[CarrotAndStick]

“

In early 1970 the anti-monarchy Sikkim National Congress Party demanded fresh elections and greater representation for the Nepalese.

In 1973, anti-royalty riots in front of the palace led to a formal request for protection from India. India worried that an unstable Sikkim would invite Chinese to act on its claims that Sikkim was part of Tibet, and therefore part of China.

Frosty relations between the Chogyal and the elected Kazi (Prime Minister) Lendup Dorji resulted in an attempt to block the meeting of the legislature. The Kazi was elected by the Council of Ministers which was unanimous in its opposition to the retention of the Monarchy. Matters came to a head in 1975 when the Kazi appealed to the Indian Parliament for representation and change of status to statehood. On April 14, 1975, a referendum merged Sikkim with the union of India. Sikkim became the 22nd Indian State on April 26, 1975. On May 16, 1975 Sikkim officially became a state of the Indian Union and Lendup Dorji became head of State (chief minister). This was promptly recognised by the United Nations and all countries except China.

The position of Chogyal was thus abolished, ending the monarchy. In 1982, Palden Thondup succumbed to cancer in the United States. “

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

As for Goa, the Portuguese had no right to occupy a land where the people were overwhelmingly in favour of re-union.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Lastly, India is not a country based on a single or a majority-ethnic group. You would have had a better argument had you mentioned the revolts in the Muslim 1/3rd of Kashmir, though. However the Treaty of Accession, signed as a precondition to how India and Pakistan would be formed out of British India, automatically grants Kashmir to India.

[Zhang Fei]

As I understand it, the Goanese never got a referendum. As to this stuff about the Portuguese (I take it you mean the Goanese), India has pretty much come about - like most other countries - via the right of conquest. If Portugal doesn't have the right to something it conquered 400+ years ago, what right does India have to Sikkim?

38 years ago the Indian government invaded my country Goa and promised the indigenous goan people a referendum on autonomy or independence. People like us have been persistently asking for a referendum on Goa, to be decided by indigenous Goans, on autonomy or independence. The people of Goa are a passive and friendly race who does not have a tradition or culture of violence. We will respect the outcome of the referendum. The United Nations has never recognised the invasion/annexation of Goa. Will the Indian government who claims to be the largest democracy please afford my people, a democratic choice?