Posted on 04/22/2006 11:26:16 AM PDT by minus_273
Lousy commies can't get any support for their stupid ideology without killing people. Commie idiots don't realize their collectivist theories are crap, or maybe they do and just want power no matter how they get it.
an update.
Thanks for the post, you are right, several of us are following events in Nepal. I was hoping we would get involved below the surface, to help build a security force that could resist the Maoists, but we have (probably for good reason) let India take the lead there.
Nepal is India's problem, but it looks like an opportunity for some friendly help. Letting Nepal fall to their version of Shining Path would be a disaster.
The king is close to China, but the maoist rebels are coming from India?
South asian politics are a bit confusing.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1499543.cms
India ready to give neighbour a helping hand
NEW DELHI: Along with supporting Nepal ruler Gyanendra, the Indian government has handed out unreserved kudos to the people of Nepal. "The people of Nepal have undergone acute suffering and economic hardship during the last several months, but have always kept their faith with democracy and freedom.
They deserve our respect and admiration," an MEA spokesperson said. The Indian response evolved after the king met the Indian ambassador Shiv Shankar Mukherjee in Kathmandu on Friday morning to give him the details of his proposed statement.
This formed part of a high level discussion between Prime Minister, national security adviser M K Narayanan, foreign secretary Shyam Saran and PM's special envoy Karan Singh.
It was decided that since the king had walked some distance, India would now support his actions. Opposition leader Jaswant Singh, who is due to travel to Nepal on Monday, also went on record to say that the agitations should now stop.
He was briefed by Saran on the discussions in Nepal over the past couple of days. There have been reports of rejection of the king's offer by the parties in Nepal, but government sources here felt saner counsel would prevail.
The interim government, when it is formed can, with its executive powers, reconvene Parliament or set up a constituent assembly and call for fresh elections.
The new government should also have the powers to negotiate with Maoists, though each of these powers will be hard fought victories, because it is likely that the king may insert many riders to dilute his offer.
The initial reactions also seem to suggest that the Maoists too may not reject the king's offer out of hand; instead wait for developments to evolve. The next step is for the parties to select a PM India will certainly push them towards a quick decision.
Once an interim government has been announced, a timetable for elections will be next on the agenda. On Friday the MEA said, "The aspirations of the people of Nepal can now be addressed by enabling them to enjoy their rights through a democratic electoral exercise free from the threat of violence."
Once a government has taken over, India will formally announce a comprehensive economic package to pull Nepal out of its economic morass.
India, said the MEA spokesperson, "now stands ready to render all possible assistance to enable Nepal to achieve political stability and economic recovery at the earliest possible date."
India, having rolled up its sleeves and entered Nepal's political labyrinth, will now stay deeply engaged. The parties will be persuaded to take advantage of the king's offer and press home their high ground.
The Maoists will be persuaded to stay quiet through the period of transition and the international pressure will now build up on the Maoists to disarm and become a part of mainstream politics.
This transition too will have to be managed. The king will have to be persuaded to stay the course, with the assurance that the monarchy will remain only constitutional.
The royal Nepal army may technically be with the king, but Indian sources said, they now know that their equipment and technology lifelines would be retained only if they weighed in on the side of multi-party democracy.
there is one more even worse outcome. Chinese communists side with the king and it becomes ground zero for an indo-chinese proxy war. I dont know how the chinese will react to india removing the buffer state that separated the two
The Communist mantra. One day you will hear them say the same thing about the same maoists in India.
These are the kind of maoists who still believe China's "great leap forward" was a great success, something even the chi-coms won't say any more.
For all that India is the 'world's largest democracy' and that we have been cozying up to the Indians lately as a counterweight to the Pakistanis, I REALLY don't trust the Indians.
"The Maoists will be persuaded to stay quiet through the period of transition and the international pressure will now build up on the Maoists to disarm and become a part of mainstream politics. "
highly unlikely. think hamas.
considering i have literally waked into Tibet at least once while visiting the place, i beg to differ.
You can't compare the Commie version of evil and the Hamas version of evil.
For starters, M.A.D. worked with the Commies. It won't achieve the same results with the 'Slammies.
I have a feeling the Nepalese tourist industry just went to hell.
Except for prostitutes.
The nations along the Sino-Indian border are used by both countries either as pawns or neutral zones. The Nepal situation seems close to the Sikkim situation. Depending on whose version, Sikkim ruler faced social breakdown and internal civil war. Some believed the situation was instigated by India to force the ruler to accept Indian rule or face street justice from the rebels (allegedly supported by India). Others say it was a natural internal strife and India took advantage of it to enter and later annex Sikkim. Nepal Maoist were supported by Indian Communists while the Indian government stood idly by and did nothing??!!! How do we know if the Maoist movement was used by India to destabilize Nepal, so it will serve as a strategic pretext or strategic pressure to force the king to allow the entry of Indian forces so the rebels (who served their purposes) will be destroyed and Nepal is firmly under Indian control? I think this is Act One is a long fubuki dance between China, and India. I think India will occupy Nepal, destroy the rebels and refuse to leave. China will capitalize on the Nepalese resentment of Indian occupation and Act Two of the play will begin. In the meantime, if Nepal falls to Indian control, that leaves only Bhutan as the remaining independent nation along the Sino-Indian border. The only good news for the US is this situation will destroy the attempts of China and India to cooperate economically. They have been trying to open their borders for trade in the last six months. We want India as an ally, not a third party who can play the China card against us or the US card against China, thus reaping rewards from both sides.
Why not? Are you racist?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.