American Ambassador to Nepal James F. Moriarity talks to Vijay Kumar in Frontline, the star journalist’s show in Kantipur TV.
Namaste Excellency!
Namasteeeee!
Sanchai Hunuhunchha?
Sanchai Chha. Tapailai?
Malai Thikai chha. How much Nepali you have picked up since you arrived here 20 months back?
Oh..mero Nepali bhasha thikai chha…. Aaaja ko baithak ma thulo bhag engreji bhasha ma dinu parcha.
How much Nepali politics you have picked up since you came here?
I am afraid even less. Politics are very confusing and we have been constantly strained in understanding them.
If we were to compare you understanding of Nepali language with Nepali politics?
Strange it may seem but my Nepali language is probably better than my understanding of Nepali politics.
You are very much in the news these days…you have become famous.
Yes, that is actually very intentional because even though my understanding of Nepali politics is flawed, I am genuinely very worried, my government is very worried that the situation here is getting worse and worse, it is deteriorating very quickly.
What do you mean by “my understanding of Nepali politics is flawed”?
This is a country is complicated history, very difficult relationships among many of the key actors, I don’t think any outsiders can hope to understand all of those.
When an ambassador of a super power says his/her understanding about the country is flawed, that’s very serious king of thing..
I think it is but I believe everybody should ….not assume they understand everything what’s going on. I think if you push Nepali politicians, if you push His Majesty himself I think they will all acknowledge that there are gaps in their understandings. One of the biggest gaps that I have been hitting up is of course Maoists’ intentions. I obviously can’t look into their hearts, I don’t have contacts with them, I can look at what they say and what they do and come to very worrisome conclusions.
What would be your specific answer to a question about the role of American ambassador in Nepal when it comes to framing overall policy toward Nepal?
Ah…frrrrruuu… I would say I do play a fairly active role in trying to shape policy back in Washington. Ultimately it is my superiors in the State Department and in White House who will decide policy towards Nepal but they will listen to what I have to say.
I am sure they will.
ha ha ha
Your Feb 15 remarks at Ganeshman Singh Prathistan have generated a lot of heat.
Hum..ha. As I said that was very intentional. If you look at the developments since the end of the cease fire you will have to conclude that there are lots of reasons for legitimate concerns here. I was trying to bring that concern for start a dialogue, start people debating Maoists’ intentions, the need for reconciliation. They don’t want people making assumptions that might prove dangerous to the country later on. I want them examining them those assumptions.
….I wanted to create a debate about Maoists’ intentions. I want the people to say each other what’s Moriarty saying, why is he saying that, what is he saying about other peoples’ intentions and as long as I get people talking about that I think I accomplish my purpose.
When you made those remarks, were you aware that they would generate heat?
Absolutely. A hundred percent sure.
When you made those remarks, were you aware that the heat would be of this scale or of this degree?
I believed that would.
In today’s newspaper, among other people, Dr. Bhattarai has come up with this version [in the Kathmandu Post].
Well, I am glad to see Dr. Bhattarai takes what I said seriously and feels compelled to respond. And indeed that is part of what I am trying to do. Let them spell out what they mean. For example, if you read these interviews closely and editorial pieces that Dr. Bhattarai and Mr. Prachanda have given since the end of the ceasefire, if you read them closely, I think you have a lot of cause for concerns.
Do you totally reject the 12-point understand as a whole or there are particular clauses that you don’t like?
First of all, the biggest concern is how the Maoists have acted since the 12-point agreement. And that played into the one point of particular concern I have when reading the Agreement. The very first clause says something like both sides agree to attack the autocratic monarchy from their own positions. And I will tell you I had a conversation with those people who were involved into formulating those agreement. And they said to me that Maoists had initially desired to include a very explicit point saying that they would continue to use violence. And obviously, that first point to me just looked like a compromise. They didn’t specifically say that the Maoists would continue to use violence but it implied that they would obviously [go for that].
My question is are you against any understanding between Maoists and political parties or you are against particular clauses of that understanding?
I think that the parties have the intention of bringing the Maoists into the mainstream. That’s laudable, that’s good. If it works. If they can come up with an agreement that makes Maoists being to come into the mainstream, that’s terrific, I would praise that. All I am saying that this agreement seemed to have left open the options of violence on part of the Maoists. And Maoists have undeniably engaged into violence. So in other words Maoists are telling the world that the 12-point agreement is not about their giving up the violence but is about their attempting to gain the parties’ support for their use of violence.
US seems to have adopted three attitude towards this understanding: before, during and after. For example, where there were rumors about Maoists and parties were about to reach to an agreement, you came out against it. You made your mind very clear in the interview with Kantipur and the Kathmandu Post. But after the understanding was publicized, America cautiously welcomed it. You were not that much against it. And in one fine morning in Feb 15, it seems that you have flipped again. Or am I reading you wrong?
Let me present details. When I came here in October against a prospective agreement, not between parties and the Maoists, but between UML and the Maoists I have been told that the agreement at that point in no way bound the Maoists to give up violence and actually move toward the political mainstream. That was just an agreement to work together against the king. That’s why I spoke out so strongly at that time. That seemed very very dangerous.
When this agreement came out, as I said, I have reservations, my government have reservations. But against we were willing to look at the clauses that seemed to be the commitment on the part of Maoists try to come to the political mainstream. We were cautions and we said that anything that would led the Maoists to political mainstream would be welcome. However since January 2nd, since the end of the ceasefire, it is increasingly becoming clear with every statements by either Dr. Bhattarai or Mr. Prachanda along with the increasing drumbeat of violence that the Maoists didn’t really come to end the violence.
But the blame for the end of ceasefire lies equally to the state because they were not reciprocating?
Ya, I want to make it clear that the ceasefire would be good to Nepal, I do think there should have been movement on the part of the government towards the ceasefire.
If somebody says Maoists pushed toward breaking the ceasefire by the state, they had no other options left.
Are you saying that the only other option for the Maoists is violence? In that case, I don’t think parties should work with them.
If somebody says the state is not reciprocating, one couldn’t have continued cease fire indefinitely…
Well, I would think people in the country side would have hoped the Maoists would continue the ceasefire. I take your point. The government should have reciprocated but frankly Maoists were getting so much credit in the country side they were beginning to reverse some of the negative feelings. I would argue that it would have helped them to continue with. I hope the government would have reciprocated eventually.
Are you aware of the background that pushed parties towards Maoists? The king was not rolling back to the democratic process.
Absolutely and I will tell you that we discussed things with Washington and the day after the takeover by the king last year we were telling Washington look this is very counterproductive and it will push people toward crazy things…push people look at alternatives, violent revolution and cooperation between parties and the Maoists. Ya, it was a move that is very counterproductive and has been very dangerous for the country.
In that case, a bit share of the blame for this 12-point understand should go to the king?
Absolutely.
You agree to that?
Ya, I don’t disagree.
Parties found themselves to be pushed in that area?
They were boxed into a corer, their space has been getting constricted. And to be fair from the both sides. Maoists have kicked the parties from the country sides and they are desperate to get back in. Meanwhile the king was pushing from the other side, not giving the parties other options. So, yes. I understand the context.
Can we say parties’ joining hands with Maoists, at least in the context of 12-point agreement was all but natural consequences of the King’s actions?
Ya, I am not going to fight with that Vijay. Well, that’s a reasonable statement but again I am just looking at the outcome of the 12-point understanding. If they let to the Maoits genuinely towards mainstream, I would say ‘this is great, and the king has to respond’. Instead, I am saying, they don’t seem to be moving toward mainstream, they are trying to drag the parties into their violent agenda, that’s dangerous. But still the king has to be reaching out trying to reach an understanding with political parties.
Give us specific reasons as to why are you against this 12-point agreement.
Murder of candidates and destruction of candidate’s home leading up to the municipal elections. Death of a poor young cab driver who broke the Banda called by Maoists in Kathmandu. I would say in totality all the statements and pieces spoken and said by Mr. Prachanda and Dr. Bhattarai since the end of the ceasefire. If you take the totality of those statements, its clear as it can be to anybody who want to listen that they plan to use violence to overthrow the state. That’s their interpretation of where they stand after the 12-point agreement.
So for you the use of violence in politics is the basic cause of concern.
Ya, very much so. And the other part you have to listen to close is that they are saying that they will use that violence to overthrow the state. They would continue to control the weapons after the overthrow of the state. They have a fallback plan. If this violent revolution doesn’t work in the next couple of months, they will go back to pushing forward constituent assembly. Even during the election their weapons will be kept under some sort of international supervision, not by foreign troops, but some sort of international supervision. But then they will get the weapons back and form the core of the national army. If anybody thinks that you can have a free and fair election in the villages of Nepal with the villagers think that the Maoists are going to get their weapons back, I think they are being very optimistic.
It seems you don’t want to trust Maoists at all.
I listen to what they say. I am reading their words very closely. I do have lots of background dealing with communists and totalitarian movements and if you use that framework to look closely what they say its very very worrisome. Ya, Mr. Prachanda has not defined what he means by multiparty system but he has clearly said its not bourgeois parliamentary democracy. What you and I call democracy is bourgeois parliamentary democracy where people vote to choose their representatives and representatives get to decide policies. Its not the system where you have a few parties under the control of the Maoists party and Maoists party candidates get 99 percent of the vote every time.
Is it possible that you are overacting to the Maoists not trusting them at all? Not giving them a fair chance…
Sure. I started [this interview] saying that I don’t know everything here. I hope I am wrong in what the Maoists are doing. But I would suggest it is dangerous for Nepalis to assume that I am wrong and to assume that should ignore everything that Dr. Bhattarai and Mr. Prachanda say. Well, Mr Prachanda says that peoples’ court will try all feudal elements. What does he mean? You are quite a feudal element to me, Bijay.
Ya..look like one with a tie…
A tie..ya…You are a class enemy, I think.
Ya.
I think people’s court might have to try you when they come to power.
Ya..ya..We will see that.
I am not being pretentious here. Look closely what they say. Five or six very long pices of interviews, and articles. Think about what they are saying. What their multiparty competition is, what sort of guarantees that they wont retain their weapons after the election of constituent assembly.
They say that they are fighting for democratic, peaceful and prosperous Nepal?
Again get them to define their terms. And look at what they say closely. Ya, that sounds like a bourgeois parliamentary democracy to me but they are saying it isn’t. So there is gong it be some important difference there.
Dr Bhattarai has written an article saying that they have taken a historic decision, they have changed so many decisions, and they are ready to come to some sort of system, which we can almost call a bourgeois democracy.
He has not said that. No. And he has not repudiate Mr. Prachanda’s insistences that there has to be a constitutional framework that embodies anti-feudalism and anti-imperialism.
I think you want a clarification and definition from Maoists regarding what king of Nepal they want to create.
That’s my point. And I hope you can actually get them to a definition of a bourgeois parliamentary democracy. Because anything else if they sort of put conditions, they will do have ‘kuniyat’ as we say bad intentions.
Would you like the existing triangular conflict go for ever instead of some bipolar development taking place?
No. Actually what I would like to see is a unitary state, functioning democracy where all the players agree that people of Nepal vote for their representatives in every two years or four years. That is what we want. This triangular division is very very unhealthy and dangerous.
Triangular conflict hasn’t given us anything and going on for years. What’s wrong turning it into a bipolar one?
All the parties should try for an unipolar agreement, not a conflict at all. I understand what you are saying. The implication will be that the parties and the Maoists have to struggle against the palace. And in some ways, I can appreciate that perspective against the sense that the king has pushed the parties away and has made it much more difficult to achieve a reconciliation. On the other hand, I say if they continue to make it clear that are for violent overthrow of the state and they will continue to have control over weapons after that.
You believe that whatever Maoists are saying is their tactics and they will come to their natural state when they are in power, right?
I am saying listen to what they say closely. I am not just picking up one or two phrases and say this is their intent. Listen to Prachanda when he says we don’t want bourgeois parliamentary democracy and think about what that means. Listen to him when he ways the next stop for the parties to join an underground government and support the peoples’ army against the state. And think about what that means.
What’s better? Parties and Maoists coming to some sort of understanding vis-à-vis this triangular state going on for ever.
Those are two options that I don’t accept. I am not supporting either of them. May be on theory, if the Maoists genuinely desire to come for political mainstream, that’s great. They are welcome. But I can’t endorse the parties working with violent Maoists who are for violent overthrow of the state. Equally, this triangular conflict is very dangerous for Nepal.
America wants to sole this problem through force or through dialogue.
I want this problem to be solved as quickly as possible. I fear this problem can’t be solved unless there is a coherence counter-insurgency strategy. I insist that counter-insurgency strategy mainly has to be how does government and parties begin winning back the rural areas. How do they make people safer in the rural areas? Nepal is pretty bad but its not that bad that I can’t talk to people. People from outside Kathmandu, whether from the left or from the right, say that people in the village are scared. Every night they go to bed scared. Scared mainly from the Maoists. They don’t’ know what’s going to happen to them. They don’t know who’s going to ask for food, somebody ask for money or somebody going to ask for their children. That’s the situation that has to be reversed.
I want your specific answer to the question: America wants to solve the problem by force, or dialogue or combination.
Obviously, by dialogue. But I have not seen a conditions yet that convince me that seeing Maoists 10 years into their struggle, seeing a very very weak government, seeing huge division between the palace and the parties, I am convinces that they need to give up their final goal. I think Nepalis have to ask themselves. Do the Maoists think they are winning? I say their answer is probably yes. If so, at that point why would they give up their final goals? Their final goal is a one party state.
Maoists appear to be winning. Will they ever win? And even Maoists leaderships say we will not be able to capture the state.
And that gets back to your earlier question: never ending triangular arrangement. I don’t think there can be a never ending triangular arrangement. Basically I believe this state is in danger of collapse. I can’t state more clearly than that. If the palace and the parties do not cooperate, if the king doesn’t reach out, if they don’t begin to plan way back to democracy, the current state of affair will not last all that long and I think the most likely result if the collapse of the state and an opportunity for the Maoists to make a huge advances.
Many things that you have said are absolutely correct but you have a hole in your theory.
I hope so.
If it is a triangular crisis, you are prescribing the expulsion of a one side of the triangle. You are trying to imagine that the side, Maoists side, does not exist. If you are trying to bring peace here through dialogue, you are negating their size and influence.
No, not at all. What I am saying is that I believe that until and unless you have a coherent way forward on part of the, I will continue to call them, the legitimate constitutional forces, the palace and the parties, there will be no need for the Maoists to make serious compromises. That’s all I am saying. I am not saying you shouldn’t talk to them because again I will go back to my opening statement, I don’t know everything. May be the Maoists are desperate to come out but their actions and words suggest that is not the case and there is no reason not to be talking out to Maoists and trying to find out what their intentions are. But I will tell you that I genuinely believe that until they understand that there is a coherent plan in place so they need gradual erosion to their position, there is no pressure on them to compromise.
Would you like to give them some benefit of doubt?
There is always benefit of doubt but their words and actions will depend on how …and their actions and word have been pretty belligerence since the ceasefire.
What do you mean by reconciliation?
Reconciliation would have two goals. One would be how the king and the parties map a path back to the real functioning democracy and 2 how the country deals with insurgency.
Where to Maoists fit in reconciliation?
Second part. There are all ways to do it as long as there is consensus. I thin it is perfectly reasonable to say okay come here and talk, we will consider putting you in a joint government. There are many possible solution. But there has to be some sort of agreement between legitimate political forces because I believe Maoists will feel no pressure to compromise otherwise.
Who is legitimate political force and who is not?
Well, all I am saying is the king and the political parties. I don’t call the Maoists a ‘legitimate’ political force because they are using violence to overthrow the state and they took up arms against state and functioning parliamentary system. They are undeniably a force that needs to be dealt, that needs to be recognized but they are not legitimate political force.
Is the understanding between king and political parties mandatory for solving political and other problems?
Again, I am not all knowing but I feel it might be. And precisely because Maoists are showing no sings of feeling under pressure to compromise, to give up their final objectives. And those actions and words are making me fear that yes agreement is necessary between the parties and palace.
In a situation like this where king and parties are not coming together, how this reconciliation can take place? What’s wrong with other two sides trying to reach in agreement?
Oh…there is absolutely nothing wrong with the parties and the Maoists trying to come up with the solution and get back to the bourgeois parliamentary democracy.
UWB: Rest of Q and A is in Nepali as we directly transcribed that into Nepali language (for Kantipur daily). We might upload the English version tomorrow.
अरु दुइ पक्ष मिल्दा केही खराव हुदैन तर फेरी म त उही भन्छु, युद्धविराम भङ्गभए यताका माओवादी कुरा र कामले (शान्तिपूर्ण समाधान) उनीहरुको लक्ष्य नभएको देखाउछ ।
फेब्रुअरी १५ को तपाइका भनाइ पछि धेरै राजनीतिक नेतृत्वले राजासँगको संधर्षा उनीहरुको स्थितीलाई कमजोर तुल्याएको छ भनिएको छ ।
यसलाई मैले गम्भीररुपमा लिएको छ किनकी मैले बुझेको छु कि पार्टीले के विश्वास गरेका छन् भने माओवादीसँग समझादारी गर्दा त्यसले राजालाई दवाव पुग्छ । म राजालाई दिने उनीहरुको दवावलाई कम नआक्न सचेत छु । तर माओवादी कृयाकलापका खतराहरु गम्भीर छन् र उनीहरुको लक्ष्यका बारेमा छलफल हुनु जरुरी छ ।
तपाइको भनाइ र्सार्वजनिक भएपछि राजाको स्थिती बलियो भएको छैन र ?
मलाई त्यस्तो लाग्दैन । मलाई लाग्छ राजाले बुझनु भएको छ उहासँग अर्न्तराष्ट्रिय र्समर्थन लगभग छदैछैन र देश गम्भीर अवस्थामा छ । र मलाई लाग्छ उहाँले पार्टी माओवादीबीचको सम्बन्ध उहाकै लागि पनि खतरापूर्ण छ भन्ने पनि बुझ्नुभएको हुनुपर्छ ।
दरवारभित्रका दक्षिणपन्थीहरु त तपाइको भनाइ पछि खुशी भएका छन्, ‘लौ हेर अमेरिकी राजदूत प्रजातान्त्रिक क्याम्पबाट हटे’ भन्दै ।
माघ १९ यता मात्रै होइन, वितेका बर्षरुदेखि नै यदि तपाइले हामीले भनेका र गरेका कुरा हेर्नुभयो भने देख्नुहुने छ हामीले शान्तीपूर्ण्, सम्पन्न र प्रजातान्त्रिक नेपाल चाहेका छौं र हामीले त कहिल्यै भन्न छाडेका छैनौ कि राजालाई सधै माघ १९ को कदमले नेपाललाई चाहिएको नजितातिर लैजान सकेका छैनन् र त्यसलाई उल्ट्याउनु जरुरी छ । त्यसैले दरवार र पार्टीबीच सम्झौता हुनुजरुरी छ ।
प्रजातन्त्र र राजाको प्रत्यक्ष शासनबीच छान्नुपरेमा के छान्नुहुने छ ?
प्रजातन्त्र नि । (त्यसको निर्णय त) निमेषभरमै (हुन्छ) ।
प्रजातन्त्र र शान्तीमा ?
त्यो त झुटो छनोट हुनेछ अर्थात त्यसमा त कुनै छनोट नै हुनेछैन । र वितेको बर्षो अनुभवले नै पनि देखाएको छ कि र्सवसत्तावादी सरकारले यहाको द्धन्दलाई सम्बोधन गर्न सक्दैन भन्ने ।
अहिलेको अवस्थामा जहा प्रजातन्त्र आफ्नै खुट्टामा उभिन सक्दैन र शान्ती पनि छैन । के यही अवस्थाको निरन्तरता राम्रो होला कि पार्टीहरुले माओवादीहरुसँग कुनै न कुनै खाले सम्झैता गर्नुपर्छ ?
कस्तो सम्झौता हो त्यसमा भर्रपर्छ । यदि माओवादीले अप्रजातान्त्रिक माध्यमबाटै राज्यको प्रभावकारी नियन्त्रण लिने भन्ने सम्झौता हो भने म त्यसलाई राम्रो सम्झौता भन्न सक्दिन । तर हतियार त्यागेर संसदीय प्रजातन्त्रको धेरै मध्येको एउटा पार्टी हुने हो भन्छ भने त ठिक छ ।
तपाइ कुन रुचाउनुहुन्छ ? राजाको र्सवसत्तावाद कि माओवादीको ?
राजाले पनि त्यो बुझेका छन् कि उनले सधै शक्ति आफ्नो हातमा लिएर राख्न सक्दैनन् । अर्न्तराष्ट्रिय र राष्ट्रिय अरु शक्तिलाई उनले धान्न सक्दैनन् । उनले देश भित्र र विदेशी सहयोग पाउने छैनन् । कम्युनिस्टको र्सवसत्तावादी शासन त नेपालको लागि पुरै विपत्तिजन्य हुनेछ । राजाले त चाहेर पनि गर्न सक्दैनन तर बाटो खुला भयो भने माओवादीले चाहि गर्न सक्छन् ।
डा. भट्टराइ भन्नुहुन्छ तपाइले माओवादीको काल्पनिक र्सववत्तावादको विरोध गरेर राजाको र्सवसत्तावादलाई सहयोग पुर्याइरहनुभएको छ ।
फेरी पनि उहाले आफ्नो लक्षहरु के हुन्, प्रष्ट पार्नु पर्छ । बर्जुवा संसदीय प्रजातन्त्र होइन भने उहाहरुले चोहको प्रजातन्त्र कुन हो ? सामन्त र साम्राज्यवादी विरुद्धको प्रजातन्त्र भनेको कस्तो हो ? राजाको र्सवसत्तावाद पनि कल्पना कै कुरा हो, त्यो सम्भव हुनेछैन ।
तर संविधानसभाको चुनावमा जादा के भयो त ?
मैले त संविधानसभाको चुनावको विरोध गरेकै छैन नि । तर त्यसका लागि माओवादीले हतियार कतिन्जेल विसाउने (एक हप्ता) के अनि हामीले विश्वास गर्नुपर्ने कि नेपालका चार हजार गाउका बासिन्दाले एक हप्ता पछि माओवादीले हतियार फिर्ता लिनेछने भन्ने थाहा पाउदा पाउदै आफ्नो मनले चाहेजसरी भोट हाल्ने छन् ? फेरी पनि म उनीहरुलाई चुनावबेला हतियारको व्यवस्थापनबारे पनि प्रष्ट हुन आग्रह गर्छु ।
माओवादीहरुले त अमेरिकाले आफूहरुलाई ध्वस्त पार्न चाहेको बताइहरेका छन् नि ।
हामीले सेनालाई कुनै घातक हतियारको सहयोग गरेका छैनौं त्यसैले उहाँले कसरी अमेरिकाले माओवादीहरुलाई नष्ट गर्नचाहेको भन्नुहुन्छ ?
अमेरिकाले नेपाललाई रणनीतिकहिसावले प्रयोग गर्न खोजेको भनिन्छ । के हो त्यो रणनीतिक स्वार्थ ?
हामी चीन र भारतलाई उदाउदा शक्तिकारुपमा लिएका छौं जोसँग हामीले काम गर्नुपर्ने छ । यहाको अस्थिरताले चनि र भारतमा पनि परिस्थिती अप्ठेरो बनाउछ । यहा माओवादीले शासन हत्याउन त्यसले क्षेत्रमै अस्थिरता फैलाउला भन्ने देखेका छौं । अनि हाम्रो के रणनीतिक स्वार्थ ? त्यो त शान्तीपूर्ण, सम्पन्न र प्रजातान्त्रिक नेपाल भन्दा अर्को छैन । यसलाई सक्रिय प्रजातन्त्रमा फर्काउने र माओवादी विद्रोहलाई प्रभावशाली ढंगमा सम्बोधन गर्ने ।
नेपालबाट उत्तर दक्षिण हेर्न मिल्छ भनेर त्यसो भनिएको हो कि ?
त्यो त हास्यास्पद तर्क हो ।
विदेशी समुदायको नेपालसम्बन्धी दृष्टिकोणमा कत्तिको मिलेमतो छ ?
धेरै हदसम्म एकै छ हाम्रो धारणा । हामीले भारतीय र बेलायतीहरुसँग नजिकमा रहेर काम गरेका छौं । बटमलाइन सहमती के छ भने यो देशलाई सक्रिय प्रजातन्त्रमा फर्काउनुपर्छ, माओवादी हिंसा धेरै खतरापूर्वक छ र माओवादीले शक्तिहत्याए भने त्यो विपतदूपर्ण हुनेछ ।
कसैले भन्छन् अमेरीकीहरुको तुलनामा युरोपेली र भारतीयहरु माओवादीप्रति नरम छन् ।
तपाइले त्यो त युरोपेली र भारतीयहरु सोध्नुपर्छ । तर उनीहरुले पनि माओवादीको शक्ति हत्यालाई सोझै अस्विकार गर्नेछन् ।
अहिलेको अवस्थामा नेपालमा चीनको भूमिकालाई कसरी लिनु भएको छ ?
एकजना बाहिरियाकोरुपमा सम्बन्धित पक्षहरुलाई वार्ताको लागि प्रोत्साहित गरेर चीनले सकारात्मक भूमिका खेलिरहेको छ ।
नेपालको वर्तमान विदेश नीतिलाई कसरी मूल्याङ्कन गर्नुहुन्छ ?
हा, हा, हा । म त्यसमा टिप्पणी गर्न सक्दिन ।
स्थानीय चुनावमा प्रतिक्रिया ?
चुनावले दरवार र पार्टीलाई कुनै सहमतीमा डोर्याउन नसकेकामा हामी निराश भएका छौं ।
राजाको रोडम्यापबारे ?
उहाको रोडम्यापबारे म आफै पूर्ण प्रष्ट छैन । तर रोडम्याप पार्टीसँग समझदारी गरेर सक्रिय प्रजातन्त्रमा र्फकने नै हुनुपर्छ ।
राजाको पछिल्लो सन्देशबारे कुनै प्रतिक्रिया ?
त्यसले ढोका बन्दगरेको छैन तर सम्भावित एक कदम अगाडी हो तर धेरै काम हुन बाकी छ । उहाको उद्देश्य के हो प्रष्ट हुनुजरुरी छ ।
राजनीतिक नेताहरु व्यक्तिगत कुराकानीमा भन्छन्, प्रजातन्त्रका र्समर्थक मध्ये अमेरिकाचाहि राजाको नजिक छ । ठिक हो ?
होइन । हामीले राजालाई दवाव दिएका दियै छौं । तर धारणा के छ भने राजाले अझै आफूलाई प्रष्ट पारेका छैनन् । तर हामी राजाको नजिक छौ भन्ने धारणा चाहि मलाई थाहा छ मैले माओवादी हिंसाको विराध गरेका कारण आएको नकारात्मक नतिजा हो ।
United We Blog 
Comments
60 responses to “Moriarty Musing: Nepal In Danger Of Collapse”
Why not bring UN into the picture and International community provide necessary support to solve the problem.
Of course Mr. Moriarty’s many thoughts for good reason reflect the objection to the negativity of Maobadi’s in the conflict, which I agree.
Unfortunately, I see KG much more dangerous for Nepalese than anybody else. Why on earth this fellow has to sack elected PM and take power in his hand without doing any good political analysis. Employ people like T Giri and others who have a rotten attitude to Nepal and Nepalese. What makes me boil from inside is the statement that T Giri, Kamal Thapa give is such a lie and rubbish that the horrible election being portayed as success. When we have people like them what can you expect from such guys.
If KG can agree to become constitutional we have a solution but this fellow is a real curse to our country
Because of KG’s action we are now with “no solution” scenario. Frankly I feel that KG is helping only Maobadi by all means. This guy is dangerous. Him after that criminal paras where do we go from here.
The US has supplied most of the weapons and much of the Training for the RNA.
In a few years the RNA & Police have swelled to 150,000 in the belief that War was the way to Peace.
BaBu Ram and US Ambassador Moriarity share the same belief that ,”POWER GROWS FROM THE BARREL OF A GUN”, as Mao wrote.
The 7-Parties have started the process toward Real and Lasting Peace &Democracy, based on the 12-Point Agreement with the Mabadi.
While the Mabadi have taken a small step toward Democracy, the US is convinced that Peace Talks are meaningless and that War is the Only Road to Democracy, I am reminded of another writing of Mao, that “The Longest March Begins with a Single Step”.
Let us hope that the US and the King will join the 7-Parties and the Mabadi in stopping the endless and win-less war.
HAVE A NICE SHIVI RATRI !
Moriarty DOES think violence is legitimate–as long as it is the violence of the RNA, as long as it is the violence that suits HIS country’s geopolitical interests. Do not forget that HIS country was founded in a violent revolution, so he is a hypocrite to say that a violent revolution is not a legitimate way of establishing a true democracy. What he is doing is attempting to assert his country’s influence as part of their larger Asia strategy, and part of that is to stop the spread of socialist ideas, which threatens US investments.
Do not forget what the Americans have done in countless ‘counterinsurgency’ situations around the world. Do not forget that it was they who advised Fujimori to massacre thousands of innocent peasants in a ‘counterinsurgency’, who advised the dictatorships across Latin America as well as Asia (Indonesia, South Korea, etc). The USA does not care one whit for democracy, unless it suits their economic and military interests.
Also do not forget that in situations like the present one, the ambassadorial staff are often largely comprised of CIA agents working under ‘diplomatic cover’. These people will be working to assert the US agenda in Nepal by paying informants and paying people to carry out ‘dirty work’, up to and including assassinations. The fact that the US is getting so interested in Nepal is an issue of serious concern, because it means that they have already begun to tinker with it behind the scenes. Beware of anything this man says.
Wagle ji,
It is sad that you refused to reply to my posts. I wanted to know how you settled the issue of plagiarism with Nepalnews. I guess some other people also want to know about it.
Moreover, I asked you a couple of questions in my post on the same topic. I guess you found it irrelevant. May be true, but you could have justified your position which would have made you stronger than ever rather than stay numb over the issue.
the New Nepal without monarchy will be like “Sunaula Bihani”. Monarchy may collpse soon, but not Nepal. It is His Excellency Ambassador’s utopia to see nepal collapsing.
Oohale afno jagir bachauna ko lagi teso bhannu bhako huna sakchha… in present condition, 12 pt understanding is the best strategy for new nepal.
Nice job, Vijay. Your next assignment will be to interview the King, Prachand and other political forces. But you better be as pressing to all of them.
I was bit surprised how ignorant Mr. Moriarty is of Nepal’s political landscape. If he argues that counter insurgency is the way to deal with insurgency, then what better is he than the Maoists? Didn’t maoist start the insurgency with the same logic- that the way to freedomo is by uprooting the feudal opressor? Historically, US has made numerous deadly mistakes such as Vietnam/Iraq war because of their policies based on fears, greed for power, and plain ignorance, not sound intelligence. McNamara-Kissanger era is a classic episode of such mistakes, the consequence of which lingers still today in the form of death, starvation, and inhuman treatment of poor non-white people of the planet. I hope Mr. Moriarty wakes up, uses his heart-consceince when proposing his boss in Washintong the policy for Nepal. Mr. Moriarty sounds like a good person, but his biased one sided view might be too dangerous for Nepal than the Maoists. I am against totalitarinian communism, but Mr. Moriarty does not seem to view the state ‘king’ as totalitarian. That’s very unfortunate.
Let Nepali decide their own fate.
What do you mean your excellency…..are you going to define the model of democracy……we can do it ourselves…parties and maoists are capable of doing that…..if dr. Bhattarai says that in his democracy feudals and imperialist will get a kick…whats wrong with that……do u want us to be ruled by feudals and colonized by imperialists like USA……..I reserve my right to be againt capitalist state, I reserve my right to be against free trade….we want to define economic model for development through our own lenses…….terror of money is no better than terror of gun…..I just feel sorry for our politicians who give too much importance to your nonsense…and ofcourse you are against the spirit of American people too….who . I believe will never support an idea of bowing down before a criminal who happens to be our king….where was your country when whole family of late king was killed…..weren’t they a human being…you are so concerned about killings of maoist….but we want to know from you about killing of a whole family…..or you don’t want to answer because you were too conspiring with the criminals.
Moriarty came to Nepal from the NATIONAL SECURITY Council, where he was one of the Principal-Architets of the US Invasion and Occupation of Afghanistan.
Maybe Ambassador Moriarty will help do for Nepal, what the Bush Regime has done for Afghanistan and Iraq ?
Without Peace Talks there can, and will only be war !
mike4radio@yahoo.com
justice, you make a good observation of Moriarty’s comments. On one hand, he seems to have a good understanding of the key players of Nepali politics and the status quo that exists among them, on the other he seems to be biased towards the view that counter insurgency is an answer to Nepal quagmire.
Violence is not the answer to any problem. Maoists committed that mistake already, and RNA through Gyanendra are committing it too. Further deployment of counter insurgency forces will only add to the suffering of the common Nepali. Like Justice compared the use of force to the problem in Iraq and Afganisthan, I do not see a solution through further violence.
A solution can only be attained if both Gyanenedra and Maoists make comprimises. Gyanendra has to hand back the legislative powers and the control of RNA to a constituent governing body compramising for the members of 7 parties. The Maoists too have to drop their weapons if they want to be a part of the constituent assembly. A parliamentary election needs to be held and new constitution for the Republic of Nepal needs to be drafted
Note:
I use Gyanendra because I no more consider worthy of the tile of a King.
I see no future for Monarchy in Nepal, unless its completely its figurative.
Why this reconciliation issue between parties and King is coming up ?
Didn’t parties decide not to reconciliate with king ?
Is it possible to get LOKTANTRA by doing reconciliation with so called King?
cledtx?
-!_ bz jif{kl5 dfcf]jfbL
) s[i0fHjfnf b]jsf]6f
b; jif{cl3 g]skf -dfcf]jfbL_ n] hgo’4 ;’? ubf{ clwsf+zn] o;nfO{ s]xL dlxgfd} rsgfr’/ x’g] b’M;fx; dfg]sf lyP . l;4fGttM o:tf] o’4sf kIfw/x? ;d]t Toltv]/ g]kfndf /fHo / hgtfaLrsf] lj/f]wfef; hgo’4 ;’? ug]{ tx;Dd k’lu;s]sf] 5}g / jt{DFFg ljZjdf o:tf] o’4nfO{ Psfw jif{ klg tGsfpg ;lsGg eGg] 7fGy] . o; If]qsf c? sDo’lgi6 qmflGt ;dfhjfbL ljrf/sf] huhuL ePs} a]nfdf ;d]t s]xL jif{d} tx;gx; ePsf y’k|} pbfx/0fn] ubf{ klg z’elrGtsx?;d]t dfcf]jfbLk|lt ljZj:t x’g ;s]sf lyPgg\ . Toltv]/ ;+;bLo Joj:yf r/d of}jgdf lyof] . To;sf d]?b08 dflgg] lgjf{rg cleofgx? eJotfsf ;fy ;~rfng eO/x]h:tf] b]lvGYof] . hftLo, If]qLo, juL{o jf n}+lus c;Gtf]if sDtLdf Tof] tx;Dd cg’ej x’“b}gYof] h;n] ;z:q qmflGtnfO{ k|]/0ff b]cf];\ . t/ ;”rf+s / k|lqmofx?n] dfq Joj:yfsf] hunfO{ ;xL ?kdf cf“Sg ;Sbf/x]g5g\ eGg] tYo s]xL jif{d} k|dfl0ft eof] . g]kfn ;dfh slt w]/} nfefdfly plePsf] lyof] eGg] hfGg d’n’sn] w]/} jif{ kv{g k/]g .
If]qLo sLlt{dfg M
o;cl3 blIf0f Pl;of / o;j/k/sf clwsf+z sDo’lgi6 cfGbf]ng nfdf] ;do l6s]gg\ ha ls Toltv]/ ltgnfO{ j}rfl/s, g}lts / Pp6f ;Ldf;Dd ef}lts ?kdf ;d]t e/kbf]{ cGt/f{li6«o ;dy{g k|fKt lyof] . >Ln+sfdf h]eLkLsf] xltof/aGb ;+3if{ lgs} l56f] t’lxof] . s]xL jif{aLrd} o;sf clwsf+z g]tf–sfo{stf{ dfl/P / ;/sf/L bdgn] kf6L{nfO{ tx;gx; agfof] . ;g\ !(&) sf] ;’?df pTsif{df k’u]sf] ef/tsf] gS;naf/L cfGbf]ng s]xL jif{d} cToGt k|lt/IffTds / bh{gf}+ 6’qmfdf ljvlG8t eof] . Dfn]l;ofdf bf];|f] ljZjo’4sf] cGTodf hfkfgL cfTd;dk{0f / la|l6z zf;gsf] k’g:yfkgaLrsf b’O{ xKtf …dnog lkkN; PG6L hfklgh cfdL{Ú -Pd\kLPh]P_ sf gfddf sDo’lgi6x?n] zf;g;d]t u/] . kl5 a]nfotn] uf]vf{ ;}lgs;d]t k|of]u u/]/ eLif0f bdg u¥of] / dn]l;of slxNo} cGt/f{li6«o sDo’lgi6 cfGbf]ngsf] k|]/0ff aGg ;s]g .
o;}u/L adf{df cToGt alnof] dfcf]jfbL cfGbf]ngn] k|lzlIft ;]gfsf cuffl8 3’“8f 6]Sof] . c/adf dfcf]jfbn] k|j]z;Dd kfPg . ckmuflg:tfgdf dfcf]jfbL ;fdf ljb|f]xLx?nfO{ tTsfnLg ;f]leot ;+3;dy{s ;Qfn] jj{/tfk’j{s bafof] . kfls:tfgsf] an’lr:tfg k|fGtdf sDo’lg:6x?n] hghfltx?nfO{ ;fy lnP/ ;z:q ;+3if{ u/]/ s]xL ;do;Dd k|fljlws efiffdf Tof] :jtGq If]q klg eof] . t/ ækfls:tfgdf ca slxNo} …dfz{n nÚ gnfUg]]Æ zkysf ;fy ;g\ !(&# df ;+;bLo k|hftflGqs ;+ljwfg lbg] h’NkmLs/ cln e’6\6f] cfkm}+n] an’lr:tfgdf …dfz{n nÚ nufP . ckmuflg:tfgdf ;f]leot ;}lgs x:tIf]kkl5 Tof] If]q ptfaf6 efu]sf O:nflds cltjfbLx?sf] lzlj/ / tflnd:yndf kl/0ft eof] . ptf O/fgsf] ;f]leot ;dy{s sDo’lgi6 kf6L{ t’b]xn] O:nflds 5b\dfj/0f :jLsf/ u¥of] / zfx /]hf kxNjLlj?4 cfoft’Nnf cln v’d]gLnfO{ ;3fof] . ;g\ !(&( sf] O/fgsf] O:nflds qmflGt cf/Dedf jfdkGyL gf/fdf nl8Psf] lyof] . ;’?df To;sf] gf/f lyof]– …g’g, sf/ / cfhfbLÚ cyf{t\ /f]6L, sfd / :jtGqtf . O/fgsf] ;f]leot ;dy{s sDo’lgi6 kf6L{ t’b]x Tof] qmflGtnfO{ ;xof]u / ;dy{g ug]{ O/fgsf] Psdfq /fhgLlts bn lyof] . v’d]gLsf] O:nflds qmflGtnfO{ ;f]leot cg’xf/ lbg] klg t’b]x g} lyof] / p;nfO{ lgs}kl5;Dd …qmflGt cfkm\gf] xf]Ú eGg] e|d lyof] . t/ b’O{ jif{ glaTb} v’d]gL t’b]xdfly vlgP / O/fgdf ;fDojfbLx? w/fzfoL eP . O/fsdf jfdkGyL s’b{x? ;2fd x’;]gsf] bdgsf/L zf;gsf] lzsf/ eP . ltgLx?lj?4 /f;folgs Uof“;;d]t k|of]u ul/of] .
g]kfndf eg] s’g} /fi6« jf alnof] cGt/f{li6«o ;+hfnsf] ;dy{g ljgf g} dfcf]jfbL cfGbf]ngn] k”0f{tM cfTdlge{/ eP/ cfkm”nfO{ l6sfof] / lj:tf/ u¥of] . ;fDojfb Pp6f ljrf/wf/fsf ?kdf kl5NNff b’O{ ;o jif{d} ;a}eGbf k|lt/IffTds cj:yfdf x“’bfx“’b} / g]kfnL /fHo;Qfn] Oltxf;d} ;a}eGbf a9L ;}lgs / cfly{s ;xof]u kfp“bfkfp“b} klg o;n] cfkm\gf] k|efj lg/Gt/ a9fof] . PSsfO{;f}= ztfAbLsf] ;a}eGbf cfZro{k”0f{ 5fkfdf/ o’4 n8]/ g]kfnL dfcf]jfbLn] Ps lsl;dsf] j}lZjs sLlt{dfg sfod u/] . olb cGt/f{li6«o kl/l:ylt cg’s”n x’GYof] jf slDtdf of] ;g\ !(*) sf] bzs x’GYof] eg] cfheGbf kf“r jif{cl3 g} dfcf]jfbLn] sf7df8f}+ sAhf ul/;s]sf x’g] lyP .
k|lt/f]wsf] sLlt{dfg M
g]kfnsf dfcf]jfbLx?n] d’n’ss} Oltxf;df klxn] slxNo} g;’lgPsf] / gAoxf]l/Psf] bdgsf] ;fdgf ug'{k¥of] . dfcf]jfbLk|lt ;xfg’e”ltzLn ljBfyL{ ;+u7gdfq xf]Og, a’l4hLjL / snfsf/sf ;+u7gnfO{ ;d]t cft+ssf/L 3f]if0ff ul/of] . kfls:tfgdf k|ToIf ;}lgs zf;gdf ;d]t ljZjljBfnoLo /fhgLltnfO{ lgif]w ul/Psf] lyPg . k+rfotsfnd} klg bnx? k|ltalGwt lyP t/ e|ft[ ;+u7gx?n] bdgs} aLrdf klg ltgsf] /fhgLltnfO{ v’nf ?kdf hgtf;Dd k’¥ofpg ;Sg] cj:yf lyof] . pbfx/0fsf ?kdf cg]/f:jljo” / g]lj;+3n] sDo’lgi6 / sf+u|];sf] /fhgLltnfO{ hgtfdfem nlu/x]sf lyP . g]kfnsf ;+;bjfbL zlQmx?n] lg/+s’z elgPsf] k+rfotL Joj:yfaf6 cfkm”n] kfPhlt ;x’lnot klg dfcf]jfbLnfO{ lbPgg\ . dfcf]jfbLn] v’nf ?kdf hgtf;Dd /fhgLltnfO{ n}hfg] ;a} gfsf aGb ul/P ha ls ;+ljwfgn] ;d]t To:tf] cg’dlt lb“b}gYof] . g]tfx?sf] 6fpsfsf] d”No tf]lsof] . u[x/fHodGqLn] ;fj{hlgs ?kd} …emf]nfdf dfcf]jfbL g]tfsf] 6fpsf] Nofpg / ToxL emf]nfd} k};f n}hfgÚ v’nf cfx\jfg u/] .
oL b; jif{df u}/Goflos xTof ckjfb xf]Og, ;/sf/L lgod eof] . anfTsf/ ;’/IffsdL{sf nflu ;x’lnot;/x eof] . lu/km\tf/ dfcf]jfbLnfO{ r/d oftgfkl5 gSsnL d’7e]8df dfg]{ cleofg g} ;’? eof] . dfcf]jfbLsf sfo{stf{ / z’elrGtsnfO{ sfg’gL pkrf/sf] xsaf6 al~rt u/fOof] . ;a}eGbf crDdsf] s’/f, klxnf] k6ssf] jftf{sf] c;kmntfkl5 of] /fhsLo kfzljstfnfO{ /fhfn] zf;g xftdf gln“bf;Dd k|];, dfgjclwsf/jfbL / …nf]stflGqsÚ a’l4hLjLn] ;d]t df}g /x]/ ;3fP .
/fli6«o kl/b[Zodf cfPsf] kl/jt{g M
dfcf]jfbL ljb|f]xn] d”t{ cfsf/ lng’cl3;Dd g]kfnsf] ;+;bLo df]8nnfO{ ;+;f/s} ;jf]{Ts[i6 df]8n / g]kfn clw/fHosf] ;+ljwfgnfO{ ;+;f/s} ;jf]{Ts[i6 ;+ljwfg ;fljt ug]{ k|of; eof] . Tof] ;+;bLo df]8n / ;+j}wflgs k|:tfjgfnfO{ /fhgLlts Joj:yfsf ?kdf ts{sf] 3]/fdf Nofpg] s’g} klg k|of; Ps y/L …k|hftGqjfbLÚnfO{ cltjfb nfUYof] . pgLx?sf nflu Tof] ;+ljwfg / /fhgLlts Joj:yf ts{ / sf/0feGbf k/, nueu wd{h:t} lyof] . To;nfO{ k|Zg / ts{eGbf k/ /fVg] c;kmn sf]l;; ul/of] . k|hftGqsf gfddf e|i6 / lbzfxLg g]tfzfxLnfO{ /fhgLlts j}wtf lbg] k|of; c;f]h !* / cem df3 !( ;Dd} eO/x\of] . t/ ca cfd”n nf]stflGqs ?kfGt/0f s]jn dfcf]jfbL xf]Og, d’n’ss} gf/f eO;s]sf] 5 . sf7df8f}+ lxhf];Dd …k|hftGqÚ nfO{ lglj{sNk eGYof], cfh ToxL ;+1f p;sf nflu ufnL ePsf] 5 / p;n] …nf]stGqÚ sf] cfljisf/ u/]sf] 5 . zAbsf] ;xL cy{ vf]Hg] of] /fhgLlts r]tgf g]kfnL ;dfhdf cfPsf] kl/jt{gsf] ;a}eGbf 7″nf] k|tLs xf] . lgZro g} ;r]t a’l4hLjL / o’jfx?sf] Pp6f k+lQmnfO{ klg o;sf] >]o hfG5 t/ dfcf]jfbL ljb|f]xsf] cfnf]sn] g} pgLx?nfO{ olt l56} oxf“;Dd NofOk’¥ofof] . ofjt\ j}rfl/s / Jofjxfl/s sdhf]/Ls} aLrdf klg dfcf]jfbL ljb|f]xn] g]kfnL ;dfhnfO{ e|flGt / cGwljZjf;sf] o’uaf6 ts{ / cGj]if0fsf] o’udf k|j]z u/fof] .
dfcf]jfbL hgo’4n] g]kfnL ;dfhsf] /fhgLlts, hftLo, If]qLo, n}+lus / juL{o lj/f]wfef;nfO{ s;}n] c:jLsf/ ug{ g;Sg] u/L ;txdf NofOlbof] . g]kfn PsLs/0fb]lvsf 3fpaf6 kLk aUg yfn] / ltgsf] bL3{sfnLg / jf:tljs pkrf/sf] cfjZostf ckl/xfo{ eof] . o;/L g]kfn aNn b]z aGg] k|lqmofdf uof], gq t Tof] gf/fo0flx6Lsf] latf{eGbf a9L slxNo} dflgPs} lyPg . dfcf]jfbL hgo’4n] g]kfnL ;dfhsf] k|lt/f]w IfdtfnfO{ klg phfu/ u¥of] .
dfcf]jfbLn] ;+;bjfbL bn / d”ntM ltgsf] o’jf k’:tfnfO{ oyfl:yltjfbL csd{Gotfsf] lxnf] kvfNg k|]l/t u¥of] . g]kfnL sf+u|];sf] o;} jif{ ;DkGg dxflwj]zgdf Oltxf;d} klxnf]k6s Pshgf blnt s]Gb|Lo ;ldltdf lgjf{lrt eP / dlxnf ;xeflutf klg a9\of] . g]kfnL sf+u|]; k|hftflGqsn] t dlxnf, blnt, hghflt / s0f{fnLjf;Lsf nflu s]Gb|Lo g]t[Tjdf cf/If0f g} lglZrt u¥of] . oL b’j} kf6L{leq h’emf? o’jfk’:tfsf] bafa slt w]/} a9\of] eg] g]t[Tj cfwf ztfAbLeGbf nfdf] ;+j}wflgs /fhtGqfTds e|dnfO{ slDtdf ljwfgaf6 ltnf~hln lbg jfWo eof] . clxn] ;a}eGbf rrf{df /x]sf] ;dfj]zL nf]stGqsf] ax;n] klg dfcf]jfbLk|lt s[t1tf 1fkg ug]{k5{ lsgls o;cl3 ;d:of 5 eGg];Dd :jLsf/ ul/Psf] lyPg, ;dfwfg vf]Hg] k|of; t k/sf] s’/f . dfcf]jfbL hgo’4n] g} zx/L dWodju{nfO{ blnt, hghflt, cflbjf;L, dlxnf / dw]zL d’2faf/] ;f]Rg jfWo agfof] clg /fhtGqsf] Joy{tf / zfxL kfvG8nfO{ klg phfu/ u¥of] .
dfcf]jfbL hgo’4 olt ;do lsg l6Sof] / o;n] olt rfdTsfl/s ljsf; lsg ug{ ;Sof] eg] lj:tf/} of] pk]lIft ;d’bfosf] cfTdklxrfgsf] vf]hL eof] . k]z]j/ /fhgLlts sfo{stf{dfq}n] o;nfO{ oxf“;Dd lsdfy{ NofOk’¥ofpg ;Sb}gy], g To;sf] olt w]/} dfg] x’GYof] . ztflAbof}+b]lv qmdljsf;af6 al~rt g]kfnL ;dfh crfgs ljikmf]6 eof] / To;n] k]z]j/ ;dfhzf:qLx?nfO{ dfq xf]Og, ;+;f/nfO{ g} rlst t’NofOlbof] .
If]qLo cfofd M
dfcf]jfbL hgo’4 s]jn /fli6«o cfGbf]ng xf]Og . o;sf If]qLo / cGt/f{li6«o cfofd / bfloTj klg 5g\ . o;nfO{ >Ln+sf, slZd/ jf pQ/ k’jL{ ef/tsf] k[ystfjfbL lx+;f;“u t’ngf ug{ ;lsGg . pbfx/0fsf nlu >Ln+sfsf] Pn\6L6LO;“u s’g} cGt/f{li6«o p2]Zo 5}g . k[ys\ /fHo jf :jfoQtf To;sf] clGtd nIo xf] . t/ g]kfn / ef/tsf dfcf]jfbLsf] n8fO{+sf k5fl8 Pp6f ;femf cGt/f{li6«o p2]Zo 5 . g]kfnL dfcf]jfbLn] If]qLo ?kdf klg lgs} 7’nf] kl/jt{g NofPsf 5g\ .
blIf0f Pl;of If]qkmnsf b[li6n] o’/f]keGbf 7’nf] 5 . ;+;f/sf] s’n hg;+Vofsf] aL; k|ltzt oxf“ a:5 . ;f“9] rf/ jif{cl3 blIf0f Pl;ofsf dfcf]jfbLx?n] …;L–sDkf];fÚ -sf]cl8{g];g sld6L ckm dfcf]O:6 kf6L{ ckm ;fpy Pl;of_ u7g u/] h;df g]kfnsf dfcf]jfbLn] efjgfTds, ;f+u7lgs, j}rfl/s / lqmofTds k|]/0ff Pj+ g]t[TjbfoL e”ldsf lgjf{x u/] . e’6fgdf dfcf]jfbL sDo’lgi6 kf6L{ o;} cjlwdf u7g eof] . o; cjlwdf ef/tdf dfcf]jfbL cfGbf]ngn] klg cfkm”nfO{ gf6sLo lj:tf/ u¥of] . @% dO{ !(^& df klZrd j+ufnsf] gS;naf/Laf6 ;’? ePsf] ef/tsf] dfcf]jfbL cfGbf]ng clxn] hlt Jofks o;cl3 slxNo} lyPg . oltv]/ of] !@ /fHodf km}lnO;s]sf] tYo :jo+ ef/tsf] s]Gb|Lo ;/sf/n] ;+;bd} :jLsf/ ul/;s]sf] 5 . ef/tsf k/:k/ ;+3if{/t b’O{ dfcf]jfbL 36s dfcf]O:6 sDo’lgi6 ;]G6/ -Pd\;L;L_ / lkk’N; jf/ u|’k -kL8An’hL_ ;g\ @))$ df PsLs[t eP / efskf -dfcf]jfbL_ u7g eof] . of] PsLs/0fdf g]skf -dfcf]]jfbL_n] k/f]If dWo:ysf] e”ldsf lgjf{x u¥of] . ut jif{ cfGw|k|b]zdf zflGt jftf{sfndf efskf -dfcf]jfbL_n] nfvf}+sf] hg;d’xsf aLrdf bh{gf}+ zfgbf/ ;efx? Uf¥of] . ljxf/sf] hxfgfjfb h]ndf ut gf]a]Da/ !# df ePsf] dfcf]jfbL sf/jfxL c8\tL; jif{ nfdf] dfcf]jfbL cfGbf]ngsf] ;a}eGbf 7’nf] / ;kmn sf/jfxL lyof] h;df pgLx?n] ;of}+ yfg xltof/ nu] / tLg ;oeGbf a9L sfo{stf{ 5’6fP . oltv]/ ef/tdf dfcf]jfbL k|efljt If]q j+unfb]zsf] s’n If]qkmneGbf 7″nf] 5 .
cGt/f{li6«o cfofd M
;’?sf jif{x?df g]kfnL hgo’4sf] cGt/f{li6«o cfofd / k|efjaf/] s;}n] uDeL/tfk”j{s ;f]r]sf] lyPg . Pp6f ;fgf] / ljkGg d’n’ssf] ljb|f]xn]] olt l56} cGt/f{li6«o cfofd n]nf eGg] Toltv]/ w]/}sf] cg’dfgaflx/ lyof] . t/ k]?df ;fOlgª kfysf] cj;fgkl5 g]kfn ;+;f/el/sf dfcf]jfbLsf] cfzfsf] s]Gb| ePsf] 5 . kl5Nnf] dlxgfdfq o’/f]ksf cf7 b]zdf g]kfnsf] dfcf]jfbL cfGbf]ngsf kIfdf k|bz{gx? eP . lgZro g} oL k|bz{g ;Lldt lyP / clxn]sf] ljZj Joj:yfdf ltgn] k}bf ug]{ bafan] g]kfnL dfcf]jfbLnfO{ pNn]vgLo /fxt ldNb}g . t/ o;n] dfcf]jfbL hgo’4sf] cGt/f{li6«o cfofdnfO{ t ;+s]t u5{ g} .
dfcf]jfbLx? cd]l/sL w’/Lsf] ljZj Joj:yfnfO{ c:jLsf/ u5{g\ h;n] ax’/fli6«o lgud, laZj a}+s, d’b|f sf]if / Toltn] klg gk’u] k|ToIf ;}lgs x:tIf]kaf6 zf;g u5{ . To;}n] ;+;f/s} ;a}eGbf cfsif{s lgj]z:yn aGg ;Sg] blIf0f Pl;ofdf dfcf]jfbLx?sf] k|efj cd]l/sfsf nflu ?lrs/ x’g} ;Sb}g . b’O{ jif{cl3 ;fj{hlgs Pp6f cd]l/sL k|ltj]bg eG5– …cft+sjfbsf] cGt/f{li6«o s]Gb|sf ?kdf dWok”j{sf] 7fp“ ca blIf0f Pl;ofn] lnPsf] 5 .Ú k|:6 5, cd]l/sf o; If]qdf cfkm\gf] e”ldsf a9fpg rfxG5 / a9fO/x]sf] klg 5 . o;n] l9nf]rf“8f] o; If]qdf c? cGt/lj/f]w l;h{gf ug]{5 . g]kfndf pm oltv]/ nueu ;+j]bgz”Go l:yltdf 5 . /fhfnfO{ k|ToIf ?kdf af]ls/xg] ;fx; pm h’6fpg ;Sb}g, /fhfnfO{ PSn} 5f]l8lbg] g}ltstf klg pm;“u 5}g .
kl5NNff b; jif{df dfcf]jfbL hgo’4n] j}rfl/s ?kdf klg sDo’lgi6 Oltxf;sf s]xL uNtLx?k|lt cfTdfnf]rgf ug]{ ;fx; u/]sf] 5 . of] k|z+;fof]Uo 5 t/ kof{Kt 5}g . jf:tjdf Oltxf;sf] ef}ltsjfbL JofVof ca sDo’lg:6x?n] ;a}eGbf klxn] ljZj sDo’lgi6 cfGbf]ngsf] Oltxf;af6} ;’? ug'{k5{ . gf]s/zfxLsf andf ;Lldt JolQmn] hg;fdfGodfly zf;g ug]{ lxhf]sf] uNtL bf]x¥ofP/ sDo’lgi6 cfGbf]ng km]l/ ;g\ !(*( d} cfOk’U5 . g]kfnL dfcf]jfbL ljZj sDo’lgi6 cfGbf]ngsf] Oltxf;k|lt cem l;h{gfTds x’g / Jofjxfl/s ?kd} ax’njfbL nf]stflGqs jfdkGynfO{ :jLsf/ ug{ tof/ eP eg] j}slNks ljZj Joj:yfdf pgLx?sf] ;a}eGbf 7″nf] of]ubfg ToxL x’g]5 . nf]stflGqs /rgfsf] ;dfhjfbL cy{Joj:yfdfq casf] ljZjbz{g x’g;S5 .
Janadseh Special Issue
mahamahim jyu lai ghar ko bagh le khanu kata kata, man ko bagh le khaye jasto chha…
“Mr. Prachanda has not defined what he means by multiparty system”
**What is your definition of multiparty democracy Your Excellency?
“I don’t call the Maoists a ‘legitimate’ political force because they are using violence to overthrow the state”
** Then must we call the USA, a largest illegitimate entity, for the same reason?
“there is absolutely nothing wrong with the parties and the Maoists trying to come up with the solution and get back to the bourgeois parliamentary democracy.”
** So what are you against prrimarily?
PLEASE LET THE NEPALIS DECIDE WHAT KIND OF DEMOCRACY THEY WANT!! YOU WANT MONARCHY? VERY WELL TAKE OURS. ITS LONG TIME THE U.S. CITIZENS HAVEN’T HAD A KING. THEY MUST’VEBEEN BORED BY THE PRESIDENTS!!
well sir exellency mr. ambassador,
the whole problem facing nepal is due to these Islamic Ieranic people disguised as shidhu-turned hindus proclaiming oneself as Lord of Universe. Either way the so called King, political party leaders or now the socalled Maobadis, they are all only different sides of same devils face, either way u see.
The only loosers are poor suffering Nepalese civilians from all these Satans. On top of that as U know for yourself there is one God and inspired by only Holy Spirit and Holy Ghost who gave his only begotton Son Lord Jesus through him is the only Salvation from misery out of our life here on Earth.
And well it is well known fact is that all these three warring greedy doggie sides donot accept Lord Jesus, the only one begotton Son who died in the Cross to take our Sin away and reunite in eternity in Paradise with the God Almighty which blesses our Great America So much and u being the messenger of the messenger from a great Holy Nation to a devilish country going throug now living hellish time on earth where once a great Lord Jesus like person called Peace Loving another Son of God like Buddha was borned.
So, considering the very fact those who donot side with US and accepts Lord Jesus is the only true one way ticket to Heaven, they are all siding with Satan hence they are Devils and our Enemy and hence also the Enemy of Great Holy Nation America too.
And considering the consequences of siding with darkforces as oppsed to light of universe under Lord Jesus, you must timely help to ROOT OUT these Islamic Ieranic Wolfs in the cover of Sheeps as Hinduists King, so called devislish democratic parties and along with communists be they UML or the worst now Maobadis.
We general Nepalese People just want to experience TOTAL FREEDOM, DEMOCRACY AND DIGNITY under only One God who is filled with Holy Spirit and blessed by Holy Ghost and who sent only one Living Son of God as Living Man who died on Cross to take all our sin away promising Life in enternity with God the Almighty as in Great Nation of America, please help us bring TRUE GODLY DEMOCRACY in Nepal with your HOLY MIGHT AND SPIRIT FILLED $$$ TO TRUELY DEMOCRATIZE NEPAL AND FREE GENERAL NEPALESE PEOPLE OUT OF THE CLUTHES OF THESE SATANS.
Please annex Nepal as 51 th State of Great Nation of America or just send like about 300000 Son of America to permanently station and take charge of day to day Governance of whole Nepal state untill it is fully rebored and filled with Holy Spirit under guidance of Holy Ghost through Lord only one begotton Living Son of God Jeus the Christ. ( who died on Cross to take our sin away and unite with God Almighty in Heaven)
We all Nepalese want to see Nepal as another Holy Nation choosen by God himself to make another Jerusalem in the South Asia at 21st century and we may blessed to be able to pray and sing in his glorious name the God Almighty through Lord Jeus Christ happily forever and forever.
AMEN AMEN AMEN on behalf of all suffering general nepalese people
Enough of interviewing this right-wing [icd] Moriarty. He should really be asked to take gyanendra with him as Nepal’s most exportable and dispensable commodity to the US. Then everyone will be happy. They like the king, so keep him.
one must not be in doubt to select peace in between peace and democracy, coz it is not sure that peace can be previaled in democracy but if there is peace whatever system comes it can appriciate by people.
Who knows KG buying His Excellency’s ranch in Texas when he flees to USA! He might be selling at a premium price.
I fully support all of the views of moriarty, America is not just a superpower but a good freind of Nepal. If people thinks that America is unnecessary supporting king ,then that is totally wrong, America still thinks that the king is a choice of Nepali people and a historical organization. So they cannot mis-adresses in the beliefs of people. But they can blame the maoists because they can directly observe the butchery of the maoists. When we people will be able to convience America that we no more need both king and maoists ,then surely America will change it’s views.
ammet
wagle jee, lets enterview usembassader and invite to visit this web…i am sure ameet will get a foolbrite scholorship…lol
i fully disagree with the view of Ajay
Peace cannot bring satisfaction alone if there is no democracy, for example in saudi arabia ,women should to wear burka. No women can complain against this , there is peace in country due to fear of harsh islamic laws. But there is no democracy
madhumakkhi thanks
how did u know that , i am writing all these to get foolbrite scholarship lol.
madhumakkhi will get scholarship in Iran
EDITORIAL
Deepening crisis in Nepal
The political situation in the Himalayan kingdom of Nepal grows increasingly chaotic. Local municipal elections recently called by King Gyanendra, who assumed direct rule after sacking the prime minister and his Cabinet a year ago, had a voter turnout of just 22 percent, abnormally low for that country. No candidates ran for more than half of the some 4,000 posts up for election.
The seven main political parties in that country boycotted the polls in opposition to an election being held under the direct rule of the king, and the Maoist faction of the Nepal Communist Party, which has been waging an armed insurgency against the government, carried out terrorist attacks against candidates in an attempt to derail participation. Clashes with the armed forces reportedly resulted in deaths. Many people didn’t vote because of their disappointment with the king. Thus the Nepalese government’s claim that the elections were successful was far from the truth.
Democratization in Nepal had advanced during the reign of King Birendra, who, in response to a movement for democracy, permitted a multiparty system in 1990. The Nepal Communist Party-United Marxists and Leninists headed a government formed in 1994. In 2001, however, the situation changed dramatically when King Birendra and other members of the royal family were assassinated by Crown Prince Dipendra. King Gyanendra then ascended to the throne, but suspicions that he was linked somehow to the assassinations have not dissipated. The people’s distrust persists.
King Gyanendra described the recent local elections as the first stage in a process of democratization and has promised to hold a general election by the spring of next year. As a result of the virtual failure of the local elections, though, the political situation is bound to become even more tense, because the seven main parties and the Maoists seem most likely to step up their movements against the king.
In February of last year King Gyanendra declared a state of emergency in what was virtually a coup d’etat aimed at seizing power. Leading politicians opposed to the king were arrested en masse, and freedom of speech was repressed. The king’s objective, it seems, was to intervene in politics. The Nepalese Constitution stipulates that the king is the symbol of the state and the unity of the people. He does have the power to declare a state of emergency and assume supreme command, but only on the advice and agreement of the Cabinet. Political parties boycotted the local polls because they saw the king’s unilateral implementation of elections as a violation of the constitution.
In an effort to resist the absolute power by the king, the mainstream political parties last November reversed policy and agreed with the Maoist faction to, among other things, implement an election for a constituent assembly. Although a gap in thinking exists between the main political parties, which recognize the constitutional monarchy, and the Maoists, who want to overthrow it, both sides agreed that the current king should be overthrown. The virtual failure of the recent local elections no doubt has encouraged both sides. Depending on developments from hereon, the possibility of the situation leading to the collapse of the monarchical system cannot be discarded.
Even as opposition to the king increases, widespread distrust of the main political parties is mounting due to rampant corruption within their ranks and internal conflicts. Meanwhile, the Maoists’ armed insurgency has terrorized the people. Nepal faces a three-cornered deadlock.
Nepal is one of the poorest countries in the world. Because of the long-running political instability and state of civil war, its tourist industry — an important source of foreign currency — has suffered a heavy blow. The number of Japanese tourists has declined to about half of previous levels.
India, which has considerable influence over Nepal, is reported to be increasingly critical of King Gyanendra. However, the king has been dodging censure and, instead, leaning toward China in his search for weapons assistance. This has provoked concerns in other countries, including Japan, which is the largest provider of assistance to Nepal.
The Nepalese people are reportedly showing growing signs of fatigue with the continuing instability. The international community is watching the situation in Nepal in the hope that King Gyanendra will abandon his hardline absolute rule and, through dialogue with the political parties, restore genuine multiparty democracy to his country.
The Japan Times: Feb. 27, 2006
ameet le mero bhajan gayeko ho? timro mookh ma doodh ra bhat…he he
I think the American ambassador is wrong here to isolate Maoists. Because, unless and untill Maoists abandon weapons, resolution of the problem is not possible.And RNA cannot finish them. Then only way is to sit for talks with them. Otherwise, the problem of Maoists prolongs to another decade of violence in which the economy of the country cannot sustain. People also can not sustain more the insurgency. That is why his thesis of isolating Maoists from the mainstream is totally flawed. The Maoists will remain in the forefront no matter how the RNA works to eliminate them. Thus to avoid violence and more deaths, it is wise to talks with them.
There so many reasons why Americans want to prolong the civil war:
1. US can supply the weapons to Nepal.
2. If there is a big crisis in Nepal, they can enter into Tibet and destabalize China.
3. US can be strategic partner with India on Nepal’s water resources.
4. US can remain always a threat to China from Nepal.
The only point he said was right is the hand over of power by the KG to a civilian government. But that is not happening because King has his own ego and stubbornness by which he wants to kill at least 15 to 20 thousand paople in the near future or he leaves the country. There is no alternative as such.
In the above scenario, there is no alternative to peaceful agitation to compell the King to handover power. But still I warn the all the parties agitating against the King should not compromise this time, if you guys compromise, again Shah-Rana will continue for decades.
When Moriarty said 12 poin agreemtn is positive you thought he was with you and with all smiles then there was no collapse. now when he talks the truth then you think Nepal is in collapse? double standard!
Nepal had collapsed that day when we had to accpet Bhutani refugees and this Maoists insurgency. Ask your brother in the neighbourhood, why the bhutanese had to land in Nepal and the Maoists destroying a little infrastructure that the nation had.
Morarty does not want the Maoits to be left alone. but Pressurize them from all sides even India. So that they will lay down their arms.
Prachanda already told that he wants to use the political parties to acheive his goals that is a communist government in singhburbar. isn’t that enough to understand thier real intentions. You have gobar or what?
All the gobar remains in the King’s skull. All the gobars also are inside the brains of Sharad C Shah, Sathcit Shamsher and Bharat K Singh.It is the 21st Century not 2017 saal. Unless and untill, all Ranas and Shahs are not eliminated in Nepal there would be no permanent peace in the country. Thats why I think Maoists have already understood these things and they are well ahead of any other parties in nepal.
It seems Moriarity’s denunciations of the Maoists have hurt the royalists more than anyone else. Now everybody is beginning to think that Moriarity is interering on Mr. Shah’s behalf.
Good interview,
Can be viewed as WARNING for all countrymen within and outside NEPAL.
I am baffled with Yuddhabirams sarcastic comments, dude, when our OWN HOME is made of Glass, NEVER ttry to hit stones on others home.
The issues raised are serious ones, but as Nepali’s are used to daily incidents so dont have enough time for READING BETWEEN THE LINES…
The day to day increase of voilence clearly indicates NEPAL is heading towards collapse.
KING taking sleeping pills
Parties NO DEFINATE PLANS to SOLVE PROBLEM
MAOSITS… aah… the morons , what can we expect from them apart from bloodshed
So, we all get the clear pciture.
NOW, before raising any suspision against this guy and bragiing like child saying we can solve our problem.. take a QUCIK look into country’s state TODAY & 10 years ago.
We will be surprised to find NEPAL WORKING WITH TIME MACHINE – going back in time.
Nepalnews Nepali Times Poll
Poll Question
Do you agree with US Ambassador James Moriarty’s recent comments about the Maoists?
Result
50% Yes
46.4% No
3.6% Don’t know
Total votes : 4382
Hey dhannya prabhu shree shree shree 10 mahamahim rajdoot jyu,
taha ko naya hal khabar ke chha. yo boka parties haru lai majja sanga breakfast khuwayera ra pani chhamkayera bhaye pani raja sanga manaunu paryo. Ani chaite dashai ma kali ko mandir ma chilayeko ghanti lai chhyakka pari raja ko scape goat banaunu paryo.
nepalisongs.info to me the nepal 10 years back was much better place to live in.. arrrggghhhh
10 years ago there was HOPE in Nepal with the advent of democracy. Today all hope is lost…
As for Moriarty, l who cares if the US has strategic interests? They should! Whether Nepali people like it or not, you are a country of 26 million or so in between countries with populations of a billion plus. if Nepal falls, yes, the whole region will destabilize,with dire consequences for all.
And who cares what you think the us’s real intenstions are? Moriarty is RIGHT. The Maoists have not said ANYTHING that leads me to believe they will evr give up their ultimate goal, which is a people’s republic or totalitarian state..read their own words!! he is not saying something that the maoists have not clearly said themselves, if we bothered to listen as much as the Ambassador has…
It will only be when the government falls, allowing the Maoists to take over, when the American Embassy closes and you have lost the support of the United States, the millions in development aid, the training of the RNA (which, until a few yeras ago, was an army less for propping up the king than for trying to fight for the peoplke against a maoist take over)…even the trai ning the us provides in the event of a huge natural disaster in Nepal, which is immiment. If the maoists take over, the United States will be unable to assist. Think of all the Nepali students who will be unable to realize their vision of studying in the USA if the Americans are not here. And the Maoists do not want the Americans, or the British, or any other of the western European bourgeouise democrats” around…they will be OUT when the maoists take power.
one day all of you who are spending so much of your energies belittling the ambassado’r’s comments, because of this irrational nepali fear of the fact that it is a GLOBAL WORLD TODAY and refusal to take part in it (which has kept you even more isolated and set the time machine even further back in time to a time of dark ages of nepal)… all of you will be eating your words with great regret. it is still not too late, but the time is quickly passing that anything can be done to stop this downward spiral.
I think the Ambassador is correct to ask all the prying questions to the Maoists. This should have been the job of the leaders who went for the 12 point agreement. However, they would have probably accepted shit at that point in time – anything to save face. The Mabassador did not mince his words, but somehow what I understood from the interview (between the lines) is that he is sending a message to the King to say – you better not be thinking of aligning with Maoists without the parties in tow. That would be truly dangerous.
Vijay Kumar as a senior journalist was poor in this interview. I saw him on TV and he seemed ill prepared. More preparation next time Mr. Pandey.
He knows that present day democratic leaders do not have the guts n brain to question the Maoists.
In 2046 Nepali congress rode on the leftists for the restoration of democracy and now even the left seem to be a weakened force so all wish to ride on the Maoits to acheive thier goal.
These political parties do not have anything to convice the people. Moraarty knows that and instead helping them unite, but these people are intoxicated with indian sermons in such a way that they are unable to find out what is good and bad for them. better support US than India.
Those leaders and journalists who are rejecting to Moriarty offer for unity among legitimate forces are all speaking on behalf of the indian government that never in the history wanted nepalse to unite.
you are so right. the political parties have a very short sighted vision. They got in bed with the maoists for the short term to save their own ass bit of they bothered to have any long range vision, they would realize the maoists will come back to them one day and say, hey, we helped you. Now it is time YOU HELP US. now THAT is a scary (but very conceivable) thought.
We could have supported the Maoists as the 40 point demands raised by the Maoists were agreeable by all but as they removed the first four demands concerning relations with India, they seem to be a force manipulated by India to destablise Nepal further.
Maoist leaders are the traitors, here i have to say nothing to thier cadres who mostly are uneducated thus manipulated by the educated brahmins/chetteris for fulfilling their goals:
You can read the fourty point demands put forwarded by the maoists on 4 February, 1996
Now in 2006 the Maoist leaders do not talk of the first four demands concerning india related to
1. the 1950 Nepal-India Treaty
2. Mahakali Treaty
3. The open border between Nepal and India should be regulated, controlled and systematised
guys this is the conclusin. conclude what the maoits are right now and see why india is supporing them.
People, the Maoists are not an Indian attempt to destabilize Nepal. Wake up! The Indians have enough problems on their hands to want to take up another burden.
From Naxalites to ULFA to Nagaland Separatists to Kashimri Freedom Fighters to Tamil extremism, they’ve got it all.
Blaming everything on India is dumb. Just because Maoists occassionally might slip across the border doesn’t mean the Indian government is welcoming them.
I suppose the 1000 chickens that died this week were also poisoned by Indian agents?
where is india?????? o u mean hindustan, ooooooooo ya “hindustan is very great country” hindustan if wants can finis nepal in just a day ,yaar it has got a MISSILEEEEEE ,it’s not like before that we fight with naked sword.
Hindustan never opresses Nepal, If nepal oposses it’s activities.
Maoist is burden for hindustan also…………………..
While Vijay maybe an astute interviewer to many Nepalese, I must say the interviews was the worst that I have seen. The interview was not for the viewing public but for Vijay himself.
Given the history of India giving trouble to neighbouring countries, the Maoisits are also an insursengency in disguise. Take an example, on the recommendations of a pseudo intellectual Ambassador called J N Dixit, India sent IPKF to SriLanka to thrash the LTTE but it failed. Before that India created this problem by giving training to LTTE in its terrotiry. It is sort of AFai Dhami and Afai Boksi. And finally Rajiv Gandhi was killed by the same LTTE human bomb in Madras in 1991.
So it does not mean that they have their own insurgencies in different parts, they do not have political interest in Nepal. We cannot compare chickens with the life of human being like comparing apples with oranges.Prachanda and Baburam could not roam arround in the Indian capital meeting Girija to journalists from kantipur to BBC in broadday light.
The irony is that Indian govt. was first to declare the Maoists as terrorists.
manan u r great ,how did u know that the 1000 chickens that died last week was killed by indian agents……………….. ur mind is a computer………………..i think u r pakistani agent
lol
Dear Ameet and Manan !
why don’t you just clarify my points. Tell me why Maoists removed those points from their demands. seems so simple but still difficult unless you belong to the high clan maoists leaders romaing around in Delhi freely with indian security personnel.
BYE
Of course, if Moriarity had been more positive about the 12 point agreement, I’d have commended him. That’s because I care about the issue, not the person. If Moriarity shows that he’s commited to democracy, he should be praised.
On the other hand, if he just wants to prop up the regime, he should be criticized. That’s fair enough.
As for the Maoists, which top-level Maoist leader has been roaming around freely with Indian Security Personnel? Give me evidence, not just wishes.
What??
No Indian manipulation in Nepa vis-a-vis the maoists?–crap!!..a truck load of b… s…!!!(anyone who thinks so would be naive at best)
Mananji aapko evidence na chahiye….tanik patrakaron se bat kijiye na bhai! …kyun hamen ponche te hain ji??
now u come to evidence……cool
I missed one question:
how is the personal relationship towards the palace as mentioned in the Kathmandu Post?
Moriarty speaks of only the Maoist, not about the RNA and its head.
People in the hills might be afraid of the Maobadis, but they too all think that it was Gyanendra and Paras behind the 1st June 2001 killings. It means the king is interessted to have this war going on and to be in power to hide the truth.
The US have a record on choosing the wrong side and interfering worldwide in a most naive way. The interview reflects this fact.
I ask you guys to read the story of 12 point understanding published in today’s Kantipur by Subas Devkota and tell me whether RAW or CBI did not know about it. The title of the article is “Barha Bunde ko Itibritanta”. Everybody including Devendra Raj Pandey, Shekhar,Sujata, Sitaula, Bam Dev,etc were meeting these two terrorists in one hour drive from New Delhi.
Can Indian Govt. say that they didn’t know about it ? Actually they were facilitating this meetings may be providing covert security.