The China Timeline

Let's look at events from a different perspective. Blogdai has always believed that China was in the thick of planning this takeover long before it actually occured. Curious threads emerged while blogdai was doing research. Conspiracy theroists: have at it! Also, a new feature will be the sporadic "diplo-speak" translations. Diplomats are trained to say something that means something else. -=blogdai

April 2004: Pro-Bush hawk U.S. ambassador to Nepal Michael Malinowski is replaced by pro-China ambassador Michael Moriarty. Malinowski was abruptly replaced with just six months of service in Nepal remaining.

July 2004: Ambassador Moriarty urges Maoists to lay down their arms. He later states that the U.S. government will do "anything" for peace in Nepal

November 2004: King agrees to arms deal with Pakistan resulting in potential arms purchases for the RNA of up to $100 million.

December 2004: Moriarty opines about Nepal: "This place was never a nation state up until the 1950's. It was a bunch of subjects of the Nepali king." Diplo-speak translation: Some of the most blunt and caustic words to ever come from a U.S. diplomat anywhere. He is saying that government does not apply outside of Kathmandu and that the democracy movement of the 1990's has failed to take hold. His tone implies that Nepal is a backwater and cannot properly maintaining democratic reforms. In the same statement he drops his bomb shell: "There is a real possibility that there will be a Maoist government here." He has diplomatically created a sense of imminent disaster. He has opened the door for drastic measures and given tacit approval to fight and defeat the Maoists by any means necessary. The two statements, when taken together, are meant to suggest that the current system of government in Nepal is incapable of dealing effectively with the Maoists.

December 2004: King abruptly cancels his India trip where he famously avowed to "speak his mind". This was done on the flimsy premise of respecting dead Indian bureacrat Narasimha Rao.

January 2005: Nepal closes the Tibetan Welfare Office in Kathmandu-bowing to Chinese pressure. U.S. response from ambassador Moriarty "expressed our strong concern to Nepalese officials that operations allowing the entry and transit of Tibetan refugees through Nepal be allowed to continue." Also, U.S.'s Christina Rocca weighed in with: "Nepalese officials have told us that these changes will not affect the welfare of Tibetan refugees living in or moving through Nepal." Translation: "Strong concern" means the U.S. will keep its hands off of the Tibetan political hot button for a while. Rocca's statement means "who cares?" Notice the lack of explicit condemnation. The U.S. is officially taking no position with regards to Tibet during this crisis.

February 2005: Takeover. China: "-- China respects the choice of Nepalese in developing their own country and sincerely wishes the nation to realize social security, economic development and ethnic pacification." "Ethnic pacification" should scare the shit out of Tibet watchers. China is thumbing its nose at the world by saying this. They are also saying that the King's move had the tacit approval of the Chinese. The speed and detail of the statement leaves no doubt that China wants the world to know that it is backing this King.

U.S. initial response from the State Department's Richard Boucher demanded an “immediate move toward the restoration of multiparty democratic institutions under a constitutional monarchy." Pure lip-service to the international community. "Move toward the restoration.." is a vote of approval not a condemnation.

Pakistan responded that recent developments in Nepal were its internal matter. "A foreign ministry statement issued on Thursday quoted the prime minister as telling the Nepalese king that Pakistan strictly adheres to the principles of non-intervention and non-interference in the internal affairs of
states." Translation: We're happy with our arms deal. We not only support the takeover but we'll use China's language of "non-interference in the internal affairs.." to reinforce China's dominance over this process.

The U.S., after appeasing the world by threatening to cancel military aid to Nepal by saying that is was ". . a step that will be seriously considered," ambassador Moriarty finally comes clean on U.S. intentions:``If we cut off our security assistance it will embolden the Maoists,'' and towards the King: ``If he delivers on his commitments, he will turn this all around.'' And on Feb. 18 Moriarity admonishes the Nepali people to "hang in there." Translation: Green light King G. Do whatever you think is necessary and the Yanks will stay out of your way. Just don't take too long and don't act like a repressive idiot in the process.

Analysis: The timing of the closure if the Tibetan Welfare Office was not just curious, it was well-planned. The Chinese got to their old, bought and paid for ally in the government, State Minister of Foreign Affairs, Prakash Sharan Mahat to work the deal. You remember him: he helped the Chinese ambassador to Nepal orchestrate the repatriation of Tibetan refugees last year. He was an easy target and a symbol of corruption. The Chinese wanted to use this contact before the takeover. It got them their nasty revenge on the Tibetans and didn't tarnish their plans for the King. In blodai's mind, this shows some real advance planning on the part of the Chinese. Plus, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong Quan's statement was released almost concurrent with the King's announcement of the takeover.

India goofed-up big time by suspending military aid to Nepal. It gave the King his excuse to go to Pakistan and China for arms. Recognizing this, India is now tripping all over itself trying to get back into the picture. They are now returning their ambassador to Kathmandu with quasi-acquiescent statements like:

``We have to deal with whatever government is in office, but our sympathies lie with the democratic forces in that country.''

No one, not the U.S. and eventually not India , is going to deny military assistance to Nepal, in spite of what every one of them will say in the next few weeks. To back out of Nepal militarily would invite China and Pakistan to assert themselves to a greater extent. Nobody wants another Chinese satellite filled with imported extremists.

The U.S. policy is as simplistic as the administration that created it: Stop terrorism around the world. The Maoists are terrorists. Stop the Maoists. Democracy later.

Pure Speculation: Nepalis knew this takeover was coming as early as last October when the king began to make plans for an India visit. Blogdai thinks the Yanks may have been in on it before that. Too many spooks in Kathmandu to keep this info under cover. China orchestrated this thing and may play a bigger role in eliminating the Maoists. Watch for Pakistan to act as a funnel for Chinese money and materiel.


-=blogdai