Invitation #2
The King just could not make himself any clearer today, everyone needs to sit down for talks immediately. This is the second olive branch the Alliance has been given. So, true to form, they called the announcement "meaningless" and once again thumbed their nose at the gesture. WHAT DO THESE IDIOTS WANT? Well, check our postings from a few months back. blogdai took a lot of heat last December for making a prediction (blogdai: "The Babbling Barometer, 12/01/05) but now that prediction bears repeating: The Maoists and the Parties have no intention of reaching a peaceful compromise with the King. They are combining their resources for a forceful takeover
So have a look at excerpts of the King's speech and tell me what you think. (Reprinted from the Himalayan Times)
King calls parties for talks
Rastriya Samachar Samiti
Kathmandu, April 14:King Gyanendra has called upon all political parties to join in a dialogue to bear the responsibility of activating the multiparty democratic polity and contribute towards the same. In a message to the nation on the occasion of the New Year’’s Day 2063 today, the KIng said the democratic norms and values demand the commitment that the goals set forth by the Constitution-1990 can be achieved only through constitutional means.He added that it is his desire that with the active participation of all political parties committed to peace and democracy, a meaningful exercise in multiparty democracy be initiated through the exemplary democratic exercise like the general elections.King noted that there is no alternative to democracy in the 21st century and the verdict of the ballot alone is legitimate. He said, “We are in favour of sustainable peace and the people’s right to vote... Democracy demands restraint and consensus as all forms of extremism are incompatible with democracy. While facing the challenges confronting the nation democracy also emphasises acceptance of the preeminence of the collective wisdom in charting a future course.”
This is a masterful stroke. G. finally got something right. No small miracle considering the baboons he employs for advisors. What G. did was to fall back on pure democratic principles: Let the people decide through elections. He seems game for them to take any form. This is a classic bluff-calling maneuver. G. and the rest of the world know that the Alliance wants to get as far away from the democratic process as possible. Elections would mean accountability and an immediate referendum on the corrupt administrations of the past.
Plus, G. is using language that distances the Maoists from the process unless they change dramatically. We know this is not possible, so this could lead to the dissection of the SPAM with the King going all out to eliminate the Maoists. Divide and conquer.
Hey SPAM: Time to put up or shut up. This is what G. has been trying to do since he sacked Deuba for incompetence a few years ago. Seems Deuba just couldn't bring himself to hold an election. I wonder why?
Oops! Big problems SPA, because M will never go for it. You are in a corner now. Reject a purely democratic gesture and be exposed for the selfish crooks you are, or go for the elections and lose your military might and street momentum with the Maoists. Blogdai fears the former will win the day as SPAM knows nothing of democracy, only protest.
-=blogdai
posted by blogdai @ 4/13/2006 05:25:00 PM
26 comments
26 Comments:
Well written, blogdai. My money's on the king, too.
Remember Girija's everpresent "grand design" theories? Looks as if what is happening now under his "leadership" is nothing less than a masterful "grand design" of someone. As long as democracy is the cause anything goes, it seems.
Threre was an interesting op-ed piece on Nepalnews about Current Maoist Strategy by a guy named Thomas A Marks. Apparently Dr. Marks (see bio) is an expert in Maoist Insurgency and his book - Maoist Insurgency Since Vietnam - is "considered the current standard on the subject of 'people’s war'."
thank you,
and now here comes the lazy media. The Independent, is one of the first to publish a rather uninformed headline "the king bows to pressure and promises election."
no one in the western media even bothers to research the fact that G. has been trying for elections all along. did the new york times forget that g. tried to hold elections a few months ago? How about what got us into this mess in the first place, G. giving deuba opportunity after opportunity to hold elections and Deuba refusing.
No, here it comes. Just the line "the king bows to pressure.. " is all the flashy shallow mainstream media cares about in its reporting.
Stay here everyone, we'll try to get it right at least.
-=blogdai
While King's speech is good, I wish considering the situation on the ground, he was more forceful in advocating that they need to sit and talk.
Santosh, yes! Dead on!
If you'll remember, the King's first invitation speech last month was clear and appropriate, sure, for a diplomat. But we are dealing with stubborn momentum here. Not only with SPAM, but with the pre-conceived agendas of the Western media, weak ambassadors, Nepal pundits and human rights talking-heads: All are bent on painting the maximum drama, at Nepal's expense, to further their individual needs and causes.
G. most definitely needs to scream his intention for talks. Spank this miguided child that is world perception gone amok.
He needs, not only to announce his intentions, but grab the media by its slanted word-processor and make sure everyone is clear on the concept.
Well done santosh.
-=blogdai
(anon 7:07: got you! I posted Dr. Marks's article just prior to this one. )
No compromise. Who is Gyane who "invites" parties for dialogue (anybody can answer)? Why do a number of dullards take it for granted that Gyane is the one whose invitation should be obeyed? Why? Who is Gyane to invite??? Why the people can't ask Gyane to leave our country? Tell me why?
There is chaos in Nepal for those who have lived in an "order" for centuries. For millions of Nepalis, the real order is on the making. You dullards often think that why did people not go against the Maoists as they do against the King? For your information, it is not that people are "stipud" or "mob" (this is Gyane's style of thinking), but it is because they want to settle the score of more than 200 years of Nepal's history. Once Gyane goes (which he will), Prachande is no problem. You dullards never ever can imagine how Gyane goes....You are the one who form opinions reading Gyane's army's statements....
I love this comment. No rationale', no logic, and not a whiff of an understanding of anything that resembles democratic principles.
This is the voice of the street protester. To them it all boils down to violence and score-settling.
Amazing what passes for the voice of "absolute democracy" nowdays, isn't it?
If these types of people win the day, Nepal is finished, plain and simple.
-=blogdai
Hi Anonymous ! asking who is Gyane is like asking who is your father. If you don't know who your father is, that means you are a bastard.
If you were just asking out of curiosity, Gyane is a leader of our country. Finally a leader who doesn't want to keep quite and be blamed for something he didn't do. He is trying to do the right thing to make Nepal a better place to live.
The point I don't understand among us Nepalese is why do we blame someone so quikly. "Khutta Tanne Prabidi ?" Why can't we for once be supportive to someone who wants to develop the country. Haven't we waited long enough through all those period of democracy to see the country getting destroyed ? Why can we give hundred of opportunities to the corrupted leader and not give a single chance to the king ?
How can you say removing Maoists will be a piece of cake once you remove the King ? I mean at least give us some facts so that we can believe you. Having read Blogdai's positing for long long time, I realize that the most of us Nepalese are just a bunch of blind followers. And you must be the one of the blind man following another blind man. I say WAKE UP, the King hasn't taken your freedom. In fact he has given you more freedom than ever. If you want freedom to do criminal acts such as destroy the public properties and vandalise the country, dude wake up its 21st century. Destroying and vadalising is not an act of freedom. In no part of the world you will find much more freedom than in Nepal. If you haven't seen the world around, learn about it and try to respect what we have rather than complaining about what we don't have.
Is the king however is gone, I guess Nepal will only have rotten rats like you.
Well done, blogdai.
I've been quietly following your posts since you opened up shop.
Your posts have been insightful and well thought out however poignant they may have been.
This is actually what differentiates your blog from the myriads of other nepal/nepali related blogs out there. Some even claim to be harbingers of democracy (or whatever word is top dog of the day) maliciously disguising their selfish or narcisstic aims. I'm not gonna say who or which ones. They're obvious.
Keep it up, there's lots of us out here who look forward to reading your posts.
You're never going to post my comments, but if you want some good advice, stop all this Gyane worshipping. It will do you no good.
I read recently that 60% of Nepalis are 24 years old or younger. The younger generation is also the one most vociferous in its demand to abolish the monarchy forever. Seeing how things are going, I have very little doubt that they're going to have their way.
And pray tell me what was so remarkable in Gyane's proclamation. All he said was lets sit and talk. But he has no authority to command anyone to sit and talk with him. And the parties have all the right to take out their processions and demonstrations. Why should they listen to him?
I'm not the biggest fan of some of our politicians. Their methods are sometimes frankly, embarassing. But this is one of those times when we've got to tell an ossified, anachronistic institution that we've had enough of it. Enough! And we've seen through Kamal Thapa's lies and Shirish Shah's idiocy how incompetent it is, so there isn't anything that can be said in monarchy's favor.
no nothing can be said in monarchy's favor. someone who understands the need of the country, the plight of the people, they are the worst enemies of the country. we should not advocate peace but support democracy. once again bring back the same leaders without even an election and let them rape nepal again. we will sit back and watch the pornography, as we always have done.
some thing we would never understand:
Terrorism unacceptable: King
By Bhola Rana
Kathmandu, 11 April: His Majesty King Gyanendra said he is ready even now for a dialogue with all for the interest of the country, people and democracy, Nepal Samacharpatyra reports.
The King reminded he has repeatedly appealed to parties for a dialogue and understanding.
The King said this while granting an audience at Ratna Mandir Monday to 41 persons from various walks of life of the western region.
Editor Hari Lamsal of Rashtra Vaani Hari Lamsal, who received an audience, said the King a dialogue and understanding between the government and parties will chart out a resolution of the country's problems.
Lamsal quoted the King as saying: "The people desire peace and peace is the roadmap. There should be unity to attain it."
In response to a question on the understanding between seven political parties and Maoists, the King said," Terrorism in unacceptable. If anybody helps terrorism in any way, that is also unacceptable."
Lamsal said, after returning from the audience, the King urged restraint and cautiousness for the country's interest.
"Let's all work together for this," Lamsal quoted the King as saying.
The King urged freedom from entanglement in the conflict and to avoid a split.
ENDS
This "ossified" institution is the only thing holding Nepal together right now.
Why listen to G? Because he's using pure democracy-speak. If the Alliance is truly committed to democracy, then they would find any means to sit down, in the spirit of democratic compromise, and work out a solution. G. is talking about democratic elections. If the Alliance is truly committed to democracy, then they would go out of their way to see if G. means what he says.
Closing doors and calling G's speech "meaningless" shows everyone that, while the Alliance is preaching "absolute democracy," the fact is, they wouldn't know a democratic principle if it came up and bit them in the ass.
What would it hurt to sit down and talk with G? Under a real democracy, if you don't like what G. proposes, propose something else or walk away for a while. Is that so hard? What are you afraid of? In a democracy, groups don't demand their viewpoint be adopted through street violence; they seek a political means. Sadly, Koirala and Deuba represented the worst possible examples of this process, so you can't be blamed entirely.
Casually dismissing G's invitation for talks simply because he is not a member of your little vandalizing political tribe shows a complete disdain for opposing viewpoints. The Maoists have taught you well, it seems.
Perhaps blogdai underestimates your understanding. Perhaps you realize that democratic negotiations and elections could rob you of your street-thug momentum and subject your uncompromising viewpoints to the scrutiny of citizens. Why let democracy stand in the way of your power grab, right?
I'll tell you why you should listen to G. First and foremost he is a citizen of nepal, and under a democracy, he deserves the right to be heard through the democratic process. As a citizen in a democracy, he is not required to belong to any political clique, or to throw one stone. His only requirement is that he speak his mind.
-=blogdai
Oh, and G. controls the army, so there.
-=blogdai
BLOGDAI'S AWARD FOR MOST STUPID COMMENT: Goes to that emminently detached journalist: Kanak Mani Dixit who said:
"Merely repeating once again the empty call for dialogue will do nothing to resolve the political problems of today."
So calling for peace will do nothing towards establishing peace, kanak? How would you propose we start the dialogue process then? Kunda, sorry but your brother is a bit lost in the moment I'm afraid.
Other contenders:
Maoists: the King's message was a "travesty to the country and the people." I suppose forcible conscription and murder are a boon to the country?
amrit bohara: "He has ridiculed the hopes of the Nepali people,"
I suppose that calling for dialogue ridicules the people's hopes for dialogue. I haven't heard one person hope that protests will continue indefinitely,strangely enough.
The alliance: "The king did not address the people and their problems," No, the speech was simply an invitation. Adressing the problems comes with dialogue not a public accuse-fest. You guys created the problems, why haven't you addressed them? If the King is so damn irrelevant in your view, why do you care what he addresses?
-=blogdai
Blogdai,
I can understand where you are coming from and why you think it is almost irrational for parties to ask for Democracy but refuse to sit for talk with KG.
I do not know how long you have been in Nepal and how well you understand the history and the relationship between King and political process, but if you sit on parties' shoes, I can perfectly understand their point as well. There should be no tolerance for violence and democracy is the only way to go forward.
1) If you look at Nepal's history, you will see many times that Kings of Nepal have mainpulated the situation, took power and fooled the parties and people. King Tribhuvan did this (although this was low profile). King Mahendra did this in 2017 BS. And now King Gyanendra repeated it.
After experiencing the history, parties are not ready to trust the King. I am no fan of Girija but I think this is what he means when he says that KG should first create an environment for dialogue.
2) They playing fields are uneven. KG has guns and parties do not. So even though parties have more support than the King (as evidenced by Himal Media's poll), KG has higher bargaining power than the parties because KG has guns. So parties want to even the playing fields by making pre conditions.
3) Sitting and participating in election under this circumstance will legitimize KG's rule and create a legal loophole in constitution for future.
4) When KG violently suppresses demonstrations, kills protestors, and repeats that he wants to sit for dialogue, parties do not believe him. If someone was kicking me and telling me that he wants to talk to me, I would not believe him. Would you?
Then Nepal is truly not ready for Democracy. You can't have a democracy until everyone is ready to move forward.
During the atrocities in Sarajevo some years back, a little girl, ravaged by the effects of war said quite succinctly: "We can't have peace until everyone learns to forget."
There is no "framework" for dialogue, only dialogue. Talking works because there is an element of trust. We do not have to address and rectify every past sin for people to talk.
By the same token, do not confuse G. using force to maintain civic order with some sinister agenda from the bowels of Nepal's history.
Look how far these historical vendettas have gotten Israel and Palestine. These people still get worked-up over 2000 year old insults.
These are not environs conducive to the fostering of democracy. I believe and take your statements as valid, that is why I have said on many occasions: NEPAL IS NOT READY FOR DEMOCRACY.
So we should stop flirting with the concept until we are all ready to put our differences aside for public good.
Get over it.
-=blogdai
Nepal is ready for democracy. With the King in power, no talk will ever be fair. Past talks with morons like Deuba has proven that the King's words cannot be trusted. True that the parties have made the mistakes in the past such as letting the Maoist problems slip, and there was en mass corruption, but there has been more improvement and development from roads to schools in the decade of democracy than there was during the 30 years of Monarchy.
Democracy is a self-correcting system, the King isn't. In fact, King G has created more problems during his time now. Let's not forget all his careless spendings. Who are we kidding? The democracy you speak of that you want to instill is romantisized. Democracy is a self-working process in itself. The parties were corrupt then, but the correction was taking place slowly. During Deuba's rein, the parliment gave CIAA enough power to put even the Prime Minster in trial.
Is King G willing to give enough power to a corruption control commitee to put even himself in trial?
Lest we forget King G's first anniversary of Feb 1 message, he said that the Maoist had been reduced to petty crimes. That's bullshit. And we all know this from the continued attacks. Having talks with the King in power isn't an option because the parties know from recent history (in fact) that the king cannot be trusted. He had his chance and he blew it.
I don't agree with a lot of the things that the parties did. Nor do I think the Maoist should be allowed to get away with what they've done so far, but whatever the problems, we know now for sure that it cannot be done with King G still in power.
Abusing a vague article, claiming the people gave him the power to use it when the supreme court told him that that article can only be used if the people has given you the power. The people have been saying, when did we give him the power? Sure he asked for 3 years. But he couldn't give the incompetent Deuba 1 year, so who is he to ask for 3 years?
Now, the king will either be forced to step down forever or be removed from his hold on power, and I'm sure then, you'll see that democracy isn't the farce of a fairy tale you make it out to be.
If you go into this thinking that no talks will be fair, then how can you possibly say you are ready for democracy.
Preconceived biases are worked out through talks, not before.
You are essentially telling me that you do not understand the democratic process but are fully ready for democracy.
All you know that G. cannot fix the Maoists or th parties? You just want him out, right? Tell me then, wouldn't it be a good idea to at least have an idea of what to do before overthrowing the only person who is maintaining stability? C'mon now, put down your stones and come up with something...you're betting your country on it.
This is what the alliance cadres have become. Young, angry men, caught up in the moment, with no real plan for the future.
Let me tell you something, you think the way you do because Girija, Deuba and the others have cultivated these feelings in the minds of students of Nepal. If it is one thing Girija knows, it's how to organize students. You are living proof.
Think for yourself and don't post anymore of this remedial crap.
-=blogdai
All aburstofoblivion was saying was that democracy is a more humble system that fully accepts its flaws. Churchill said democracy was terrible but better than anything else. Don't argue with Churchill.
You royalists can fault democracy all you like, but what ideas do you have? Zilch. The only way you can defend your argument is by saying that democracy's bad. Aburstofobvlivion was right. You have some romantic aspirations for democracy that can't be obtained so quickly in a country that has seen 237 years of royal rule.
And as for the 'only guy capable of bringing stability', damn right, we're seeing some major stability in the contry allright. Can I laugh here?
It seems like it's your preconceived bias that has you referring stereotypically to anyone who doesn't want King G in power is either a misguided student or a stone thrower. I was never a student in Nepal, but I am a Nepali nonetheless. I was born and raised overseas, and I chose to come back recently when everyone else were leaving. My ideas aren't westernized or americanized or based on what Girija or Deuba has preached, but rather empirically thoughts because it is what I've come to believe is best. Does it perplex you that not everyone who doesn't want King G in power is a student or a stonethrower?
I'm not betting my country on the parties. I'm betting it on the people - a bet you seem extremely reluctant to raise stakes in. You're asking me to think for myself, yet you don't seem to want people to think for themselves by placing your bets on a King with obsolete ideas. I don't see how you're any better than the Maoist you hypocritically criticize and condemn.
There has been more political awareness during the decade of democracy than there ever was during the monarchy rein. That's people thinking for themselves! Don't mistake polemic for being angry. I am rational enough not to trust the parties. Instead my trust lies again with the people who put those parties in power. Until you want people to think for themselves and trust them with the power, don't ask me to think for myself, because I know that's not what you want me to do.
manan is right by labeling you a royalist because that is what you've been reduced to. You just can't seem to see answers beyond the failed King anymore.
then stand up and lead your country, you cretin. Quit complaining and stop labeling blogdai as a royalist. Any simpleton who bothers to read this column knows otherwise.
(apology's, blogdai is a bit "vladimir" due to the stress of being the lone voice of blog reason.)
and what have you done with your "awareness" in the last 10 years? Well, Mr. democracy, you haven't held elections, you've let the Maoists get stronger, and you've supported a party system that has enriched political favorites at the expense of the poor.
How dare you call the last 10 years the "decade of democracy" when Koirala used the term to rob Nepal blind. You are an uninformed fool and you cower easily to mob momentum and the rule of instant, shallow perceptions.
Get off this blog.
-=blogvladimir
"I believe and take your statements as valid, that is why I have said on many occasions: NEPAL IS NOT READY FOR DEMOCRACY. "
Thanks for agreeing but your logics are flawed. Democracy does not come in a package and cannot be installed and run in hours like a software. Instead, democracy needs nurturing like a farmer growing a crop. Mistakes will be made. We will learn from the mistakes and try to do a better job next time. American democracy reached this stage after 200 years. Yet, blacks received their rights only 40 years ago and gays still do not have all the rights.
Although your venom towards Koirala is understandable, Nepali people benefitted more during 10 years of democracy than any other period including the last 5 years under King. You should have lived in Nepal as a Nepali prior to the 1990 movement to understand how democracy changed Nepali people's lives. That is why parties still have people's support and most blame King for the problem.
Your logic about parties should talk inspite of King's credibility problems also does not make sense. If your logic was to work, solving problems with Al-Qaeda should also be possible through talks. King has repeatedly stabbed people on their back and hence hr is not trusted. The latest example being King reaching agreement with Deuba and kicking him out after 8 months. Dialogue or democracy will not work when one party has this kind of absolute power. I am sure if he gives up this power, parties will talk with him. Just imagine some one in the US having absolute power to dismantle government. I am sure in that case, American people will fight back.
And finally, you claiming Blogdai to be impartial is like Fox News claiming to be fair and balanced. It makes me laugh when you lash out at tax paying private media for being biased but think it is OK for Governemnt media funded through tax on poor to spread KG's propaganda.
Stand up and lead for my country? Now you are being presumptuous by thinking I would sit at home all day, doing nothing perhaps? What makes you think I'm not on the frontline trying to make things happen?
What does that have anything to do with my views? Would my arguments be more credible should I be King G himself? (even if that would be ironically twisted) That would translate to mean no one's arguments against your views would be credible unless they are a political leader trying to make a change. How sanctimonious of you. Should we stand in line in mute support of everything you say?
Quit complaining? I suppose if those critical words for King G came out of your mouth, it would be critiquing?
You make it hard for anyone to argue with your constant dismissing of anyone who feels the King G will be a bigger doom than the parties as a cretin or simpleton. Those are words that are available in my vocabulary too. I just don't resort to marginalizing my arguments and captiousness.
My bigger irritation lies with how your blogs has become more sympathetic towards King G's actions, so much so that it feels you need to bash anyone feels otherwise. I have made it clear that I don't completely agree with the parties. I already told you that, but obviously, your cerebral thoughts transcend everyone else's, so much so that calling them names would be justification enough an argument.
The reason why the parties now won't hold talk with King G is unequivocally similar to why I am not replying to this blog from here on: both you and King G cannot be reasoned with.
Tell me. Which people do you represent? The ones that get easily impressed by your silly bashes disguised by witless prose; or the ones that agree with you cowardly, only to disagree with you once in a blue moon? You haven't had the decency to give me a reply without resorting to name-calling or frivolous bashing. This isn't a blog for thinkers or doers as you claim. This is just a medium to serve as a self-congratulatory subtext to fondle your self-esteem till you go blind.
King G will step down or be removed even if you think otherwise. On the same level, you or your blog too will fail to anymore impact in the political scene than a mouse fart because that simply isn't in your agenda. Perhaps then you will let your ego take a backseat to your ambitions.
Goodbye.
Some of the bullshitters here need to be told again and again that during the democratic rule of 13 years, Nepal lost 13,000 lives!
Again, these bullshitters need to be told that Maoists problems was created by these parties and they are continuing because of these parties!
Again, these bullshitters need to get their ideas clear regarding the development of those 13 years:
Roads: The relaying of roads (Mahendra Rajmarg) was because of the initiative on the part of Late HM Birendra with the help of ALL foreign aid.
Name me any other development that took place in Nepal?
Education level: Hah, you think this was because of democracy! Go to Bihar and see how related democracy is to education!
Bullshitters, Bullshitters!
Love Live Nepal, Love live HM King Gyanendra!
Look down through the posts here, my short-attention-spanned friend and read my column: "democracy and trust. "
Parties SHOULD talk because talks establish credibility. Unless we do this, your Alliance will keep thinking up excuses to maintain their little momentum in the streets. So while you're criticising my logic consider what you are saying: "we will not negotiate with the king while he has all the power:" If G. has all the power, why would he feel the need to invite anyone for talks? Why would he feel the need to give Deuba another chance like he did in 2003? Why would the all-powerful-and-mighty G. feel the need to ackwnoledgy you at all?
You misguided fool. The King did not blow up the world trade center like al-quaida. The king did the terrible deed of giving Deuba a second chance if he held elections; deuba refused and was dismissed as incompetent. Was your head in a vacuum during this period? I find it incredible that you equate an act designed to jump-start a do-nothing government and prod them into accountability, with the murdering of thousands of people a-la al Quaida.
That was a charity posting. I left your nonsense up there so rational posters could see how street logic like yours has manipulated reality and past events to suit your cause.
How very FOX of you.
-=blogdai
oblivious, let's just sit down for talks, ok?
Here is my olive branch to you. You make sense and you will get an airing of your views. You make things up and you will get corrected or bashed (vladimir dependent).
Perhaps you are sub-cretin because you refuse to listen, read or acknowledge anything that has been said before. Since you do present your argument at a level higher than most, we will repeat ourselves ONE MORE TIME FOR YOU ONLY.
BLOGDAI IS A REALIST. DEUBA AND GIRIJA WOULD HAVE SOLD NEPAL TO INDIA OR THE MAOISTS HAD g. NOT STEPPED IN.
-=blogdai
Post a Comment
<< Home