was following the Indian government’s line, particularly as the ministry of external affairs barely waited for the king to finish his speech before rushing to embrace his offer.

THREE QUESTIONS


The questions on everybody’s lips even now are: one, is the government so ill-informed and insensitive to democratic struggles; two, is the government so caught up in helping the US realise its own interests that it is quite prepared to sacrifice Indian interests; three, can the government be trusted to protect Indian interests?

Prime Minister Singh, on way to Germany the next morning, showed no signs of second thoughts, even after a strong anti-India sentiment engulfed the streets of Nepal. His rather dangerous determination to “stay the course” at any cost, made him tell reporters accompanying him on the visit that his government was wedded to the twin pillar concept, that it was supportive of a constitutional monarchy (even though it had been rejected vociferously by the people of Nepal!), and what was even worse, the government was prepared to re-examine the proposal to send arms to the Himalayan state.

It was almost as if he had no idea of what was happening on the ground in Nepal, and that either his people had not informed him or that he actually did not give a damn. The day played out in Nepal with the widespread protest acquiring a decided anti-India hue, and it was made clear by the SPA leadership that they were not going to buckle under this pressure, and that the agitation would intensify until their legitimate demands for the revival of parliament, establishment of a Constituent Assembly and elections were met.

It was clear, even before Dr Karan Singh’s visit, that all of Nepal had joined the agitation against the King. The students, academics, lawyers, doctors, and finally even the civil servants had turned against the monarchy. It is thus, still a mystery as to what inputs prompted the Prime Minister to turn his government’s — and in the process, India’s — back on democracy and embrace a man who has become the symbol of oppression for the people of Nepal. Key advisers to the government here were absolutely aghast with the Indian response, as were the political parties who had no idea at all of what was coming. The Left parties rushed in, in an attempt to salvage the situation and CPI(M)’s Sitaram Yechury was rushed to make common cause with the democratic forces and the Maoists, and work out a face saving solution before the anti-India sentiment took a violent form.

Interestingly, the fact that the government had not thought out matters and was only following some kind of directive from the top, became apparent when a panicky foreign secretary called a press conference on the same night that Prime Minister Singh had left for Germany to declare that the twin pillar concept was no longer valid, that no arms were being sent to Nepal, and that the government stood firmly with the people of Nepal. There was not a word in common between the Prime Minister’s press conference in the comfort of Air India One on the way to Germany, and the foreign secretary’s briefing a few hours later. The next day, Dr Manmohan Singh, again in Germany, backtracked furiously insisting that his government would never desert the people of Nepal.

In Delhi, defence minister Pranab Mukherjee rushed into some levels of damage control. Sitaram Yechury worked out a seven-point formula with the SPA and the Maoists and discussed this in detail with Mr Mukherjee who then held a high level meeting with the home minister, the intelligence chiefs, the Army chief and others. The Indian ambassador to Nepal was told to make it clear to the King that he had no option but to back off, and to concede to the demands, as there was every possibility that Tuesday’s agitation of a million people would turn violent and leave him with no option but to flee the country.

Basically, that New Delhi had had second thoughts and was no longer prepared to back the monarch as had been earlier stated by Dr Manmohan Singh. Strange isn’t it, the Prime Minister’s policy was overturned by his Cabinet colleague with Dr Manmohan Singh placing himself in that strange position where within 24 hours he himself was compelled to give entirely different statements on Nepal?

Despite his aversion to the Maoists, the prime minister will have to accept them as they have been accepted by the SPA and the people of Nepal. The Maoists have made it very clear that they are totally prepared to give up the gun for a democratic government in Nepal, and it is now imperative that they are brought on board. US inspired attempts to scuttle this will only lead to an unsettled Nepal, an unstable government, and an eventual return to an oppressive regime. The people have sacrificed their lives for a better future, and it is only the arrogant and the insensitive governments who can ignore this, and that too — as India has learnt — at their own peril. It was frightening, however, to see how out of tune with reality New Delhi was in the region and how cunning became its political machinations. Indian interests cannot be furthered by secret pacts and deals, but by factoring in the people’s aspirations that were so very visible and transparent in Nepal. —By arrangement with The Asianage






Previous Story Top of Page Next Story

Seprater
Contributions
Privacy Policy
© DAWN Group of Newspapers, 2006