Yesterday's post consisted of an interesting article from a political analyst of India from their website www.indiareacts.com.
Today another interesting story woven by a Nepali political analyst from www.telegraphnepal.com. It is hard to believe in some of the articles in this portal. However, it is interesting to read.
All that said, will there be Nepali politicians standing on their own feet, ever? The old genre of Nepali politicians is experienced without much academic hardwork in their lives. However, the new ones are definitely the ones who at least had been to the college and university - most of them. May be this is the reason the government should be run by new and young ones with the support from the senior peers.
Here is the thought provoking article from the Telegraph Nepal
Kathmandu: If what the analysts have understood of Nepal’s Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala, the politics of consensus that have been agreed upon by the Nepali Congress, the UML, the Madhesi Janadhikar Forum, MJF, and the Maoists might catapult in a day or two.
If Koirala concludes that the four party consensuses is to sideline his prospects of becoming the next Prime Minister, he would definitely, as is his habit, begin playing destructive politics as he is presumed to be the number one player of “destructive politics” of Nepal.
Those who have seen Koirala from close quarters say that he will approve the four party consensuses arrived Monday afternoon on condition that the four parties also provide him the Chair of the Prime Minister.
If denied, what is hundred percent sure that he will twist the arms of the UML and MJF in a surreptitious manner forcing these parties to change their current stances in his favor.
Koirala can’t stomach the Maoists coming to power and this is what has been agreed upon in Delhi-the Mecca of Nepali politics-in between Koirala and his “Indian masters”.
To boot, Koirala is a conspiratorial player as well or else why should a Prime Minister who has lost his political standing back home and remained in a state wherein his resignation had also been accepted by the President should exhibit his utter excitement to visit Colombo?
The idea was to meet his real “masters and mentors” in Colombo or in New Delhi and seduce the Indian leaders so that they ultimately approved Koirala’s claim for the post of the next Prime Minister of Nepal.
And in effect he did meet his Indian counterpart-the India proxy Prime Minister Dr. Man Mohan Singh right in Colombo and convinced the latter that the Maoists were still “bad boys” who could not be trusted for some time to come in the power structure of Nepal.
The Indian Prime Minister got stunned, reports say, when Koirala appraised him about the likelihood of Maoists’ staging an “October Revolution” of the type and dimension of Russia if denied power this time.
Power insatiability in Koirala grew to the extent that he even told the same “spine-tingling story” to the US Assistant Secretary of State, Richard Boucher who was right in Colombo during the SAARC Summit, and presented the Maoists case to him in such a way that Boucher too got horrified.
No wonder then the US dignitary said of the Maoists that “even if the Maoists form a government in Nepal, the US will have no objection as such”.
However, he made it abundantly clear that the “Maoists were still under the US scanner”.
This perhaps caps the possibility of the Maoists jumping to Singh Durbar if Koirala’s schemes go smoothly.
The word “still under the US scanner” do implies that the US preference would be a government in Nepal sans the Maoists.
The statement made by Richard Boucher that “We don’t have any objection” if the Maoists come to power is just a diplomatic language to keep the Maoists in good stead. However, the inner meaning is that, analysts presume, the US would take some time to watch the “activities of the Maoists prior to the party of the ex-rebels come to power. But then yet one has to admit that the US has some what softened its stance as regards the Maoists.
Look what he says of the Maoists in Colombo: “Though the US didn’t want to alienate the Maoists, they were still closely watching the party, specially their threats to carry out another movement”.
This is what has been told by Aditya Baral, Koirala’s political advisor to the press men in Colombo. Baral accompanied Koirala when Richard Boucher met with Koirala in Colombo.
A close look at what Boucher says of the Maoists does indicate that the US possesses a sort of soft corner for the Maoists for the word “alienate the Maoists” explains this.
But concurrently, the US is some what suspicious of the Maoists inner “intents”.
That the US is still concerned with the Maoists political overtures becomes abundantly clear from what the US dignitary says.
Let’s analyze the US fresh consideration as regards the Maoists from what has been aired by Mr. Boucher in Colombo.
First, the US would not mind the Maoists steering the nation.
Second, the US would want to see the Maoists paraphernalia wearing democratic clothes prior to swinging to power structure in Nepal.
Third, the US was still not confident of the Maoists that the latter if in power would act in a manner that is demanded of them in a fully democratic set up.
Fourth, the US has reasons to suspect the Maoists’ changed credentials as the party of the ex-rebels more often than not air views that speak of what Boucher says “another movement”.
Perhaps it is this factor that has distanced the Maoists with the US administration.
And here is power hungry Koirala to benefit from Maoists’ lapses. Analysts presume that Koirala might have presented the Maoists’ case in a way that might have startled the US dignitary who out of frustration might have told Koirala to “proceed” with his ambitious plans.
Unfortunately, the Maoists have had no emissary in Colombo who could have defended their case and put the Maoists perspective in a proper manner to the US official.
Analysts wish to advise the Maoists leadership not to annoy the US any more through their fiery lectures. The Maoists must understand that the US is not the villain. The scoundrel is right across the border of which Koirala is number one collaborator. A far flung US in no way could influence Nepali politics.
The Maoists must read in between the lines what US Assistant Secretary of State has spoke of them. The US possesses no evil designs against the Maoists, however, all that the US wants, as would be clear upon reading Boucher’s statement, that the Maoists “behaved” in a democratic manner and that the Maoists must discard the habit of terrifying the national population by airing that yet another revolution was round the corner if denied to form the next government. The more the Maoists terrify the population, the more they are distanced from the people and the democratic countries here and there.
Such fiery lectures with threat loaded meanings must have alarmed the US administration. If they continue to talk on the same lines, it is Koirala and New Delhi who will extract benefits from the Maoists’ repeated follies.
Now coming back to Koirala’s Delhi stop over.
It was a deliberate move taken by Koirala. In effect Koirala wanted to prove that his rule was still “indispensable” in Nepal to provide what he calls a “logical end” to the ongoing peace process.
Koirala to a greater extent bagged success in receiving “sanction” from “Mother India” and other “brother Indias”-read Lal Krishna Advani and Raj Nath Singh-the two powerful leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party having profound connections with the Madhesi leaders more so with Upendra Yadav.
Or else why Mulayam Singh Yadav, an Indian leader who prefers not to poke his nose in Nepal’s affairs too this time bluntly put his inner feelings by stating that “Nepal must have a consensus government”.
What this consensus government means in Mulayam’s consideration is that Koirala be made Nepal’s next Prime Minister who should be trusted by the entire political parties without any glitch.
Mother India too has reportedly assured Koirala that he should steer the nation. Prior to this assurance, Koirala presented the Maoists as “evan the terrible” who could destabilize the entire Indian Union if they were allowed to assume power in Nepal. A practically terrified Mother India instantly instructed, say reports leaking from the men in Koirala’s entourage, her “loyal” servant(s) to act fast in a way that ensured Koirala’s Premiership next.
No wonder that the Bharatiya Janata Party too gave a clear nod to Koirala and thus a confident Koirala landed in Kathmandu all beaming.
To recall, Koirala prior to his Colombo trip had said in a private family gathering that he will teach a befitting “lesson” to Comrade Prachanda soon.
Reportedly Koirala expressed his anger over Prachanda for the latter’s aversion against him for the Presidential candidate.
Under the given circumstances, if Koirala becomes the consensual candidate of the Prime Minister then it would be no wonder. If this does happen, it is the Maoists once again who will be ditched.
This would perhaps explain as to how deep penetration the New Delhi establishment has in Nepali politics.
However, what is for sure that if the Delhi preference prevailed, then the Maoists will tease India under one pretext or the other.
The issues are abundant.
Finally, but at what price Koirala received such blessings? Is it for free? India and non-reciprocity can’t go together. It is time that the Nepali nationalists watch as to what Koirala gives India in a silver plate?
But if the Maoists are allowed to form their own government per chance, Koirala will instantly engineer mechanisms to pull the Maoists leg from the power structure. Take it for granted. The one who broke his own bi-cycle can easily break the BOLERO of Prachanda.