For a Democratic Republic of Nepal
- http://demrepubnepal.blogspot.com/

Mailadai wrote:

"Mohammad Mohisin's remarks was a signal from the Palace of the days to come. Political parties and others rejection of his remarks were signal to the palace of their disagreement."

So who won this round?
The palace.

In politics, it does not matter being right in a fundamental sense.
If that were so, then philosopher-kings would be ruling us, not opportunistic mortals.

It's winning in the short-term to obtain enough advantage to leverage it for further gains down the road.

*******

"Now you think Tulsi Giri, who's not even lived in Nepal for last how many years, with the King can finish Maoist."


No, I have not made any prediction as such.

All I said was: "Let's see what they are going to do", and I have given both optimistic and pessimitic scenarios. I may not like Tulsi Giri personally, but I would not underestimate his devious mind.

***

"In my opinion, the Maoist can be fought by the people only. And how can that happen, the best choice is Constituent Assembly."

Fine.
Have your OPINION.
Just don't pass them off as dead certainty yet.


Still, having seen how self-styled experts have turned out to be WRONG about Nepali politics, I, not an expert, don't mind being wrong if coming events prove me wrong.

oohi
ashu

HAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAA!

KUNDA DIXIT ET AL., THEY ARE INCREDIBLE & INCORRIGIBLE FLIRTS. THEY JUMP FROM ONE SKIRT TO ANOTHER IN NO TIME.


IN POLITICS PEOPLE HARBORING SUCH JUMPING TENDENCY ARE CALLED OPPORTUNISTS.

Mailadai wrote:
>After lots of discussion of yours and Nepe,
>now I am finally understanding what Nepe
>is talking about you.

Mailadai,

My understanding of Ashu is summarized in my prediction, on the record in Sajha, that he will metamorph into a republican on the eve of the establishment of the republic of Nepal.

Let me add this bet as well. If he proved me wrong, I will never ever pronounce the world 'republic' in my life again !

We will start to see Ashu softening as soon as we start to see the signals that the monarch is giving up.

I am not calling Ashu a rat, but I sure am looking forward to seeing him join the group of rats leaving the sinking ship when it's time comes.

Ashu is still hard to the core as he has revealed above that he is still hanging on the hope that the monarch might bring a rabbit (translates: trump card) out of his crown.

By the way, Ashu is not alone in hoping to see a rabbit out of Gyanendra's crown. I am seeing even some ghagdan liberal democrats doing the same, although they don't seem to know exactly what kind of rabbit are they expecting.

Ashuji, with all due respect:

your answer to my previous questions were true to the questioning/answering spirit. however, i am saddened. ok one more question if you don't mind:

1. What is the role of the civic society in the present context? (If you are of the persuasion that civic society does not exist in Nepal, what is the role of the civil society?)

your answers and analyses of realpolitik are all fine and good. i won't refute them or refuse them. and i think you are as honest and as accurate as anyone has been in these forums. however, what i felt was sorely lacking was a multidimensional approach - everything is in one-D. ok, maobaadi are bad, but all bad? maobaadi are ideological cousins to the north korean politburo, so we are going to end up exactly like them, should maobaadi come to power? tulsi giri is at the helm, so the onus is upon him (and him alone) to find a solution?

you present a case as an uninterested outside observer (now that is not a bad thing per se), and thus my complaint of single dimensionality. sure, the maobaadi and the royal entourage (coterie?) have a lot at stake. so they are going to do something. in fact, they are doing something.

but what about us? don't we have anything at stake? don't you have anything at stake? i believe the answer to that will be in the positive. in fact, we as a collective nepali people-unit have more at stake than any individual player in the two camps, i would assert (please tell me if i should revise that). in that case, why do we still adhere to the "wait and watch" (w&w) policy?

i am not asking you to make a prediction or to speculate. sorry, that was not my intent if it wasn't clear earlier. i just want you to do a cost-benefit analysis (if it comes down to that) of W&W for you and for us, the nepali people.

thank you.

Ashuji,

Blaming the short-sightedness of Girija, Makune and other political leaders is an easy way to defend the current move by the King and the seat covered by Tulsi Giri. He is an old man. People used to say the same thing about Surya Bdr Thapa (that's why I brought up that name there on the previous list). Why dwell on wishful thinking? Why dwell on the cosy bungalows inside the Ringroad of Katmandu.

Again about M. Mohsin, what could the leaders say about his comments. You wanted them to agree with M. Mohsin??. Everyone knew the King was upto something, infact some of the party high-commands had even suggested to the King cronies to take over long time back. They were also tired of the stalemate, the "far-sighted" king who was having difficulty which boat to ride on. In a way this is relief to the political partys. Of course they don't like it, but at least they can move forward and can focus for the days ahead.

Disregard netaas of all political parties. The words of these guys dont hold any water and these leaders and political parties will not have any effect on the outcome of fight between the Maoists and monarch. The political parties dont have neither grass-root level support nor the military force of their own and under the current circumstances, to make an effect on Nepali political landscape the political parties and its leaders have have at least one of those factors.

The fate of Nepali politics and its future will be decided by the outcome of fight between the Maoists and monarch not the helpless bunch of political parties and its netaas.

Ashu.

In the entire time of interacting with you online over the years, this is the most direct comment you have hurled at me (under your real name). And I intend to respond. It has been my theory after meeting hundreds of Nepalis all over the US, that these folks like the American dollar, and their car, and their orange juice, they might go to big colleges, go work for big corporations, but there is this social segment of their brains that just does not change. It is as if they never left Nepal. The neanderthal stays on. For one, they tend to be super sexist. That does not change. Their ethnic prejudices stay on. Like in Indianapolis, the Newars no longer mingle with the "Bahuns," as if to say, I had to put up with you in Nepal, but I don't need to anymore. And I see why they might feel that way. Those same Bahuns have the weirdest things to say about Madhesis. No amount of education, no amound of "exposure" in a culturally diverse country like America seems to help them open up. Like Max Planck said, people don't change their minds, they die with them. For all your liberal arts blabber, I am sorry to say, maybe you are not blatant, but you are not that different. And you expose yourself in this comment.

First of all, did you even read my blog post? If you did, do you realize I am only claiming to know King G through his public actions, and biographical details as have come forth through media sources I trust? I do not know the guy personally, for that matter neither do you. And it is not about the person. The question is about the system. A guy like you can go to Harvard, campaign for Al Gore and "deliver" him a town in New Hampshire, as you claim, and still not "get" democracy. Is that a shame of what?

I don't know Nepe personally, but from what you tell me about him, so the difference between you and him is that you have access to power and he does not, and so he is bitter! Is that what you are suggesting? What access to power do you have exactly? And what is the source of that power? Where exactly does that power come from? You mind quantifying? Revealing?

How can you not see this debate is not about individuals like you and Nepe or me? It is about the 27 million Nepalis?

"....the usual "let's replace the King because he is khattam but, hey, everything will be hunky-dory after he is gone -- just trust me on this" hypothesis? ..."

Trust me? Is this your attempt to personalize every discussion? Where in my writing do you get that "trust me" element? The choice the article offers is between Panchayat II and a Democratic Republic? If you have problems with the concept of a Democratic Republic, maybe you should elaborate and go on record. This is your chance.

"....non-Kathmandu-based (i.e. village-grown) elites -- who may now be living and working abroad -- to vent their frustrations over their own sheer lack of access to any political power within Nepal than out of any desire to strengthen democratic institutions in Nepal...."

This is the biggest reason why Federalism is necessary. Some people feel superior by spreading the Bahun, non-Bahun divide, some with the rich, poor divide, some with the Valley, out-of-Valley divide, and I guess you claim all of the above. So if Nepe says he is a Republican, you attack his "village" background? That means two things. One, that you think people from "villages" are lesser. Two, that you are not from some "village" which you are suggesting is your only claim to fame.

I mean, what happened? Did King G induct into the cabinet someone you happen to know? Is that why you are feeling powerful? Or think Nepe is powerless and bitter? What exactly is the total amount of "power" anyone, you or King G and everyone in between, can possibly amass from within the "kuwa" called Kathmandu? What is your ceiling?

"....the distance lends an air of doctrinal purity, an almost idealzed wish -- regardless of the messy situation in the ground in Nepal....

It is thinking like yours that has created that mess in the first place. And only progressive thought will clean it up. There is no other way.

" The Maoists will NEVER come to the mainstream. Let's stop deluding ourselves -- once and for all. Either the state will flush them out to the point of irrelevance (a move I support, while keeping a sharp eye on the state's human rights abuses) or the Maoists will take over the country."

I hope you are wrong, because both options look pretty bloody to me. But it is possible you are right, and you are being more of a realist than I am. Maybe you are seeing "reality" better than I am. And this is a respectful difference in opinion. And I can live with that.

On the other hand, I think it is your Nepali Speakig High Caste Male Kathmandu Elite self that has been cultivating this social place in the scheme of things over a lifetime that will just not give ground to the Dalits and the Janajatis. It is like after the "backwards" in India came into power through the Mandal wave in India, a lot of "forwards" (the Indian term for Bahuns like thyself) left the country saying it is going down the tube! They actually left the country! A lot of "forward" kids burned themselves alive when they saw "backwards" getting reservations in jobs. I think you are part of that clogged social artery in Nepal. You will rather break or be broken, you will not bend. You will not make room, expand the horizons for those who do not share your background.

So, I strongly disagree. I think the Maoists are perfectly capable of coming into the mainstream if people like you and King G were to be socially accomodating.

Chhoowa Chhoot Murdabad!

"...the King threatens the interests of non-Kathmandu-based elites..."

Are you kidding me? There is no "elite" outside of Kathmandu. All the power in the country has been centralized over centuries in Kathmandu.

"..Yes, the political parties threaten the interests of Kathmandu-based traditional elites' (hence, opposition to political parties and their netas come most from these people who chant the mantra of 'corruption' and 'bad governance' against the netas)..."

Good observation.

You paint the Maoists as less than human types who pertetrate violence for the sake of violence. I think that is the powerful demonizing the powerless.

" They apper to have realized that military solution is not enough; and like the rest of ther world, I am hoping (with increasing impatience) that the King has some sort of a trump card."

So King G is your Knight In Shining Armor!?

"....Whether I support Tulsi Giri or whether Paramendra hates Tulsi Giri...."

My grudge is with the system. You keep wanting to personalize things. Sure he is a Panche, from Dhanusha, of all places, but I don't much know the guy.

".... Talking about democratic republicanism at this stage is basically a RELUCTANCE and even intellectual cowardice to face the harsh reality in Nepal....."

It must take a lot of courage to sing praises of Tulsi Giri!

" And meantime, thinking that Maoists would make good bedfellows with the political parties to throw out the King is like thinking that having a pet cobra would not bite the owner someday. The Maoists would use the political parties for their own ends and then DISCARD them."

If the Maoists were to come to power on their own, what would they do, take away your right to free speech? Last time I checked, King G did just that! So why are you for the king agains the Maoists? You should be for the Maoists.

Satya: "He has no interest in negotiated solution."

That is my understanding also. King G is trying to expand his personal power base as much as possible. So basically using the Maoist situation to get rid of the democrats he never had stomach for in the first place.

mailaadai: " In my opinion, the Maoist can be fought by the people only. And how can that happen, the best choice is Constituent Assembly. "

Exactly. I think, like you Ashu, the most important thing is to demilitarize the Maoists. And mailadai and I have the best prescription. Yours has not worked for 10 years. Try ours.


Some comments at SEBS

Re: For a Democratic Republic of Nepal
RocknRollAbs 2/21/2005 2:06:38 AM EST
only one comment to make: if you think that treatment/condition of madhesis will suddenly change because a new constitution is drafted by a constituent assembly, you clearly have wrong ideas about what a constitution is.
the social inequality that sadly exists in nepal requires education and awareness of the people, intermingling of the various groups so that they better understand each other, even basic things like roads so that ppl travel around more and get to know more etc etc. i don't think all these things require a constituent assembly to materialize. constitution ma bhandai ma hunchha ra? ahile ko constitution le pani ta sabailai equal trtment/opportunities guarantee gareko chha ni...

not against the idea of a cons assmbly, but against the idea that this is a good time to have one, and suggesting that we all be more realistic about the powers of reformation of a new constitution.

Re: For a Democratic Republic of Nepal
asis 2/21/2005 3:33:45 AM EST
nice article paramendra dai...im sure the politicos back home are having the same dream as yours...but the bad news for both of you is that: "So the onus is on the democratic forces to create the political platform that gets rid of the monarchy and brings the Maoists into the mainstream." is either the most expensive option for nepal in terms of lives, time and money or simply just an impossibility.

Re: For a Democratic Republic of Nepal
bijaya 2/21/2005 6:47:47 AM EST
If you do not believe in the street protests, how on earth can you 'abolish' the monarchy which is still surviving the military threats of the Maoists.

Second thing, calling people who do not believe in constituent assembly as a non democrat reflects poorly on you, it is merely labelling someone. It might be a good idea if there is a political consensus among all the political players. It will not serve its purpose if it lacks support.

The Maoists sold the slogan of equality and justice and self-rule (autonomy) to different dis-advantaged ethnic groups, therefore drawing large number of recruits from these disadvantaged ethnic groups.

In the western section of Nepal the Maoist war effort is driven by Magars, kamis, damais etc. Tharus have driven the Maoist war effort In the south-west and mixed group of Madeshi and other groups in south-east. Tamangs and other groups in the central region and Kirats in the east.

No matter what type of political game does Gynendra play in Kathmandu with the Maoists leadership and Gynendra's international allies. The different ethnic groups that have supported the Maoist war effort at different levels really dont care if the Maoist leadership make any deal with Gynendra or not. If they do not get anything close to what they have promised to by the Maoists leadership at the begining of war. They will abandon the Maoist leadership and keep fighting. Therefore simply appeasing the Maoist leadership into agreeing to some peace deal by Gynendra will not mean the end of the war.

By now it has become more and more clear that the way of Maoist organization is controlled has undergone great transformation. By reading the interviews of the Maoist frontline fighters with independent Nepali journalists during 2003 ceasefire it has become clear that the orders and directives given by their highest leaders are routinely dismissed as useless and unrealistic probably because the fighters on the ground know about the axact situation on the ground much more than any of their higher political leaders hiding somewhere far outside the country. Which gives the local and regional commanders unusally great flexibility to decide what to do and what not to do and when to do and when not to do with unimaginably little intereference from their political leadership giving them far greater independence.

Probably that is the reason why, the many foreign tourists who were issued "War Tax" receipt when visiting specific area, the Maoists incharge of that area told the tourists that perticular "War Tax" receipt is valid "ONLY" within the area assigned to that specific band of Maoists.

This situation creates a great ease for regional and local Maoist commanders while the same thing creates great difficulty for the Maoist leadership when making important political decisions as they have to seek acknowledgement and approval from the lower level of the organizational structure. The Maoist Leadership can choose to do it without the approval of the lower level of the party but it will definately alieniate the foot soldiers, local commander and the regional commanders who do the actual fighting on the ground. Definately the highest level of Maoist leadership doesnt want revolt within the organization.

Therefore now the highest level of Maoist leadership is more or less confined to the job of "coordination" and "maintaining and establishing" new relationships with the foreign allies of Maoists while the local and regional commanders run more independent. lThis situation creates great difficulty for the Maosit leadership whenever there is a talk of peace deal with Gynendra because the Maoist organization is now controled "Bottom to top" rather than " Top to bottom" .

Finishing off the Maoists means killings of large number of people belonging to different disadvantaged ethnic groups which are primary driving force of the Maoist fighting machine. This act will definately set the pre-text for another civil war in the next generation to come.

The complexity of making a political solution is much more deeper than simply putting Baburam and Prachanda into making a peace deal with Gynendra. In fact Baburam and Prachanda are not even important players anymore as they themselves had once
imagined at the begining of the war.

Although a newuser, now I am attempting to join in the fray of Sajha Stalwarts. Hopefully, no one will question my eligibility.

It is Ashu's comment that has forced me to put my opinion in this thread. Otherwise, I used to be a loyal reader to both guys- Paramendra and Ashu. Both of you have good English, probably helped by your lengthy stay in the USA (Ashu, I guess is a Xaverian) and it's always nice to read well written composition in English on Nepali issues. I hope you guys will acquit me for putting subdued English in your discussion for I don't have strong linguistic skills like yours.

First, although I do not fully agree to Paramendra's reply (specially the first paragraph in which he has used all of his limited knowledge about the shortcomings of Nepali people to lambast his critic), I think Ashu deserves more bashing then that for his silly comments(by his back ground and standards). Paramendra has picked up the right sentences to strike and hit the right target. I will just add my disagreements to Ashu's analysis.

I am really disappointed to see the U turn Himal media has taken in the recent weeks but I am not surprised at all. For the bondage between the Dikshit family and the Madan Sumshers since decades, it was obvious that Kunda and company would soon revert to their family values and sway towards the palace hierarchy. When Himal media decides to make a turn, people like Ashu don't have many options to choose from then reciprocating their ideaology with the Dikshits. After all the Dikshits were splitted into pro monarchists and pro democratic halves in the recent years and there must be a good bargain hunt that has softened the stance of the moderate/ democratic dikshits to allign with their hardliner dikshit brothers. Ashu is just a pawn in the sacrificing gambit step taken by Himali Dikshits which will unfortunately prove to be a suicidal move for themselves in the time to come. I still hope they won't take this funny step and re think a new move.

I will be back to Ashu's comment soon, in the mean time few months ago(months before the royal take over), I had written a letter to Himal media and the following is the extract from that letter:

''Once the King begins to act as according to the
recent submission of the Royal Council, what do you expect? Kathmandu based
diplomats have already indicated that they would not stop the King from
taking the final authorities and the big western medias have rightly predicted
that our country is becoming a failed state sooner or later. This is an
alarm bell. The western scholars had warned in the same way about Afghanistan
in the late seventies and their predictions on Nepal may come true because
they know the interest of their nations very well.This is the time for Nepalese
politicians, students, scholars, press and everybody who love the country
to resist fiercely against the menace of the big Royal take over. Imagine
if pro democracy leaders are taken into custody, people disappeared and
killed en masse and press freedom aborted; on top of it the maoists carrying
on with their act of terror and violence in much larger scale. Can anybody
assure that this can't happen? Has anybody the real power to stop the King
from doing what he intends to do? The danger is looming ahead and it's time
to do every bit of our strength to make the King realise that he will have
to face fierce resistance from the public in order to fulfill his ambitions.
Lets not allow the royal henchmen to have the last laugh. We cannot wait
for thirty more dark years again.''

Himal published almost every thing from the above comment but excluded the following sentences:
''This is the time for Nepalese politicians, students, scholars, press and everybody who loves the country to resist fiercely against the menace of the big Royal take over. Imagine if pro democracy leaders are taken into custody, people disappeared and
killed en masse and press freedom aborted; on top of it the maoists carrying
on with their act of terror and violence in much larger scale. Can anybody
assure that this can't happen? Has anybody the real power to stop the King
from doing what he intends to do? ''

And from there on, I had the suspicion that one of the most trustworthy media in Nepal in fact do not support the real cause of democracy.

I think the above anecdote challenges Ashu's analysis which I have quoted below.

''Thankfully, I have seen that other people -- despite their self-confidence and compelling pro-this and against-that logic -- too have NO better batting average when it comes to accurately forecasting our short-term political future.

Remember, some time ago, intellectuals and journalists were all over Mohammed Mohsin for daring to suggest that Nepal might become an autocratic state soon. At the time, it was fashionably knee-jerk thing to gang up on Mohsin ad infinitum and ad nauseum for
making that remark.

A few months later, look, where Nepal is now.

Could any one of those intellectuals and journalists even have dreamt the state we
are in today in Nepal?

No. ''

Furthermore, without raising eyebrows to Ashu's capabilities, I have to add that the Bahuns or other elites of Kathmandu think that they are superior to other bahuns or elites from outside the valley. The irony is that their forefathers shifted to Kathmandu and started serving the king and the Rana prime ministers and reaped reward for their servitude in the form of transforming 'Guthi jagga' to their name. They sold those land and built bungalows and started up business in Kathmandu and now they boast of being elites closer to the rulers. What a shame? Those bahuns who woked in the stables of Rana Prime Ministers think they should remain the only elites in the country. They think that no middle class families from the outside of the valley should not have a better home, should not start a better business and should not be better educated. St. Xaverians and the Budhanilkantha groups think that they are the only prolific English learners in the country and they should remain the same.

But in the last 15 years, the bahuns and chettris and other so called elites from outside the valley have outclassed the ones from inside, displaced them in their own den(Kathmandu), excelled in business(the Gyawalis of Kantipur overtook Dikshits of Himal). Schools outside Kathmandu have started teaching as good english as in Xaviers or Budhanilkantha and taken the majority of SLC board. Today There are many Nepalese outside the valley who are taking education in the USA and UK. In the past only some Sharma and Lohani and Tiwari and Dikshit could afford this. And all this has panicked the elites in Kathmandu. So , although they know the advantage of democracy and disadvantage of autocracy, the likes of Ashu tend to tilt on the side of autocracy. They don't believe in their competence and seek protection from the palace. This is absolutely ludicrous.

No offences guys, just my opinion.

And again to Paramendra, please do not behave as if the Indians are all united. And as if they don't run after American dollar. We know how a Punjabi behaves to Delhiwala, How a Gujarati eyes a Madrasi. Probably you are also aware that the Indians have introduced so many kinds of frauds in America and Europe in specailly business and banking sectors. In fact, Indians are not only partly responsible for creating mess in Nepal, but also in the whole world. US, UK, South Africa, Carrebean, Fiji, Gulf everywhere. Any way, I salute those who have emerged from zeros to heros. You have performed better then us neigbours- hats off. But don't make a mockery of us. You are not much better in totality.

They think that no middle class families from the outside of the valley should not have a better = should have a

Newuser wrote:

"Ashu is just a pawn in the sacrificing gambit step taken by Himali Dikshits which will unfortunately prove to be a suicidal move for themselves in the time to come."

AND

"When Himal media decides to make a turn, people like Ashu don't have many options to choose from then reciprocating their ideaology with the Dikshits. "

*******


Oh my God!

I did NOT know that I "am just a pawn" in someone else's "suicidal" game.
Nor did I know that I "don't have many options to choose from".

To paraphrase Woody Allen: And all these years, I thought the Dixits worked for
the phone company!

But, ugh, the betrayal!
The treachery!!
The abomination of hidden intents!!
Who knew that they are so khattam? :-)

Jokes aside though, Newuser, what ELSE is going on in my life that I should know
about from you so that I can: a) increase my options, and (b) not be a pawn?

***

NOTE to others: Newuser's comments is the kind of laughable bullshit you get when
you dare to question or differ from strident republicanism, which IS as dogmatic and shrill in some quarters of Sajha as Maoism is Nepal's hinterland.

Because these people don't have to RISK anything to push for republicanism, they
can afford to be doctrinally pure on paper -- a fact they delight in.

And so assured are these people of the sheer superiority of their position that they can't help repeatedly falling in love with their own theories.

Ambiguity be damned!!

This is why, one imagines them as viewing the 63 per cent of Sajha online voters who (gasp! choke!!) actually approve of the King's move as those who are plainly stupid, misguided and pampered bunch.

Such is their abiding faith in "the collective judgement of fellow-citizens" -- a process otherwise known as -- oops! -- democracy (which makes it easier for people who may hate one another to live together without erupting into bloody wars!)

Hence, we have Nepe who dutifully trots out his 40,000-word manifesto whenever
he can. For evidence, he turns, with amusing qualifiers, to Dristi-patrika -- Nepal's most impartial weekly newspaper, no doubt!! -- tables as an indication of how republicanism is sweeping across the hills and the valleys.

All this adds up to an entertainment of the highest order -- at least for me. I love the way these guys play the game of the future and NOT -- emphatically -- not of the present, which is a lot more important.

To play upon Keynes' words: In the long run, Nepal might indeed turn into a republic, but by then we will also all be dead! Better present than dead.

That is why, it's better to focus on the PRESENT immediate challenge of defanging the Maoists. After having spent tons of money, lost so many people and even having our liberties suspended to counter the Maoists, we might as well reach some sort of a conclusion on this point than on foolishly pining for a King-free Nepal anytime in
near future . . . especially when it's clear that the loudmouths for republicanism are
not going to risk anything themselves.

Humans, after all, are designed to fight only one battle at a time, NOT multiple battles on multiple fronts like the hero of a Hindi movie.

oohi
ashu

63% of the vote at an internet site exites you, how about the voting done by the Students in Nepal??

You just seem to be living in Katmandu, and enjoying tato tato momo. You probably have no relatives, no REAL friends from outside the valley.

lol..........it seems mailadai has not been able to get a good sleep since the royal takeover. Poor you! Dont teke it too seriously

Ashujee,
What did you have to say to Paramendra's detailed analysis/ rebuttal above? Hope you haven't run out of your Harvard-fueled firepower to sidestep the main issue and pick on the weaker enemies (because you can't take on the substance) or resort to your old "I-know-I-risk-and-therefore-I-am-right-and-nobody-else's-opinion-is-as-valid-because-they-are-either-from-out-of-kathmandu-and envious-of-"my"-background/power, live/study-in-the-us-and-don't-know/risk-anything-or-are-simply-nondemocratic-because-they-oppose-my-view mental frame.
Wow!!! Kudos to your intellect, imagination, and wisdom. Had God not preceded you by birth, He would have sought a class with you.
Don't take it personally, I love you. But to follow onto your footstep of paraphrasing, I would paraphrase your comment about CK Lal sometime ago: If you didn't exist we would have to invent your character. The only difference, it means what it stands for here.
Good luck.
Lonely#1

Ashuji,

tapaaiko response padhera saachikaai mero aankhaabaata aashu jharyo.

Ashu wrote:

" I love the way these guys play the game of the future and NOT -- emphatically -- not of the present, which is a lot more important."

>>> Please, please, please refer to my question above (I was told that it is bad manners to copy-paste one's own writing in these forums). Please. Let's pause a moment from our pristine analysis of realpolitik. Let's think about the here and now. As you suggest. I am only seconding your suggestion.

"To play upon Keynes' words: In the long run, Nepal might indeed turn into a republic, but by then we will also all be dead! Better present than dead."

>>> Further play: In the long run, the Maobaadi may well be beaten, or they might peter out, but by then we will also be dead! Should we still wait for the King's trump card in the present and wait for future peace?

" Ambiguity be damned!!"


Peace.

Dear Ashuji,

You termed my comment as a 'laughable bullshit' but I am glad that you had to think something about the laughable bullshit and defend yourself. Isn't this an irony? My selection of words may have been below par for a US educated 'intellect', and you have reacted as if you didn't care of what I said but I can understand that some how it pricked your sense of superiority. I am very pleased with myself for being able to demoralise a complacent man.

You preferred not to say anything about my predictions months ago(the letter to Himal). Ok let it be.

You think as if you know everything and I am just a sense less man. You may be of my uncle's age but I bet you have not seen Nepal as much as I have seen. You have not walked across as many districts and villages as I have done, so while talking about Nepal your predictions fall flat on nose and mine will come true.

Note down in your diary today. King Gyanendra will have to hand over the government to the same political parties within 2 years( I myself do not want to see this happen in this way however). The maoists won't be crushed or defeated. If their demand for constituent assembly is not meet, the violence will continue for further more years. And after the country is ravaged by war, the UN or Norway or any other third party will have to negotiate a peace process that will finally pave the way for constituent assembly. So why not accept their demand for constituent assembly right now and prevent further bloodshed?

Ashuji, I am not some one who changes his ideology or principles or values from time to time. I am not an oppurtunist as some self fulfilling western educated so called Nepali intellectuals are. I have found lots of intriguing changes in your opinions in the last three weeks proportionating with the change in comments by Kunda and Kanak Dikchit. And I am very much sure that you will have to change your analysis every month. Because you do not know what the ground reality is, you write from what you hear from the journalists of Himal media. I don't need to suggest any options for yourself, I am waiting to see how you will write your article on the 1st week of April. I am sure, I will read your article urging for constituent assembly election within few months to come.
One more to wrap up- if things continue as at present ,you will see the republic of Nepal long before your death.

Paramendra, Nepal far too much fragmented to be a viable Democratic Republic. Too many ethnic races and languages and even religions with little resources to share the same country. Most of the political power in Nepal is controlled by upper-castes and the economy is pretty much controlled by Indian dual citizens. Hence, the hatred for both Bahuns and Indians is emmense.

We cannot go on like this. Our situation is similar to former Yugoslavia. We need to be broken up so that we can exercise self-determination. The current Bahun control of the political landscape is not good for the Bhotes or the Madheses. The Madhese control of the economy is not good for the Bahuns or the Bhotes. The Bhote control of the army and tourism is not good for the Bahuns or the Madheses.

Lets face it. Nepal was not a country until a King incorporated different kingdoms and tribes into one country. Nepal was founded by the ambitious Monarch who was distrustful of the British-Indians and Mughal-Indians who were sharing the power then. If the Monarchy is eliminated, we will lose the very concept of Nepal.

If that is the case, then we should go back to living in different smaller kingdoms and nations with our own people running things without any fear of discrimination.

Brah"man" dude

---------"Nepal is far too much fragmented to be a viable democratic republic......."

well, if you were to argue on that basis, other countries are at even situation. An example sits right next door to Nepal. Take India for example. There are people of more than hundred different races having more than hundred different languages and dialects. There are hardly anything in common between these races in India from west to east, north to south but still it has managed to remain as a viable democratic republic because there were many visionary leaders who kept that democratic republic going with out breaking up because the leasers and the nation adopted the doctrine of "inclusion" not "exclusion" of different races risiding within the nation of India.

India has largely accepted the doctrine of self-determination and implemented on the ground and yet remained to stay as a single strong country as well as to become more and more powerful country in the regional and world stage.

Nepal would have been far easier case to manage but still it seems to spun way out of control because there were no such leaders and the administraton throughout the history after the formation of state of Nepal who of course were primairily from the dominant race had no such visionaries. Until this date the nation excercises the policy of exclusion "exclusion." Even the so called modern constitution of Nepal in the context of Nepal, bears the testament.

The threat of British colonial expansion is long gone and its relevance has been left far behind in the shrouds of history. The long gone threat of British colonial expansion is no longer an excuse to keep monarchy alive which of course has become more like a "pain in the ass**" instead of being anything useful.

Only those countries whose so called elite class refused to give up some space and allow "exclusion" to take hold has fragmented into smaller nations. Yougslavia is given
by Bhra"Man"' as an example.

Those countries which have exercised "inclusion" have remained to stay strong as a multicultural, multilingual society within the framework of a single nation.

Guys,
Read this counterpunch article. " Death of democracy and rise of dictator: the monarchy of Nepal". Great.
http://www.counterpunch.org/devkota02192005.html

Another interesting book about G Shah
"King of Nepal" ISBN 061511928 X