India: Arrogant and Clueless
Indian State Minister for External Affairs, Rao Inderjit Singh, arrives in Kathmandu and immediately bribes officials by offering a new Pajero to anyone who will support India's bid for the UNSC . (KOL photo)
On the same day that Girija vowed there would be no compromise with the Monarchy, and on the heels of India's endorsement of the 7-parties's political platform, India has the unmitigated gall to ask for Nepal's support in its bid to gain a permanent seat on the UN Security Council.
This is the penultimate display of Indian political philosophy. Play both sides of an issue at once and see which angle affords the most gain. Throw your support behind a corrupt old fossil like Girija while tacitly acknowledging that the legitimate current government of Nepal rests with the King.
India wants this Security Council seat badly; and as we often see, Indian greed trumps all other issues.One of our readers here at blogdai suggested that G. extort every bit of aid and compromise he can from India as the price of his endorsement. Blogdai says, go for it. This is a once-in-a-lifetime chance for Nepal to see India groveling, hat-in-hand, at its doorstep.
Without even a hint of irony, The Statesman, India's biased and nationalistic mouthpiece which broke the story of India's plan, publishes, in the same issue, a gushing and ridiculous fluff fantasy on the heroism of Girija--claiming that the old crook is the only chance to save Nepal.
This is India mocking Nepal to the highest degree. Do they think Nepalis would simply forget India's arrogant and aloof behavior of the the last 10 years and simply bow down to "big brother?" Also, is it me or is anyone else out their having trouble recalling an example of Girija "saving Nepal" during the last 10 years?
-=blogdai
Girija's vow: http://kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=46367
India visit: http://www.thestatesman.net/page.news.php?clid=2&theme=&usrsess=1&id=83691
Girija fluff article: http://www.thestatesman.net/page.news.php?clid=3&theme=&usrsess=1&id=83697
posted by blogdai @ 7/21/2005 10:17:00 AM
9 comments
9 Comments:
blogdai,
Your views on India are quite biased. Being a Nepali, I do not admire India either, but it is important not let your feelings affect your reporting (including opinions).
Every country is looking out for its own interests. We can only expect india to do the same. Yes, India is the big bully of our neighborhood. But do you see any country with India's might not exercising its muscles for its vested interests?
India will deal with the devil (if it has to) to ensure that it gets a permanent seat in the UNSC.
I completely agree with your stance that the king should get as many bullets as he can so our army can pump them into the zealots running around our country trying to implement philosophies that rot in the dustbin of history.
We can expect India to do the same, yes, but as Nepal and world citizens, does it mean that we should remain quiet?
Everything you say is correct in my opinion; but in order to change India's approach to Nepal, perhaps we should move from accepting their actions towards outright challenge of their supremacy if we ever hope to jog-loose the status quo.
-=blogdai
both your comments are dated.and do not bash india for everything happening in nepal.
Of course they are dated you stupid moron, the article was written over 2 years ago, idiot!
don't bash India or what? What will you do, protest by having 10 more children? Teach them to beg so you might have enough extra money to afford some comprehension.
Crawl back into your little Delhi hell-hole until you recover from your Pan stupor.
-=BD
Your hostility to India is unfounded. I have always wondered why people from Bangladesh, Nepal etc feel this sense of being bullied ? I mean considering their circumstances, they have it very easy with a neighbor like India. Just look at other big nations and their neighbours. Take America for example, every single American looks at Mexicans with suspicion and loathing. Mexicans arent allowed free travel and are even shot if they illegally cross the border. Now take China, all their neighbors have been attacked and/or extorted them. They have no friendly neighbors.
India on the other hand for its part has always treated the Nepali people with a LOT of benevolence compared to other countries. Free travel was possible a till a few years ago. Thousands of Nepali's work in India, without restriction and Nepal has enjoyed a lot of support in the world thanks to Indian help. India even didnt oppose overtly or covertly the Maoist uprising in Nepal despite it being against India's interests because we saw it as the internal affairs of Nepal. Yet you people have so much resentment. It is surprising.
After all the most India can ask from Nepal would be its vote now and then, or its help in tracking down some terrorists. Things which any nation where we even have cordial relations, is it too much to ask from people we consider friends ?
I wonder if it merely an inferiority "complex" that drives these feelings or maybe some misconceptions behind our motives. Sure Indian politicians will think of India first, that is their job. Just as Nepali politicians ought to think of Nepal first. You cant fault them for that.
The Indian philosophy towards nepal has always been one of minimal internal interference. Where only when we are asked for help or we require something do we approach the Nepali government. I think that is a wise philosophy as Nepal should be Nepal and not India. I just cant understand the hostility behind it.
Well said. Nothing India does inspires my outright hostility.
Perhaps it is India's constructive lack of action towards assisting in Nepal's stabilization that is frustrating for reasons mentioned before.
there will be no break with any ties to India; Nepal is just to culturally close.
But, politically, do you ever wonder why areas such as nepal and bangladesh are in a perpetual state of crisis that almost begs for a turn toward India? It is strategic, to be sure.
Your comments are well concieved. I wish all our counter arguments had as much thought as yours.
-=blogdai
"Well said. Nothing India does inspires my outright hostility.
Perhaps it is India's constructive lack of action towards assisting in Nepal's stabilization that is frustrating for reasons mentioned before."
Well, India has tried that approach in the past and failed. Thus, the reticence to act in their internal affairs.
I dont know if you are aware but India tried its hand at brokering peace and bringing stability within the region only to find itself unwelcome. Take for example Sri Lanka where Indian peacekeeping forces were deployed at the behest of the Sri Lankan government against the tamil rebels. Now, despite the cost in Indian lives and money and where the Indian army was not allowed to employ heavy weaponry, in the end as the battle with the tamil militants proceeded, the Sri lankans turned around and started aiding the tamils and attacking the Indian military. The whole purpose of being these was lost and domestically the repercussions were high as well from the tamil community.
That was hard lesson in regional politics for India and disenchanted us from the idealism of bringing stability to the region. Even Bangladesh, whose very existence was perhaps brought on by India today is filled with anti-India sentiment about some ideas of Indian bullying fueled by Islamic paranoia and xenophobia.
During the Moaist revolution in Nepal, most Indians wondered that should India intervene somehow or decide to play judge there, the nepali maoists would perhaps side with the Chinese due to the political considerations and turn nepal into another "conflict zone" and staging ground for maoists in the region, eventually becoming a Chinese foothold west of the Himalayas.
So you see the reluctance to take action is NOT a sign of indifference but rather the reluctance to mess things up any further.
that, sir, is one hell of a good observation and blogdai must bow to your observation in this case.
I am persuaded, yes. Can you also find room in your analysis for India's savvy towards geo-political positioning with regards to Nepal? I'll explain.
Is a feisty Nepal with a cranky, independent-thinking monarch likely to be a better ally to New Delhi than a poor, conflict-ridden state seeking help from any and all quarters?
Again, well done sir, but I cannot believe India's intentions are 100%altruistic and politically naive.
With China's economic inroads towards Kathmandu: the planned expansion of the Tibet railway, can we honestly believe India would want a weak buffer/ally or a strongly dependent one?
-=blogdai
Hi, allow me to say a few things as an Indian.
I think smaller countries in the Neighbourhood such as Nepal and Bangladesh feel "bullied" by India simply because of it's size. I am a member of another forum and many of the Bangladeshi there are passionately anti-India and constantly refer to Indians as "maulanas, bhartis, hindoos" etc. This suggests to me that a lot of religious bigotry exists in Bangladesh. Couple this with their sense of being "bullied" and their feelings are quite understandable. In Nepal's case however, I doubt any anti religious sentiments so it can be put down to solely the sense of being "bullied".
This "bullying" however I think is a perception among the smaller countries. In international diplomacy, India will always look out for her own interests. Name a country that doesn't. South Asia as a whole faces one big enemy and that enemy is poverty.
In short what I'm trying to say is that India has too many internal problems of her own to be able to be "bullying" other nations.
Regards.
GR
Post a Comment
<< Home