the problem can be summed up thus : Indian administration (in this case the Indian Foreign Service)continues to flounder, their mistakes continuously glossed over with the politicians and babus ensuring they protect each other in the face of increasingly visible gaffes committed. Be it in the wording of Bills passed by the Parliament, foreign policy statements, behaviuor of the politicians, nothing comes under the public scrutiny and no official seem to be answerable to the public for their decisions regardless of the effect it has on the country, its citizens or their future. The media highlights such things for a few days and then everyhting is consigned to the dust-bin of memories. Had it been any other country, especially one that is in the forefron tof the world and aspiring for a security council seat, such acts/ decisions would have been publicly debated. I am referring to the govt decision in the nepal monarch issue. Why does not the foreign secy along with the minister be made responsible. do we get to question the nepal desk of the foreign ministry. i am sure very few journalists also know the name of the concerned official, forget the hapless general public.
Here goes the Pinko brigade back on the offensive. "The maoists pose no threat to India" - Only a person sitting happily in his Airconditioned accommodation can say that. Try asking police jawans, who regularly get blown off in their tracks. The birthplace of Mao has reconciled to the realities of the limitations of Maoism, but India is blessed with some real die-hard Pinkos! Of all the despots in the world, our dear friend Mr.Bidwai can find only one. It makes me sleep in peace that such people are not leading our country but are limited to spilling dirty ink!
It is the duty of India to save Nepal from the Maoists. At the same time India should protect Nepal from the designs of Pakistan and China too. Otherwise this will turn out very costly for India. Mr.Singh has at last taken a pragmatic step by helping Nepal in its our of crisis
well what'er the world may regard and call it human rights violation r killing of democracy r any other name ,the king has in my opinion exercised his ironhand 2 crush the maoist and its terrorism.Post 9/11 even in america the democracy was looked down r in the case of india itself when indira gandhi clamped emergency every 1 just shouted .
Look for yourself, there is at least 50 - 60% drop in the maoist insanity.if in the event he has 2 assume dictatorship,it is fine as long as it is used 2 crush the maoist violence & attrocities.He has done what an elected government failed 2 do..i.e, 2 protect the innocent citizens from the maoist brutalities.
Atleast , give the king his due in curbing violence.
The problem is that the prescription of multi-party democracy lacks credibility. Simply because it 'appears' to be working in India or elsewhere, is not enough reason for King Gnanendra to opt for it. He must be aware of the downside of multi-party democracy and how far it is removed from the common man's welfare in the final analysis.
While reading the article, 'India's U-tern for a despot'I thought it was written by Mr Surjeet or Mr Yechury but when I saw the name of the writer I got thoroughly disappointed. How could a person like Mr. Bidwai write such a biased and third grade report. I have a feeling, Mr Bidwai needs to be educated on a country's internal matters as well as one's foreign policy compulsion. He should also read the history and geography of India and Nepal.
I agree with kalachandar. This article is a typical leftist bullshit. India should not be worried whether there is democracy or dictatorship in Nepal. The only thing needed is a strong Hindu kingdom that will be fully dependent on India for time immemorial.
I am a bit surprised by the authors line of argument. What does he mean by saying that India could have issued a jont statement with China during the Premier's visit to India on the situation in Nepal. What can be a bigger joke than this? A Chinese Premier to endorse a concern on 'murder of democracy'.
India should be pragmatic contrary to what the author preaches, if you can do business with Musharaf & China where is the question of taking a high moral stand in the case of Nepal. just because you cant wish away China & Pakistan it becomes a compulsion. Either one should take idealist stand or a realistic stand - not a mix of both. a mix is crudely termed as HYPOCRISY.
india should realise that the safety & security of Nepal certainly has a bearing on india & today the biggest threat to nepal today are from Maoists & not from the King or the record of Democracy. so India should help Nepal crush the Maoists. But how? when the Government of India is itself supported by jhollahwallahs who draw their inspiration & strengths from JNU which in turn is the cultivating ground of the Maoists like Prachanda.... Its not all that simple, Sir....to put it simply.
The general people of Nepal are really happy during the period of emergency than Democracy. The article does not depict realities - hope it may be of Maoists support group. As an ordinary person if we interview a common man he is happy with all the facilities.
