|
King Gyanendra firm on his roadmap
Kathmandu: On two separate occasions last week, His majesty King Gyanendra has firmly reiterated his continuing commitment to the constitution as a result of which he has taken a consistent approach in his much controversialised actions of the past years.
Revealingly, at the Hotel Soaltee gathering of University academicians Friday evening, He chose to underline the importance of the judiciary in interpreting the constitution. This is a pointed reference to the tendency of the politicians to interpret the constitution on their own. It is this self-serving habit that has led the constitution to arrive at this stage. The opposing political parties continue their lackluster agitation opposing the constitutionality of the King's moves under Article 127 and 27.
At Sunday's gathering of Weekly newspapers over a cold drinks, the King followed up on his Friday's statement calling for talks with the political parties stating that discussion should center around how the political sector proposes to deal with burning national issues such as peace, corruption, good governance and fiscal discipline. Notably, the erring political parties have demonstrated their ability to unite in opposition for talks with the King on the restoration of the parliament.
On this too, the King, has been succinct that the restoration of the parliament is unconstitutional and the King's constitutional role can't defy the constitution, he said.
The King's offer for talks, therefore, contrary to purposely-circulated rumors is for the resolution of real national issues designed to lead the country to the only constitutional possibility of restoring parliament which is through the elections.
Of course, the agitating political parties have chosen to denounce the King on his uncompromising posture while at the same time re-circulating rumors that the King is about to budge on their participation in government in order to conduct the elections. In actual fact, the King has said nothing new and has rightly demonstrated his firm commitment to the restoration of the constitutional process so thoroughly violated by our politicians.
Of course, at the media meet, media persons were bound to voice the current malaise in media policies to which the government which the King heads has contributed its share. For media persons the highly unsavory destabilization of existing media practice such as the arbitrary closure of FM Radios, the stoppage of government advertisements has been difficult to digest on its own. To add fuel to fire, has been the government's silence on the proposed press law amendments over which an opportunistic partisan media has jumped to take the media towards an agitation on the streets opposing the King's move. The King has made it clear, here too, that these regulatory moves have yet to come to his table. Until then, perhaps, the media will be allowed to agitate.
King not to yield to parties pressure; parties remain adamant
Kathmandu: King Gyanendra has abundantly made it clear that he would proceed his way come what may.
The Nepali monarch has also indicated that he would abide by the stipulations of the constitution and would not exceed his limits even if the political parties push him to the wall.
The King in the process has expressed again his displeasure with the political parties and its leaders and has urged them all to come clean and clear in the eyes of the population. In saying so the King maintains that the political leaders were not what they should have been befitting to a true democratic system.
King Gyanendra opines that why it is so that only the monarch has to remain in the boundaries of the constitution? He says not only him but the political leaders too must respect and honor the constitution in letter and spirit. In saying so the King hints that the political leaders who allege the King to have exceeded the constitutional limits too have had many a times in the past crossed the constitutional limits and have had interpreted the constitution that suited to their political inclination most.
Its corollary would be that the King is well aware of the political animals bypassing the constitution while in power. By implication, the King indicates that it is this self-serving interpretation of the constitution that has had its Himalayan impact in the country, which facilitated the derailment of the constitution.
The King who made a speech last Friday at a University felicitation program maintained that he would not "restore" the parliament as demanded by the political parties for he thought it would be an act thoroughly "unconstitutional" and that he as the protector of the constitution would not dare to violate a rule that he is supposed to protect tooth and nail.
Here lies the King's straight and blunt message to the political parties who have "surprisingly" united for a cause, read the restoration of the now dissolved parliament, that the King would do anything except yielding to the political parties one point agenda of the house revival.
This means that a fierce political confrontation in between the monarch and the political parties is in the cards because both the sides have made it a point of prestige issue.
To recall, the seven party alliances against the King (tentatively) has clearly said that until and unless the King restored the parliament, no talks with the King were possible.
The King remains firm and undeterred. The King is not apparently going to budge an inch from his standpoints and appears to face the political muscle of the political sector.
Predictably, King's straight no to the restoration of the parliament must have come as a bolt from the blue for the political leaders who appeared confident that the King would under intense pressure from within and without would be forced to yield to their demands. But that was not forthcoming. Instead, the King said that yes he would provide them with a parliament but only after elections, which the political sector wants to avoid for a variety of clandestine political reasons. The fact is that the political sector would want power without going to see their voters, which is what they should do. The political sector apparently is averse to elections because they are afraid of penetrating into the forts of the rebels, which the latter easily captured in the absence of the people's real representatives.
The fact is also that the leaders do not want to risk their lives. Albeit, they would not mind their voters being harassed by the rebels back in the villages. What they would wish is to pressurize the King to facilitate their smooth entry into the power corridors at Singh Durbar. The King perhaps understands this psychology and sends the message to the other quarter that he would not be influenced by their flimsy interpretations.
This again means that a political tussle of the Himalayan order is in the making. However, how the political parties have taken King Gyanendra's straight no to the episode of house revival is still to come. NC President Koirala, however, has said that the King who has crossed the constitutional limits many a times after February 1 takeover, can do so. Koirala in saying so indicates that if the King restored the parliament would do great justice with their demands and that such an act initiated by the King would not be deemed "unconstitutional".
This means that if the King took steps that favored his or his colleagues' agenda would not be interpreted unconstitutional moves. This further means that any moves taken by the King that did not favor Koirala and his friends would be considered as illegal and hence unconstitutional.
This interpretation is very hard to digest.
King Gyanendra's Friday speech at the Soaltee Hotel, nevertheless, has an olive branch for the political parties. The King appears to have become, analysts say, comfortably flexible in his would-be dealings with the political parties. This "flexibility" bodes well for the nation which could facilitate dialogue in between the monarch and the political parties. King's flexibility is a welcome step in the direction of settling the issues that have been confronting the nation.
The King frankly admits that he was ready for talks with the political leaders provided they came up with clear perceptions on certain issues of national importance.
While the King, as much is evident from his statement made last Friday, is not averse to talks with the parties. However, the parties have their own reiteration wherein they say that they too were ready for talks if the talks centered positively on the restoration of the parliament.
Both the differing parties appear adamant in their standpoints. Both will not budge from their declared stances. The consequences of such a standoff is predictable. Some countries in the neighborhood, which wants to see a thoroughly weakened Nepal, would like to widen the rifts in between the monarch and the Nepali leaders in order to extract greater political benefits.
The fact is that Nepali leaders would submit themselves to foreign powers willingly but would summarily neglect the Nepali power that is a national power in the hands of a Nepali from head to toe.
How the United States of America and other democratic countries take this confrontation and how they pursue their quiet diplomacy to avert this looming crisis will have to be watched.
Analysts would wish the United States taking up the lead in bringing about a sort of compromise in between the two differing sides or else India will jump into the scene in one pretext or the other which will be nothing more than a disaster to the political health of this country.
Innocent Koirala's Dilli chalo program
Kathmandu: The Nepali Congress President, Girija Prasad Koirala, is bit different that his colleagues housed in various political parties.
He is different not because his styles are different but because whatever he does he would not reveal and what he would reveal he would not do.
This makes him distinctly different from his fellow colleagues. The fact is also that in front of Koirala's political stature, others appear dwarf, politically speaking.
In effect his bold personality with an unimaginable height, at least by Nepali standard, dominates other political leaders and thus even the adherents of diametrically opposing theories, the communists for example, prefer more often than not to honor him as their commander of the agitation as and when the "political season" demands so.
It is not surprising therefore that this agitation season the communists of various shades and colors and other namesake political groupings should make him the commander of the movement predictably aimed at pressurizing the King to yield to their dictates.
Not so many people know as to why Koirala is made leader of the agitation or for that matter the agitation time and again. The communists know it better. The communists are not fools for they know that any movement against the monarch in Kathmandu to yield positive results needed India's calculated blessings and to get those "ill intentioned" blessings, or give it any name, who else could be the best personality other than Koirala, a time tested and reliable friend of the Indian establishment who possesses the fame of the Tanakapur saga.
In effect, most unfortunately, Koirala knowingly or even unknowingly have had to yield to Indian dictates while in power and thus this time again exploiting the very continuing proximity of Koirala with the powers that be in Delhi that the six musketeers have chosen him as their commander.
Koirala must not feel himself honored for this reverence bestowed on him by his clever friends, more so by the communists, but would do well if he understands the ploy in his selection as the commander of the movement.
Analysts at the Telegraph never doubt Koirala's nationalist credentials because he was the first ever sitting prime minister who had bluntly alleged India for having sheltered the Maoists rebels. A great courage was needed and the courage was with Koirala who made the movers and shakers of Delhi politics nervous by his blunt allegation which was and perhaps still continues to be a hard fact as the recent events that have unfolded in Nepal have amply shown.
Now that Koirala is all set to make a pilgrimage to Delhi must have come as a Himalayan consolation for the smaller insignificant members of the seven party alliances who understand that unless India came to their rescue they will be left in the cold.
Koirala's love for Delhi durbar is so intense that he preferred to land in Delhi straight from Hong Kong after attending to a Chinese invitation instead of coming to Kathmandu.
Over the years Koirala pretends that he prefers to keep a comfortable distance with the Delhi durbar for a variety of reasons. However, the fact is that neither he can afford to keep Delhi at a distance nor he would be allowed to keep the distance that Koirala would intend to. Koirala even if wanted to come out of Delhi's political grip he can't do so because Delhi knows what Koirala can manage for them when in power. An innocent Koirala perhaps does not know that how the Indian establishment is extracting benefits from his innocence.
This time as usual Koirala will be told to enflame the agitation against the King in lieu of Delhi blessings for the agitation. A frustrated Koirala would perhaps pleasingly accept to the hidden conditions of alien forces in his bid to show his strength (which in effect is not his real strength) to the Nepali monarch. If he does so would mean that Koirala's political career has come to an end and that too with an unhappy note.
Analysts say that Koirala as a Nepali has every right to confront with a Nepali King for a cause that is genuinely Nepali. But to invite enemies in the solution of Nepali cases or seeking their clandestine favors would be suicidal.
Will not it be like what a popular Nepali saying goes: Sauta ko ris ley poi ko nak katn ?( to cut the husband's nose to spite his other wife)
Analysts hope that wisdom would prevail and Koirala as a senior most politician of the nation would not surrender to alien forces' dictates for solving the Nepali crises.
UML leader, J.N.Khanal is also packing his baggage for Delhi. A host of Nepali leaders are already in Delhi.
In an indirect manner, Nepali leaders themselves are inviting Delhi to "meddle" in Nepali affairs. God bless Nepali leaders. As if it were not enough, India's proxy prime minister Dr. Singh too has begun meddling in Nepali affairs to which he says it is not. Its corollary would be that Nepal could now openly talk of Indian atrocities perpetrated in Kashmir citing humanitarian grounds. That too would not be any sort of meddling in India's affairs by the candid definition Dr. Singh, an economist turned politician, so graciously provided just the other day.
Friends can be changed, not the neighbors. This is Nepali tragedy, a permanent one indeed.
Allegations follow counter allegations in the rebel camp
Kathmandu: Circumstantial evidences backed by newspaper explanations now sufficiently tell that India in so many ways than one provided moral ands political support to the Nepali rebels for unexplained political reasons.
Take the Royal Nepal Army's grand disclosure last week and the Indian media's candid assertion that Indian intelligence agencies did manage some sort of tête-à-tête in between the Nepali rebel leaders with the movers and shakers of Delhi's politics in the recent days does amply tell the Indian connection and by the same token the penetration of Indian politics into the mainstream affairs of the Maoists insurgency.
This is not all, the recent war of words in between the two top-hats of the insurgency, Comrade Prachanda and Dr. Bhattarai, also magnifies the Indian connection with the rebels in a much candid manner.
While the Maoist insurgency supremo Prachanda in a subtle manner dubs his comrade in arms, Dr. Bhattarai, as to be a personality close to the Indian establishment and goes to the extent that considering his, read Dr. Bhattarai's proximity with the Indian leaders, he (read Prachanda) commanded Dr. Bhattarai to initiate talks with the Indian leaders for a solution to their overly stretched conflict. In doing so Prachanda kills two birds with one stone. Firstly, he damages Bhattrai's political credentials by attaching the Indian connection tag onto the personality of his nearest but competent rival. Secondly, Prachanda concurrently tries to cash in upon from Dr. Bhattarai's close association with the Indian leaders for the benefit of his insurgency.
This he does with so finesse that even Dr. Bhattarai must have thought it twice whether his friend is praising his intellectuality or degrading?
However, Dr. Bhattarai, a highly intellectual personality as he is, does not allow his rival space to breathe and retorts with equal intensity and magnitude.
"Those who dub me as close to Indian establishment must be close to the Nepali monarchy", is what Dr. Bhattarai says in response to the allegation labeled on him by his party colleague. In saying so Dr. Bhattarai indicates that if he is branded as pro-Indian then those branding him were all pro monarchists.
Unfortunately, Dr. Bhattarai made a blunder here. In effect, he should have proven his political credentials and devised mechanisms to support his claims that he was not in the Indian pockets. This unfortunately he did not do. Instead he spent much of his time and energy in making a tit-for-tat accusations on those who accused him of his having Indian connection. Dr. Bhattarai while passing on his subtle comments at Prachanda that the latter was close to the nepali Palace miserably failed to prove his own innocence first but chose to do just the otherwise. He should have thought of clearing himself first than charging others.
Be that as it may, a sort of Himalayan conflict is there in between the two main architects of the Nepali insurgency. The fresh spate of allegations and counter allegations is sure to expose the leaders of the insurgency to the extent that the two could go to any extent in damaging each other out of vengeance.
And this is what Nepal as a nation state would prefer.
This is not all the end of the story. While Prachanda says that he has deputed Dr. Bhattarai for talks with Indian leaders, Nepali media reports reveal that Bhattarai has once again been demoted and the post, which he was occupying, has been allotted to Krishna Mahara. Should this mean that a real battle in between the two top hats is on and whatever is appearing in the media was correct?
If the media revelations were correct then Dr. Bhattarai is at loss, this much becomes pretty evident.
What is not yet clear is that what factors brought differences in between the two? Is it the matter of the initiation of dialogue with the King's government? Which of the two favored dialogue? Or is it that the two top hats have differed on how to take the all-pervasive Indian factor? Should this mean that Dr. Bhattarai and Prachanda differ with each other on how the insurgency should fare with India in the given scheme of things? The question automatically arises as to which of the two more often tan not side with India? As per Prachanda's allegation, if it were one in truest sense of the term, Bhattarai should be the one favoring India and her policies in Nepal. But Dr. Bhattarai denies which means that he is not what he is being projected as.
Analysts in Kathmandu conclude that some sort of fierce personality clash is currently going on in between the two giants of the insurgency and the two appear not to reconcile with each other on their respective positions on the presumed India factor.
Let's wait what the Indian newspapers have yet to reveal in this regard.
Media men still the target of state authorites
Kathmandu: The crackdown on the media persons by the state authorities continues unabated.
The reality is that the government despite its lip service that it is not up against the media persons and gagging the Nepali press, it is doing so in order to irritate further the already agitated journalists.
On 27 May, 2005, the army men reportedly arrested one journalist, Ishwar Aryal, the editor of local Sajha Bichar weekly alleging that the media man have had sympathy towards the rebels and later upon the completion of the proper enquiries Mr. Aryal was released at the initiation of the Federation of Nepalese journalists.
Mr. Aryal is a member of the local committee of the FNJ branch in Gulmi district.
Likewise, the representative of Samachar Patra, Gulmi branch, Mr. Nav raj Pathik too was arrested by the army men who has not yet been released. The same day, May 27, Mr. Himal Dhungel, FNJ's Ramechap district president was also taken into custody.
FNJ central office claims that the security personnel searched the house of the journalists.
The reporter of Sukhi Sansar-a monthly magazine- Ms. Sarita Aryal, was allowed to move free in Rame Chap after a thorough search of her personal belongings.
Yet another journalist, Madhu Acharya, continues to be behind the bars of kavre district, claim FNJ sources.
Reports have it that three media men are still to be released from detention who had been arrested prior to February 1.
They are Chandra Giri, Maheshwar pahari and Bhai Kaji Ghimire.
ENBREF:
Self-respecting Nepalese don’t accept foreign intervention: HM
Kathmandu: HM the King on Sunday gave a collective interview to representatives of various weekly newspapers at the Narayanhiti Royal Palace over cold drinks.
The following were the key-points raised by HM the King on the occasion:
Constitution violation: “How can the constitution be violated when you say the King is also the protector of the constitution? Is only the King to remain within the confines and the bounds of the constitution or should it extend it up to for the leaders of the political parties?”
Rule through ordinance: In my view, it’s not a good system to rule through ordinance. But the country now is being governed by rule of law and not by the rule of the jungle.
Peace Talks: On the question of talks with the Maoists, nothing has come from their side. An effort has been made (or is being made) to bring Maoists into politics by laying down their arms.
On Protests: We understand in which season and month protests are conducted.
Foreign intervention: “Self-respecting Nepalese don’t’ accept foreign intervention".
Democracy : Democracy is needed for the interest of the nation and people. People don’t want conflict. Work is being done to achieve a good result. Nobody goes to pluck a rotten fruit. A democratic culture has to be inculcated peacefully. Democracy has to be carefully nurtured. (By Senior Journalist Bhola Rana)
Japanese national to construct 100 schools in South Asia
Kathmandu: According to news reports last week, a Japanese national, Masakazu Mizutani is going to construct 100 schools in South Asia of which half will be constructed in Nepal.
Mr Mizutani, a social worker for the last four decades decided to help construct schools in South Asia in memory of his younger brother, Masakazu Mizutani, who died at the age of 25 while attempting to climb Putha hiunchuli (Dhaulagiri range, west Nepal), in 1973.
Four school buildings are already being constructed, two in Kaski district and one each in Myagdi and Kavre, it was reported.
Students set fire to their school
Kathmandu: Three students torched a school in Jhapa where they were studying causing damage estimated up to Rs 100,000, a leading daily reported this week.
Students were later released on conditions guardians repair the damage.
King to visit Britain: UK to continue arms supply
Kathmandu: News reports last week claimed that UK, Nepal's long time ally has decided finally to continue non-lethal arms supply to Nepal. The UK following the footsteps of it former colony, India, had stopped arms supply to the Himalayan kingdom following the Royal takeover of February 1.
High placed sources claim that King Gyanendra is all set to pay an unofficial visit to United kingdom immediately after his trip to Quatar, Doha.
|
