Amidst high expectations the Summit Talks is going on in Baluwatar this very moment. Here are the excerpts of an interview with Chairman of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), Prachanda, taken on the eve of the much-hyped October 8 Summit Talks between his party and the ruling seven-party alliance as posted in Ekantipur:
Q. Will the CPN-M be participating in the October 8 talks?
Prachanda: There is no certainty as to the question of participation in the
talks. Interactions to this end are going on with the parties, but nothing is confirmed yet.
Q. So what is the reality then?
Prachanda: We haven’t been able to agree on the way forward. What we feel is that the 12-point understanding against the feudal autocracy was aimed against the excesses of the then Royal Army and the present Nepal army. The 8-point understanding was the result of an attempt to move forward with the 12-point understanding. But since then the seven-party government has deviated from the spirit of these historical understandings.
Q. Could you cite some examples of the deviation?
Prachanda: The way in which the letter to the UN was written, with the intention of separating the Maoist army from its arms, contrary to the initial agreement of managing both armies and their arms in the same manner and calling the UN for monitoring, is the most potent example of this deviation. This is a very dangerous thing. This was an attack on the spirit of the April movement. The political outlet the eight- and 12-point understandings had promised was effectively blocked for us. Our greatest objection is to this very issue.
Q. And yet, after all the dispute, you are still in the talks. Sometimes your relationship with Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala looks cold and sometimes warm. You look extremely optimistic as soon as you step into Baluwatar. And a couple of weeks later you again look hopeless. What kind of spell has the PM cast over you? Or is it the other way round?
Prachanda: This no spell. This time around too we have made it clear that we will neither head back to the jungle, nor will we leave the negotiating table. A power centre seems to be in a hurry to detach us from the dialogue process. But we are not willing to be detached. Issues like restructuring of the state, constituent assembly, democratic republic– issues which were raised through the sacrifice of thousands of lives during the people’s war—have today become national slogans. Because, these issues have fallen within our rights, within our responsibilities.
Q. What kind of environment marks the informal talks between you and the PM? It seems there is lot of love and affection between you two?
Prachanda: Frankly, the two of us have always been at odds ever since our first meeting four and a half years ago. And yet, the country’s overall situation compels such interactions between us.
Q. Hasn’t the goodwill between two of you increased in these four years?
Prachanda: There have been occasions where this did happen. During the forging of the 12-point understanding, this goodwill had gone up tremendously. Similarly, the rigors that went into the formation of the eight-point understanding had shown the courage Girija Babu had displayed. Because our agreement on dissolving the parliament and forming a new (interim) government definitely enhanced our mutual respect for each other. But later, the manner in which the letter to the UN was written arose our suspicion. The kind of political stability that was needed in him was missing. After that, the way he spoke in public let down the masses. We were also disappointed by his comments. Despite all those agreements, he couldn’t stand by his words.
Q. But there is still some hope, isn’t there?
Prachanda: Let’s not say there is no hope. The talks are going on because there is still some hope left. But then, the kind of a sea of good feelings you are hinting at is not there. At some points, the situation demands it; at others, it is genuine goodwill.
Q. But there’s no bitterness?
Prachanda: There isn’t. I think he (Koirala) has the role of a very important character. Despite the apparent barriers, he is very important for a political outlet in Nepal. And I believe that at this point, he stands at a crossroads—one that will determine whether he will be remembered as a great hero or a villain. The way I see it, at this point, he teeters on the brink. Looking at his recent activities and comments, the people are worried that he might be becoming a villain instead of a hero. He stands on the edge—he can slip and fall any time.
Q. Will you put forward this very thing during the October 8 talks?
Prachanda: Not only on October 8, let me frankly tell you that I am going to meet him (Koirala) in a very short while. I will tell him the same thing in this meeting also.
People may think that we (Prachanda and Koirala) have reached some secret agreements during our meetings. Last time also, I had flatly told him “Girijababu, our role has come to a very critical point. You are in such an important place. If you still side with the repressive elements of the royal army, it will be a really bad thing in history. If you move forward as directed by the 12-point and eight-point understandings, you will become the main character in history. I will also have a role, but that will be only a supporting role.” I have clearly told him that he will become the main character. I have told him to stick to the role of that historic character. I meet him again and again to remind him of this.
Q. These days the SPA leaders say that you (Maoists) are interested more in another mass movement than in the ongoing peace process. What do you say?
Prachanda: We want a peaceful exit to the crisis. We have come up to here with the same intent. After forming the government, the seven parties are getting closer to the structures of the old regime. This makes us worry that a peaceful solution to the crisis may not be possible. Therefore we have said that the preparation for another popular movement should not be abandoned because the SPA government may eventually decide to take the side of the feudal elements.
Q. What is the possibility for such a movement?
Prachanda: It’s quite possible. We haven’t said that we will break the ceasefire and walk out of the talks. It’s our assertion that if the SPA government goes against the spirit of the April movement that created a new history then the same people who took part in the April movement will stand up for the new uprising.
Q. Now it seems both you and the SPA need each other. You need the SPA’s support to balance the international situation. And they need your support and participation to keep the national politics in balance. But instead of consolidating your ties, both of you seem to be blaming each other?
Prachanda: We had said in the very beginning that whoever will try to go against the earlier agreements between us (SPA, Maoists) will be betraying the Nepali people. We have told even Girijababu (PM Koirala) that the seven parties are now quarrelling over the same agreements. But they raise the issue of donations and all.
Q. What if the issue of monarchy is decided through a constituent assembly?
Prachanda: We don’t have any objection to this idea if there is a consensus on other issues. Because the 12-point and eight-point understanding were reached to make the constituent assembly possible. But we are talking about holding a referendum (to decide the fate of monarchy) because we think this is more democratic. The elected representatives of the constituent assembly will draft the new constitution. And it will be more democratic if all the people are given a direct chance to decide the issue of monarchy.
Q. But it is the UML’s proposal, isn’t it?
Prachanda: Certainly, this proposal was put forward by the UML. But during the course of discussion, we thought that it is more democratic and therefore we agreed on this proposal. But we haven’t made the referendum issue a precondition.
But the prime minister is saying many elements will get a chance to become active in a referendum. This risk will be there in the constituent assembly elections as well. Both processes (constituent assembly and referendum) face this risk.
Q. It seems both the SPA and the Maoist leaders have not been able to understand the people’s desperation. Don’t you feel you may de-link yourselves from the people’s feeling?
Prachanda: Definitely. But the situation is not the same for the two sides. Because they (SPA leaders) are now in the government and have become MPs and ministers. But we have a compulsion of moving forward in a different way. During the Dashain holidays, I visited Sindhupalchowk, Tatopani, Naubise, Daman of Makwanpur and Pokhara. I also experienced the cable car journey and visited Mankamana as well this time. In my experience, the people are desperate and are agitated within.
Q. Don’t the obstacles seen in the peace-talks increase the people’s desperation?
Prachanda: Kishor ji, I don’t think this (situation) will last long. We are also intensely preparing for the talks. In case the talks fail, we feel that we will have to take certain steps to address the people’s desperation. You will know about these steps after a week. Let’s keep it a secret for now!
Q. How optimistic are you about the October 8 Summit Talks?
Prachanda: I am not very optimistic.
Q. Is there any possibility that the talks will not go ahead?
Prachanda: I do see that possibility. But the possibility that the talks will be held is also there. Shortly, I am going to put my things to Girijababu in black and white.
Q. There is also this rumour that the talks will be deferred for a week?
Prachanda: That’s not true. We want to hold the talks on October 8. But we don’t want the gathering of the leaders on October 8 to look like a Gaijatra. The Nepali people desperately want a positive conclusion; they are hoping for the country to take a clear direction. If that is not fulfilled, there is no point in holding the talks. We don’t think it’s necessary to sit for talks just to conclude that no conclusion could be drawn.
Q. It’s not that the talks will have to continue if the October 8 talks do not take place, or is it?
Prachanda: It’s not like that. We don’t say to postpone the talks to leave the talks process or to break it. What we have said is let’s take some more time to prepare for the talks if the homework done so far is not enough. Otherwise, the leaders gather and the gathering gets much publicity but nothing comes out at the end– this will only send out a negative message. In reality, our emphasis is on reaching a consensus. If that does not happen, we will take a big decision for the people within a few days. The people are in a huge uncertainty for the past four months; we won’t let this situation to continue. We are ready to make another sacrifice from our side for the sake of the country. We won’t let a situation come where the Nepali people could blame us.
Q. Could that sacrifice be remaining silent on the issue of monarchy?
Prachanda: No, not that. We may walk out by handing over everything to the seven parties. Let us just go to the people. We can move ahead with this much right. Then the seven parties can do whatever they want; we may say that constituent assembly is enough for us.
Q. Mr Chairman, it seems you are very disappointed. These expressions of yours indicate that you feel weary and tired?
Prachanda: The people are desperate for peace; I am concerned that if that desperation is not addressed in time, there will be another danger. What you see as disappointment in my expressions is definitely not disappointment. Yes, it may be the reflection of my concern. It could be a reflection of my agitated mind. The people should not be left un-addressed for a long time. Last year also, we had declared a three-month-long unilateral truce. Now, the seven parties are preoccupied with their own things even as the royalists are looking for a role again. The people feel suffocated. What we say is we should even be ready to make some sacrifices for a way-out. It’s not disappointment.
Q. That way-out could be reached on October 8 itself?
Prachanda: May be, may be not.
(Interview by Kishor Nepal)
United We Blog 
Comments
66 responses to “INTERVIEW WITH PRACHANDA”
Wagle ji,
Please update to us about the Maoist/Government summit outcomes as it progresses. I found Prachanda’s view very clear and straight forward when I go through the excerpt of his interview taken by Kishor ji in the eve of Summit Talk.
–“What we say is we should even be ready to make some sacrifices for a way-out. It’s not disappointment.”
–“We are ready to make another sacrifice from our side for the sake of the country.”
how much more? What is it about, power? There is always “smell of blood” in interview with Maoist Chairman.
in this interview Prachanda’s view is very clear and straight forward but i was bit disappointed that they didn’t discuss anything about their plan to restructure and bring the country forward. do they have any?? it’s all about how the Maoist will go on parliament and bla bla.
”We are ready to make another sacrifice from our side for the sake of the country.”
Sacrifice of what?? same tired, vulnerable and innocent nepali citizens. it’s still not enough taking thousands of innocent nepali’s life. shame shame
Prachanda sounds more and more vague as the days go by. Him consistently bringing up these “feudal elements” when the King has already become a gonner is getting tiresome. The only remnants of this feudal mind set is unfortunately coming from authoritative and undemocratic leaders like him. He has demonstrated his feudal nature when he has not tolerated any form of dissent within his rank and file, except of course he has had no effect on the lower ranks who wield guns, thereby allowing him to remain a feudal lord.
He is trying his level best to sound coy by saying he is a “supporting character” and Girija the “main character”, trying to patronise the old PM into succumbing to his very feudal way of chicanary, hoping the PM will slip up and make way for Prachanda himself to be lord and master after Girija. The political solutions he speaks of is in the lines of “either my way or the highway” with no regard for the political inputs of anyone else but himself. His continued cry over the UN letter sent by the government shows his petty mindedness and dog headedness, when at the same time his party is breaking the spirit of the 12 point, 8 point, 5 points and any other point agreemments left, right, centre, up and down. What is this chap talking about? Prachanda has to understand that the more he continues on like this without even upholding the ceasefire agreements while expecting the government to even adhere to minuscule details, and the more he threatens, the people will lose their patience which is there for now so that peace prevails. Simple for Prachanda to make his threats, but let the comrade know that if he does not try hard enough and make compromises and expects to go on with his power grabbing agenda, the next time around the people will be his nemesis.
“Q:Is there any possibility that the talks will not go ahead?
Prachanda: I do see that possibility. But the possibility that the talks will be held is also there. ”
If you do not all agree that Prachanda is vague from just the example cited above, then I don’t know what you would call him?
He knows how to give an interview filled with vagueries so that the interviewer is in fact left with even more questions in the mind at the end then when he started.
If the man knows before hand that the talk is not going to be fruitful then you can guess the intension of the man.
prachanda is trying to blackmail whole country. this man is terrorist, satanic. he must be trialed in international court and detained in labor detention camp
Dear All,
1)Fate of Monarch:
What is the wrong with doing referundum to decide the fate of monarch? Isn’t it the most democratic process?Why seven parties particularly Congress(Girija) and (Deuba) who claim themselves democratic Masihhah are suspicious about this agenda? Isn’t democracy they believe on by the people? Going to the people is not black amiling?
Management of Arms:
After 2007 BS the king had seized power( coup de ta)severl time with the help of Royal Army(now name changed to Nepali Army). There is chances of having coup at any time as the structure of the NA remained same . Therefore what is wrong of reorganizing Nepal army with merging with Maoist Army? If there is any doubt why not we go for referrundum for this issue too?
without destroying the country to the bone even moaists can see that victory may be defeat for now.
Nepal needs time to make the changes everybody wants and needs. We all believe the forces of destruction, give us a break.
Parliamentary solutions only.
Bone in the neck to SPA now. Majority of the poor people don’t get bother whoever comes to the power? Their need is not democracy but food to eat and live in peace. Prachanda seems to be heading toward right target of his goal.
Dear Sandesh,
Nothing wrong with referendum. Only contention I can see is whether a simple majorioty will suffice or a 2/3 majority required as there will be all sorts of errors if we call it close. For example if you go with a simple majority, even if 49.99% vote for the monarchy, the republicans will have won. Now, there will definitely be people who could not vote either way so this will be unreflected, plus would this nation move along with half the population discontented. So a 2/3 majority on such a major issue is a must.
As for merging NA and maoists, let’s go for the referendum, I’m sure most people will disagree as there are many people who are not maoists who also want the job.
Since you’re on referendums, where do you draw the line –
How about a referendum on whether maoists should lay down their arms instantly or not?
Maybe there are many people from the Terai who would want a referendum on whether it is’nt better for Nepal if we joined India as a state – this is because Nepal was united by King Prithvi and made Nepal, before him we had many states just like India, so if a referendum decides for a republic since the argument is that the Kings were no good, then the whole idea of King Prithvi who made Nepal in the first place is a non existent, therefore since the likes of Prachanda calls for the undoing of our history as Nepal, why not start from the beginning and ask the people if they want to remain Nepal a nation founded by a King or join another nation, or divide into the original states? Sounds okay to you Sandesh, as you are sounding very democratic with your referendums, or does your referendums begin and end with only maoists interests and power grabbing in mind?
The only people likely to try a coup are the maoists. I doubt the NA will side with the King after last years fiasco.So, comrade Sandesh, I’m afraid when you mention coup everyone only looks one way – to your boss man Prachanda. Just read his interview and read between the lines. I don’t hear the King or the NA talking with such blood thristy terms as Pushba baje does. Does anybody?
Ethnic war is the most danger issue for Nepal at the moment and which is neither even good to maoist aswell in the long run…So Prachanda should also sacrifice something of his stands…it is very clear that bowing head of SPA toward maoist is too much now…the unity of Nepal is phasing out day by day and vulture started to look at us…
I am for one referendum immediately – something that does not require any political debate – (all surveys have shown that at least 80% or more Nepalis would vote A. below). So while Prachanda calls for political solution first, why does’nt he agree to the ultimate demand of the people directly? When the people asked the King to give up his direct rule he did and frankly without the much anticipated bloodshed expected, more people have died in several minutes in crowded football stadiums. Does Prachanda think he is mightier than a King? Or does he even dare to think he is mightier then the people he pretends to represent?
The referendum should ask all voters:
Should the maoists lay down their arms?
A. YES
B. NO.
From me it’s A AAAAAAAALLL the way comrades.
Referendum sounds nice
Are we talking about the referendum for the Maoists weapons or the fate of Monarchy?
What is happening at the Summit? Is anybody has clue? The meeting as reported in some news started at 9:00am and now is almost 6:45 pm.
To kp,
Thankyou for enlightening me on nepalese history as i am so not up to date. Ignore my sarcasm if you wish to.
Haowever I have difficulty understanding why you have implied that just because pritivi united nepal as a state the nepalese people ultemately belong to the monarchy. I do not undersatnd why we cant have nepal as a free state just because pritivi united nepal.
He!
What is wrong with script?
Wagle ji,
A strikethrough is coming through out the text ,what is wrong? Could you please correct this ?
SOS! SOS! SOS!
WHY STROKE IN LAST FEW COMMENTS?
Has any body got strikethrough lines starting from the ‘sandesh’s comment down like me?
Dear kp(#12),
u got a point.U right.We should have the right for referendum on any kind of issues in a democratic state.As we were a feudal state before Historic April Movement,we didnt had any right for referendums of which we have now.
So,ya kp, y not..Referemdum is about respecting peoples’ views.U r damn right.
But do we go to people & ask them if they want their home? Like u said…>>
(contd.)..
Nepal as a nation is a home to the Nepalese.And u r talking about holding a referendum about whether we should continue Nepal as a nation or be a state of India ..??
Wot is this..Isnt it ridiculous..Isnt it a suicide.. Does anybody goes for a referendum citing whether he should live or not?Huh..Answer me u crook !
To say that mr.kp, whether u r a moron or u must be Raw’s agent.
Who r u?
Or Maybe a royolist and trying to confuse people by citing that Monarchy means the symbol of national unity.So if monarchy goes then wots the use of nation..Right kp..So also hold a referendum for whether be a Free Nation or part of India.Isnt it ?
Wow ! Wot a way of defending monarchy.Indeed.I mean it.
Or Maybe a royalist and trying to confuse people by citing that Monarchy means the symbol of national unity.So if monarchy goes then wots the use of nation..Right kp..So also hold a referendum for whether be a Free Nation or part of India.Isnt it ?
Wow ! Wot a way of defending monarchy.Indeed.I mean it.
wat is happenin
dfgdgbcvbcv
test
sfsdfsd
testtest
i think blogger on post# 16 and post# 17 forgot to end the bold, strike, strong end-html tags to their post.
UWB team you should program to auto end tag for those html scripts.
and also italic end tag
Dear Bloggers,
I have been here some time and forgive me, as I just an ignorant foreigner (though I try to understand).
Gripping stuff these days. The problem with the peace talks is that while there is perhaps a genuine effort by Comdrade not-so-awsome to bring about peace, he is guilty of being the very feudal overlord he claims to fight.
Most Communists simply want the things Capitalists have. Prachanda is no different…
Though while you all – very entertainingly – wax lyrical about Comrade Puddled. Battarai (excuse the spelling!) is another story.
We’ll get the people, go back to the “urban” jungle, they bravely pronounce. Though ask yourselves this question. If you had the confidence of the Comrade not-so-awsome-as-the-great-not-so-awsome (Battarai) the question of does he seriously think that any urban warfare would turn out in their favour, even with their new AK-47s?
The answer? No.
So a simple bluff.
But can the PM sort it out? Maybe.
My take, my two piasa, if you like, is simple. This conflict evidently involves three players or protagonists. Namely, the King and RNA (yes, cheeky foreigner I still call them that!); the “government” and Comrade Daft and his cohorts.
Now, if one of you can point out a war where two parties in a three party scenario negotiated a peace (i.e. without one power base present), then I would be very interested to know.
Personally, the solution is obvious. Get an RNA General to represent the royals and then perhaps, just perhaps, there could be something approaching a peace agreement.
The referendum on the Maoist arms is a good idea, maybe then they will understand, a white flag, not a red one stained with their own blood is a better option.
Usually, to change the constitution of a country, two votes with both a 2/3 majority are needed, plus there should be an election between them. The maoists know that, and they also know that they can scare voters to vote their way once, but as time goes by, and peace grows in Nepal, they will be forgotten. This *referendum* is a sham, since it will not present a valid alternative to the monarchy.
The question really on the ballot will be:
A. Do you want a country with the king as a de jure head of state, but with an elected prime minister as a de facto head of state?
B. Would you want Prachandra as both de jure and de facto despot of the nation?
i was thinking lately, what happens when king is out of his power? he might go to jungle, as the maoist went 10-12 yrs ago. although maoist didn’t hav enough resources at the time but now they are unseperateble force in Nepali politeces but the king is very strong economically and also has big numbers of hands. so to be honest, i m very pessimistic about the future of the country. everyone is talking about summit, summit. do u think the king is staying quietly in his mansion who mastermind that unimagined bloodshed inside the Palace? i doubt it. i won’t be surprise if another advance form of maoist emerge in the nepali political arena.
The king, the king. It seems like a part of the blogosphere and political elite see royalis coups and nefarious plans everywhere. They never present evidence. We do not have to far though for real plans of coups and violence: Prachandra and the maoists! Like real thugs they scream and threat uncotrolled violence everytime the negotiations don’t go their way.
It is a good thing to look for problems in the democratic process – but why not see the ones that are obvious instead of looking for ones that might not even be there?
As many people went to India and other countries, they found the feelings of general people that Nepalese are from the country like Afghanistan and Iraq. The outsiders are more curious about the threaten to press freedom and peoples voice occuring in Nepal, about AK-47 in the hands of 14 years old boys, about property restriction and nationalisation, property destruction and October revolution, about maoist ideology. Look how we have developed our reputation in international field even after this revoulution. SPAMC should be very serious about this humilation to Nepalese people in outside world…
Until now, my mind was like 50% on keeping ceremonial King. After this interview I am 100%. We need king for unity. Prachanda will take us nowhere
pundit: i’d thought you’re a bit different than the cronies at “newpalnow” like harke and pyarelal etc.
but i’m proved wrong. you’re typical pandit having no self-esteem, no confidence. you need a master to whip you. you don’t believe in yourself. you can’t be a leader. perhaps you also should be placed alongside the same psychos who daydream of killing the maosits.
First in order of appearance:
Sandesh:
“I have difficulty understanding why you have implied that just because pritivi united nepal as a state the nepalese people ultemately belong to the monarchy. I do not undersatnd why we cant have nepal as a free state just because pritivi united nepal.”
Do you always attempt to place words in others mouths? Just because Prithvi united Nepal does not mean the Nepalese people belong to the monarchy – it maybe something the maoists think that just because they have caused all the stir that the people belong to them but I don’t follow that line of thought.
So yes we can have Nepal as a free state but what is so wrong in asking the people if they wish to continue as a free state as in one nation, or free state(s) as in several nations, or free state as a part of another democratic nation? What has being part of Nepal provided to the mass population but more hardship and conflict?
Now to Truth:
Trying to get an argument inbetween your personal insults to myself, my reply to you is such:
If there was such a referendum don’t you think whatever the outsome, it is the people who are more important then geographical boundaries?
Although your comment – does anyone want a referendum on whether to live or die seems so bizzare, I can also say maybe you do have a point. However, human lives and physical boundaries do not follow the same course in life, as you will notice that for humans life and death is much more noticable and consuming than for geographic land masses. It is the humans I am more concerned with and not so much geographic boundaries. So again tell me as life and death means so much to all humans, do you perceive a better life for our citizens as a nation called Nepal (remember at no time in our modern history have our people got any respite from hunger, poverty and conflict) or would you rather have the people living in a place where they have better opportunities to get out of the misery and poverty? Also, remember such a referendum if people opt to split or join another nation means the people have spoken and for example if we end up as another state of India, the people will be more or less the same people in this boudary – just like Punjab has Punjabis, Kerela has Keralites, Bengal has Bengalis, Gujarat has Gujuratis, you get my point – Nepal will have Nepalis. The loss of a poor and bankrupt nation will end up in the birth of a new democratic state under a republic and thriving economic powerhouse. Putting all your misplaced ego aside I wonder if you can claim that we won’t be better off.
National identity – well like I said, no matter what, we are still a nation formed by a King there is no way even under a republic that we can deny this. Being Nepali and being a nation called Nepal are two different things. There are Nepalis in Darjeeling and Sikkim as well. Maybe it will be for the benefit of all Nepalis if we are united and this argument of keeping a nation called Nepal founded by a King should not be an issue if the majority want a republic. Economic prosperity and poverty alleviation and a better life for every Nepali in the future is the mantra – everything else is just politics and only serves political masters and their agendas.
Finally, you mention suicide – going for a referendum on this issue is asking for the will of the people, if the people decide in favour of not staying as Nepal why call it suicide? It is the peoples wish is’nt it? You are talking so defensively that if a referendum were to be held you sound like people will opt for my line of thought. So are you saying you don’t trust the popular mandate of the people?
One more thing Sandesh,
My line of thinking is not so different from your comrade boss Prachanda’s, even he is for a world united under communism and definitely his communist corridor including our Nepal extends to South India. So please stop talking about “Nepal as free state” when you are actually talking about “Nepal as a communist state”, and to go on to the region and the world. As for me I am talking about individual freedom for our people and economic prosperity, geographic boundaries are less and less important, especially for us – one of the poorest nations in the world.
Sometimes I feel royalist were right, all the exercises being done by India is to merge Nepal into India as Sikkim. Now some people start to coming to that point. In my view we are very near to that situation where our choice will be limited to reject the merging concept. This is the grand design of India to make weak to maoist to the king to the democratic forces so that frustration will be built up among the people.
Regarding kp, first of all you try to understand, Nepal is iteself can grow economy if democratic forces play good role in terms of their ethics and seriousness toward country and the people instead of misutilisation of power. If two giant countries have economic growth rate of about 8-10% then why not Nepal only 6% and which will enough if that goes steadly for atleast 10 years. But good economic bargain should be there instead of political bargains with India and China. There are lots of opportunities in Nepal to grab the growth rate but our visionless leaders are destroying it. Still we have time, if SPAM are serious about the country and the people then they should leave all their useless logic of their political stands and move toward economic growth. So merging to India will baseless concept and which is against the blood given by our forefathers to built the nation. Don’t even think about it…leaders and king are being failure doesnot mean we handover our country…lets find new good democratic leaders then…
fanta,
you have too many big IFs. You have given the reasons in your own argument already for the many reasons why we will be stuck on reverse gear, so no need for me to continue.
Fanta,
I truely have sympathy for idealists. You really believe that we can go on and in prosperity for most of our citizens when our incompetent bunch cannot even agree that everyone can have their own point of view, and cannot even decide how to lay down guns that kill people, and cannot even give the people a straight answer as to what has been agreed and what has’nt, and when realistically will there be any decisions made leave alone CA elections. And you are jumping a big gun and talking about 6% economic growth???? We are relying in a less than competent geriatric PM with a very dark past, and gun wielding blood thirsty communists, with power grabbing MP’s and you are talking of 6% economic growth? There are not enough roads for Kathmandu the capital of this god forsaken place and you are talking of great prosperity for a landlocked nation who jumps when the neigbours say jump?
Even idealists should show atleast little pragmatism.
Kp,
you are true, the weakness of political forces, which even not yet deciding where we are heading and still discussing about laying down arms which is barrier to development and blood thirsty, cannot take our nation to 6% growth. My personal opinion is that since 50 years we have not able to bring one concrete leader for political and economic development like many other countries got. We are failure in this case and even I am not seeing good future. Another point is if this political strategies continue then frustration definately develop among the people for better option. That last option might be merging Nepal into India.
test
test