by Andrew Korybko
The relatively obscure and media neglected topic of Nepal’s growing constitutional crisis has the very real possibility of transforming into a larger proxy confrontation between China and India. Neither state stands to gain by falling into this strategic trap, but as their mutual neighbor’s destabilization only intensifies, and each Asian giant finds themselves increasingly supporting opposing sides, it might just take another small spark of violence to enflame the country once more in civil war, and with it, bring the continent’s two largest countries into a full-blown proxy conflict. This briefing looks at the recent history behind the latest political crisis in Nepal, and then concisely examines the dichotomies between China and India’s approaches to it. Finally, the last part sums up the most probable regional scenario of what would happen if civil war returns to the South Asian state.
Nepal’s government overwhelmingly passed a new constitution last month which plans to devolve the unitary state into a federal one formed from seven new provinces . The decision was met with immediate consternation by some of the country’s minority ethnic groups, most notably the Madhesi and Tharu that live in the fertile Terai region that stretches along the Indian border. India, too, hasn’t been too keen about supporting its neighbor’s moves, giving indications that it’s worried that friendly ethnic groups like the Madhesi might be underrepresented in the new structure. India’s lack of enthusiasm about Nepal’s federalization is occurring at the same time as the growing Madhesi uprising in the south (now joined by the Muslim community) that has stopped border trade between the two countries, leading Kathmandu to accuse New Delhi of implementing a de-facto blockade. India, for its part, denies the accusations, and says that its trucks can’t get through the border because of the anti-federalization unrest there. The crisis is becoming especially acute because fuel supplies are blocked at the border, and Nepal is having difficulty compensating with imports from China because of most of the border checkpoints are still unpassable after the earthquake earlier this year. One of them just reopened , however, and it’s already having a positive effect on ameliorating the crisis.
What had begun initially as a domestic political issue has warped into one with international dimensions, as it’s observable that China and India are now competing for Nepal’s loyalty. China has the advantage of taking a hands-off approach to its partner’s internal affairs, and combined with its fuel exports to the beleaguered country, this has ingratiated it with the national government. At the same time, however, India exerts a different level of influence that’s concentrated along cultural, economic, and ethnic lines. It’s the Himalayan state’s largest trading partner , and it has strong connections to the country’s majority Hindu population and plethora of minority border-region groups. There’s thus a certain dichotomy when it comes to China and India’s present methods of influence over Nepal – Beijing’s are top-down, while New Delhi’s are bottom-up.
From Civil War To Proxy War?
At this juncture, it remains to be seen whether the government will budge on amending the internal borders of its proposed federal entities. Kathmandu is afraid that giving in to the Madhesis’ demands will grant them too much clout within the new administrative construction, essentially carving out a de-facto state for the pro-Indian ethnicity within Nepal which other minorities might be eager to copy. On the other hand, failure to work with the Madhesis in calming its agitated protests might lead to the unintentional outbreak of an ethnic-based civil war, which would then have the potential to unravel the country in ways that its ideological precursor never could, and consequently provoke a humanitarian crisis that could predictably spill over into India. In such an event, India’s subtle support of the Madhesis and others would become overt and stated, and it would find itself forced to deal with this (somewhat expected) crisis along its northern borderlands. Forecasting ahead, India’s support would be for anti-government ethnic minorities, while China would assist the government. If it gets to the point of both states sending weapons to their preferred side, then the constitutional crisis will formally become the next Asian Cold War (with US-Chinese pan-regional tensions and their subset of Chinese-Japanese insular and ASEAN rivalry being the first one), and the disastrous consequences that this would have for BRICS and SCO unity could drive India even closer into the hands of the US and offset the multipolar zeitgeist that’s sweeping the supercontinent.
Nepal belongs historically and culturally clearly to the Indian Subcontinent. Any overtly aggressive political moves by China would be a huge mistake.
The historic Gautam Buddha, for example, traveled with his Sangha all his teaching life in a region that is situated both in modern India and modern Nepal.
Yes it belongs to the Indian subcontinent, but it doesn’t belong to India. Thats what you people dont understand. India has always tried to bully Nepal (ever since it got its independence from the British). It was giving shelter to the Maoist insurgency that plagued the country for almost a decade. And it uses the Madhesis (the majority of whom are Indians, who came across because of open border and visa free regime between the two countries) whenever it want to force Nepal to accept even more dominance. One of the main reason that is stopping the compromise between the two parties is the Madhesis (read India) insistence that the naturalized citizens must get the chance to held top posts of the government (Ukrainian style). This was never going to be accepted by the Nepalese.
Nepalese have a very favorable opinion of the Chinese because it doesn’t interfere in internal matters unlike India who is hated by the most. Indians arent too keen on diplomacy as long as they feel they can coercion will do the job. A couple of years ago there was an attache at the Indian embassy who even threaten to shoot one of the reporters of the leading newspaper because they had ran a report that one of India’s biggest companies ‘Dabur’ was grossly violating health standards. India even blocked the newsprint that was imported by the newspaper because most things Nepal imports transit via India, being a landlocked country.
India is nothing but hypocritical in its insistence that the new constitution is not inclusive enough whlie leading Nepal experts in India have commented that it is far more inclusive than Indian constitution ever was. Its amazing when you realize that India pretends to be taking a moral high ground backing Madhesis while disregarding the demands of a sizeable ethnic Nepalese population that became Indian after British annexed parts of Nepal after Nepal lost the war.
Reading Korybko’s article you get the feeling that it is a tension between India and China but in actuality it is between India and Nepal. And China has taken a wiser position by backing the majority Nepalese because they know that alienating ethnic Nepalese inside their own country means a recipe for disaster. It is just not viable. Because if Nepal was to kowtow to Indian demands now, in the future they will have to fight for their own legitimate rights against powers that represent foreign interests inside their own country.
But ultimately, I would like to address that its the fault of Nepalese leaders who in order to gain power inside the country have always acquiesced to Indian demands against the interest of their country. This goes a long way back and finally has come to this that a constitution approved by more than 84% of all members have to please foreign demands first.
More on this from one of sane voices in India – M.K. BhadraKumar.
thanks for the link, it’s a good article.
India under Modi is turning out a real nightmare. Not only cosying up to the USA and the hereditary fascist Abe in Japan, but aiding the US regime change operation in Sri Lanka, and drawing close to Israel, whose expertise in crushing a restive Moslem population forever has been very useful in Kashmir. And inside India Hindu fascist mobs are running amuk, killing Moslems with impunity for ‘crimes’ like eating meat. And as the bizarre and hideous sex crimes against infants and children show, something is rather sick in ‘Shining India’. The failure to raise more than a thin layer of ‘middle-class’ out of poverty, so unlike China, might have something to do with it. Modi looks likely to try anti-Chinese aggression (India remains the only one of China’s fourteen land neighbours not to have resolved all border disputes, due to Indian intransigence)to distract the populace and ingratiate himself with the USA. A real pity. China and India together could shake the world, and for the better, but Modi appears to prefer pleasing the European overlords.
Modi’s a creep. But even aside from him, India’s regressed a long way since Nehru.
Mind you, India’s huge. Some of the provinces are still cool–Kerala, for instance.
PLG, Kerala is Heaven on Earth. One can scarcely imagine what it was like in the days when the Romans traded silver for pepper there, but even today, over-populated and with its forests in retreat, it is wonderful. I’ll always remember one day when I visited Trivandrum, from Kovalam, to see an exhibition of Roman coins found in a treasure trove, and outside the museum was an Amherstia tree in full bloom, a never to be forgotten sight. Sitting on the balcony of a hotel on an island in Cochin Harbour sipping gins and tonic, or finally seeing a talipot palm in full flower, the largest inflorescence on this planet, were equally memorable. I could really enjoy living in the hills around Munnar, too.
PLG, I was just listening to a report that a number of Indian writers have protested the most recent, the third, murder of venerable Indian Hindu scholars, who had the audacity to teach a ‘rationalist’ approach to Hinduism, rather than the primitive superstitiousness of the Modi-approved form. India is careering rapidly to a sort of clerico-fascism that will make it an ideal ‘partner’ for the USA and India.
This mostly seems very sound. But I hadn’t heard before anyone claiming that India had been at all fond of the Maoist insurgency (which had some pretty strong reasons for coming into existence).
There is no publically available evidence to show it but it was claimed by Maoist leaders themselves and known by everyone that they were residing in India. India never handed the top leaders although I think it did capture them on a couple of occasions. It supported Nepal’s ‘anti-terrorists’ operation against Maoist officially but never showed that in practice. It cant be believed that that a ragtag bunch of Nepalese could have evaded all the intelligence apparatus of such big and resourced country like India for a decade. Moreover SD Muni claimed that India played a influential role in helping bring Maoist to peaceful politics. So if you add all of them together you get the picture who was behind them. Not to mention where did the Maoists got their weapons and ammunitions from?
Exactly Purple Lib Gy,
You are correct in questioning that narrative. They were “Mao-Ist” (ie inspired by China’s communist founder Mao Ze Dong). The origin of this insurgency is still a murky mystery to me. It is not clear whether they were backed by China, the Anglo-Saxon West or India.
Zweistein, your comment:
Nepal belongs historically and culturally clearly to the Indian Subcontinent. Any overtly aggressive political moves by China would be a huge mistake.
Is an excellent comment. As soon I saw it, I thought here come the hysterical comments of the usual band on of Anti-India trolls, this’ll be fun: to see so much wasted effort at impotent hatred and myth-making. Q.E.D. :-)
Of course it would be huge political and military mistake by China if they were to engage in either an overt or even a covert aggressive move in Nepal: one that they would highly likely lose (and lose badly). Everything favors India in Nepal, the geography, the religion, the culture, the economic integration, etc. Truthfully, the only beneficiaries of such a cold-conflict would be the inbred incompetents in Westminister and their Wilsonian-Anglophile fans in the US (as well as the thoroughly corrupt and incompetent political class in Katmandu who’ve proven their selfishness and ineptness in their recent bungled earthquake rescue & reconstruction; the only effective efforts by local Nepalese are those that by-passed the Nepalese civilian politicians and bureaucracy as well as heroic efforts by the Nepalese military and the massive air-lift by India).
The second part of your comment is equally true:
The historic Gautam Buddha, for example, traveled with his Sangha all his teaching life in a region that is situated both in modern India and modern Nepal.
Of course this part of your comment will drive the usual Indophobic crowd into a frenzy of self-exposure.
“Of course it would be huge political and military mistake by China if they were to engage in either an overt or even a covert aggressive move in Nepal: one that they would highly likely lose (and lose badly). ”
Did you even read the article at all. China is close to government that majority of Nepalese support. It says right there in the article. Moreover, the people of Nepal view China favorably and they hate India even though they are some cultural connection with the Indians because of their constant interference in domestic matters.. So how will backing up majority be in China’s disadvantage? Your comments simply defy logic and commonsense.
I’m sorry but I think you’re proving my point;-)
“I’m sorry but I think you’re proving my point;-) ”
Yes, I agree and so is everyone else.
Thank you again for an important report on this very sensitive issue – which needs to be monitored.
I think it is important that we keep an eye on the bigger picture outside of Syria and Ukraine. The US is already trying to flex its muscles in the South China Sea and would love a civil war in Nepal and the potential consequences for the BRICS and SCO. I hope India will not allow itself to be dragged into this confrontation.
Nepal is world’s only Hindu state by its Constitution. India has targeted its tiny neighbor for exporting religious hatred and cheap labor. British empire’s famed ‘Gurkha regiment’ also comes from Nepal.
Nepal’s recent earthquake has exposed another Israel’s secret to fight the Arab demographic ‘existential’ threat. On Tuesday, two Israeli planes landed at Tel Aviv Ben-Gurion airport carrying hundreds of tourists and Jew gays including 26 Israeli babies for Jew same-sex couples from Kathmandu. The babies were given birth by Nepalese and Indian Hindu mothers.
Millions of Nepali work have been working in India for decades. India has provided employment, a livelihood and a way to support and feed their families.
China has done no such favours. Except bribe the political leaders.
That is why India has a bottom up approach while China has a top down approach.
You are just misinformed my friend. Millions of Indians work in Nepal too. So either both are providing employment, a livelihood and a way to support and feed their families or neither one is.
China doesn’t have a visa free regime and open border with Nepal that is the reason why there arent many Chinese inside Nepal and vice versa like Indians in Nepal and vice versa.
I think when it comes to bribing Nepalese leaders China is nowhere near India thats the reason why Indians have so much clout in Nepal.
As for the bottoms up approach, it is easier to get the favor of the population if that population is infact from your own country who have migrated to another country or the most of Madhesis. Infact one of the members of constitutional assembly representing the Madhesis was/is an Indian citizen who lost the election in his own country(in Indian state of Bihar).
Lastly, I dont know why India is viewed so favorably in the West or at least way more than China when the modern state of India is the continuation of the worst traits of the British empire that left it behind. Its is run by the ruthless corporatists who have very little regard for the minority or the indigenous population fighting for their rights/lands.
“I dont know why India is viewed so favorably in the West ”
It’s because (a) India is less recalcitrant, i.e. more obedient to Western demands and
(b) It’s a “democracy” – serious, in the minds of the West, “well, at least is a democracy” counts a lot…
“Lastly, I dont know why India is viewed so favorably in the West or at least way more than China when the modern state of India is the continuation of the worst traits of the British empire that left it behind. Its is run by the ruthless corporatists who have very little regard for the minority or the indigenous population fighting for their rights/lands.”
Indeed. I still can’t believe that the Indian government has allowed Wall Mart to set op shop in India. Or Mc Donalds and last but not least MonSATAN. It is unreal how many farmers take their lives everyday (forgot the name of the documentary).
A few weeks ago, there was another item on tv called “Nero’s guests”.
One of the many (good) qualities about Putin is, that he said “no GMO” in Russia. I had hoped that Modi would copy this, but I know better now. India may be the biggest “democracy” in the world, but that doesn’t mean anything if you let little farmers, the cornerstone of Indian society, bleed to dead, literally!
Indeed. I’m not sure how handing millions of farmers over to Monsanto and moneylenders so tens of thousands can commit suicide by drinking pesticides constitutes a “bottom-up” approach.
Quite right. To be frank it’s rather strange that India is buying Western weapons (i.e. US, France, IsraHell).
The Indian government should get their priorities straight. They are part of a new alliance, BRICS and should behave accordingly. That means no more weapons and other sh#t from the evil empire and their minions.
By the way, the documentary I forgot (see above) was “Bitter Seeds”, the last part of a trilogy. This trilogy has won many awards:
A little research you will find out that your statement is false. Here is the remittance to India
Remittance Source Countries
Remittances source country Remittance amount
UAE US$ 14,255 mn
USA US$ 10,844 mn
Saudi Arabia US$ 7,621 mn
United Kingdom US$ 3,904 mn
Bangladesh US$ 3,716 mn
Canada US$ 3,145 mn
Nepal US$ 3,220 mn
Indians making so much money in Nepal, It is Indians not grateful!
It’s rather easier to travel to India than China, from Nepal. Culturally Nepal and India are much closer. It’s hardly enough to hang a Sinophobic rant on. Nepal ought to be a transit point between the world’s two biggest states, to all their benefits. India seems to prefer a vassal state, a larger Sikkim, perhaps.
For Indian perspectives on this issue, I recommend following the relevant thread at Bharat-Rakshak.
“Nepal/Bhutan News and Discussion”
Edited to remove rude comments. Whoever – please tone down your rhetoric – the moderation policy does not allow attacks on other commenters or racist comments. Mod TR
More like a thread parroting their country line that they be given a free pass to pursue their hegemonic role. Dont know much about your own country or how to improve your fellow countrymen’s living standards but when it comes to others almost every one is a world class expert. I guess your thread could be aptly summarized as the ‘Bellingcat of India’ or where kids with too much time and too little knowledge gather to make themselves feel smart thus finding a way to avoid the troublesome issues at home that actually matter.
To the mod:
Yeah I agree I got bit too carried away on this one but I still dont see how you could’ve removed parts from my other comment.
Whoever, please see my other reply to you.
Nothing can be more entertain than seeing Indian kick up a storm whenever, and where ever it perceive that Chinese is, or maybe having a upper hand on any thing, or any where. One thing I can see is you sure are consistent.
People now live on that land is far cry from the people who Chinese used to study from. You ought to let those natives break off of your stranglehold, and so they can be their true great self.
Anon, China and India were level-pegging, more or less, in 1949, although China had suffered far more devastation in WW2. Now they are miles apart, and that rankles the Indian elite, who, if you have had dealings with them, particularly the caste elites, rather fancy themselves pretty special. Indeed I think the recent closeness between India and Israel devolves from their shared hatred of Moslems, the need to eternally repress restive Moslem populations in Kashmir and Palestine, and the shared belief, between the Brahmins and Jews, that they represent branches of the ‘aristocracy of humanity’. Indeed, in recent years, as if to cement this alliance of ubermenschen, another ‘lost tribe of Israel’ has been discovered in India.
China should not involve itself in Nepal.Its not a wise move.Nepal is on the Indian Sub-Continent side of the Himalayas.It has been involved with the Sub-Continent’s culture and history of territories for thousands of years.Just as India should keep out of Tibetan affairs,China needs to do the same with Nepal.While Nepal isn’t a part directly of India.Its about as close as you can get to that.If there is anything that would lead to trouble between the two,that is it.Its a similar situation to the US involving themselves in Ukraine or Belarus.But Nepal is even more dependent on India than those two are on Russia.While China has her hands full dealing with the US aggressive actions,Japan’s re-militarism,and her SCS Island disputes.Getting into a no-win situation with India over Nepal would be totally foolish.If worse came to worse,India would likely enforce a Sikkim or at best a Bhutan solution to Nepal and that would be the end of the problem.But it would leave relations with China bad.And that is the last thing China (and Russia) needs right now.Hopefully they won’t get into the situation of doing the US’s handiwork of ruining the China/India friendship for them.
Comments attacking other commenters have been removed. Mod TR
Moreover your comment shows you don’t know anything or nothing about Nepal and its relations with India. If you think the Nepalese will acquiesce to Indian demands now they would have done so with the British too a long time ago. Instead they fought unlike Indians and remained sovereign and independent. Thats one of the reason why Indians and Nepalese dont get along. Indians think they can easily subdue others with enough force and blackmailing like the Brits subdued them.
“Hopefully they won’t get into the situation of doing the US’s handiwork of ruining the China/India friendship for them.”
paragraph edited to remove comments antagoising other commenter. Mod TR
You think forming an axis of resistance with India/China/Russia against the West but, I got news, its not as easy as you think it is. India and China have their own differences without Nepal further the complicating matters. Besides, if China were to leave Nepal to India, they are sure that India in cohorts with Americans will start making trouble along the Nepal-China border to gain a upper hand. For China Nepal is a very sensitive issue because of Tibet. So things arent going to go as you wish. Just because Russophile sites like The Saker and Fortruss push ‘India=Good’ line because they buy Russian weapons and technology which is good for Russia means that Indians are the force to align yourself with. They only bought weapons from Russia because the US didn’t sell them. Now with US trying to forge ties with India, they aren’t too keen on Russian weapons all of a sudden, unless its something the US doesn’t sell them. India will try to be close to US because the population demands it.
to the mod:
If you are going to remove parts of my comments and make it incoherent please remove all of it or dont even bother publishing it at all. I dont think I called him names or called him stupid so how was it attacking? If I cant attack someones ignorance on the matter without making it personal than whats the point of commenting? I thought my comment had the similar tone that Saker uses sometimes when he has to counter somebody’s argument.
Whoever, as I have already mentioned please read the moderation policy. Your comments still make sense but your remarks which are not acceptable have been removed. I will trash your comments going forward if you cannot counter someone’s comment politely and with facts to back these up. Without reverting to insults. You are not the Saker.
Whoever, I know nothing about the situation in Nepal but what you write seems entirely plausible to me. Who is India to interfer in the internal workings of Nepal? Who are they to protect the minority in another country? If that is so come to New Zealand and protect the indigenous minority here India. The situation in New Zealand for these people is going from bad to worse.
It appears that other commentators have put on their eurocentric albeit racist anti Chinese glasses and are spouting anti Chinese rhetoric that is prevalent in mainstream news media. Get the same rubbish in New Zealand. It appears to me that China is supporting in ways the Nepalise Government has asked it to do. India on the other hand, according to this report, is worried about the Nepalise govt. they sound like the US in Ukraine to me re interfering in another country’s internal affairs.
I can tell your a Nepalese nationalist.And that’s fine,you have your opinion.But I’m not,I take the historical pragmatic view.You may not like that.But that is my view.All,and I do mean “all” the advantages lay with India in this situation.Nepal will have to come up with a plan that is acceptable to India.It may no like it,(and I don’t.I believe in countries being able to run their own affairs.As long as they aren’t oppressing people.),but regardless Nepal has no viable way around that.Three out of four sides of Nepal border India.The mountains,and Tibet are the fourth side.Just how much aid do you imagine China would be able (or willing) to ship into Nepal if India closed their borders.Just how long could Nepal survive without an economy.And a massive revolt by the pro-Indian supporters,not long.Don’t get into the mindset of the Ukrainian junta.Claiming that if Russia invaded them they would win.Have you noticed the population and military size of Nepal and India.And as I said many people in Nepal would revolt as well.So start to be pragmatic,and use the advantages that Nepal has.The main one is that India doesn’t want to invade them.Nepal could gain a lot from working with India (and China,as a bridge between them).But lose everything by not.As to your statement about the Nepalese fighting the British.Yes they did,and the British let them survive without direct rule.But Nepalese troops were recruited to serve the British after Nepal’s defeat in that war.In which Nepal lost almost a third of their country (now part of India). All historians and demographers class the Madhesis as Nepalese.They were split with India when Nepal lost all that territory to India.And then again when the British gave land gifts to the Nepalese monarchs.But there are over 6 million in Nepal.With not even a million in India.I think that says it all there.They make up around 12-15% of Nepal’s total population.So yes they should have a say in Nepal.Those classed as Nepali are only around 45% of the population.So Nepal is a very multinational country to begin with.
I can see you can read a map. But you cant tell what will happen or should happen by looking at the borders of a country. You say all say advantages lie with India so it can force its way. Well, if that was the case why haven’t they tried what they want before but now?. If India’s main advantage is geography then it is the same geography which was before isnt it? Why now they are trying to force it? Nepal doesn’t get aid from India it purchases with its own money. So where does this idea of Chinese aid come from? Are you trying to portray the whole country of Nepal as a beggar? Or do you think the situation is like Ukraine and Russia? It isnt. India doesnt provide gas or oil on discount it doesn’t give Nepal anything that it cant take more in return. You think that a massive pro-Indian revolts in cards. This too reflects your ‘the Sakerian’ view of the matter. Nothing against Saker but your views seem shaped by this and similar sites. You try to apply it to everything else. There are 25,000 thousand Nepalese serving in the Indian army. What do you think they will happen when they see Indian aggression against their country? If anything like a revolt was in the cards you will now it beforehand because India and Nepal are all too much connected with each hide it. I cant see anything like a revolt brewing. India cant start a fire without itself getting burnt. You just dont know the region at all.
Its very hard to argue with someone as uninformed as you. Nepalese dont have problem with Madhesis who have been living inside for so long. I am Nepalese, yes but I’m not a nationalist (this again shows your Ukie-Russia approach to everything). The President and the Vice President of Nepal are Madhesis. How do you think it was possible if Nepal was trying oppress Madhesis? The problem is with the demand of some Madhesis that want citizenship rules relaxed. If the Madhesis who have been living in Nepal long enough have got no problem attaining citizenship then why is this need for citizenship rules to be relaxed if it wasnt to include foreigners or Indians who migrate from India because of open border and visa free regime.
And yes, Nepal is a multinational country and Nepalese society is one of the most tolerant in the region (ask anyone who knows the region, he/she will confirm this). So why is the country where Buddhists and Hindus and Aryans and Mongols live peacefully together is up against some faction of Madhesis (not all)? This is the question you have to look at if you want to understand what interests of different parties is at play here. the new constitution was welcomed by everyone, by everyone I mean everyone of course with the lone exception of India. If India’s position was right couldn’t if find one other single nation that had similar views?
And lastly, you think might makes right so India will get anything it want and so Nepalese should kowtow to its bullying. Well for a short period of time lets say it might even succeed (which I doubt) but whats will be its plan when Nepal orients even more towards China slowly and painfully reducing its dependence on India. Do you think the humiliated Nepalese who are at a disadvantageous position now still follow the old rules when new facts are established on the ground? India knows its limitations. It cant start a Ukraine like uprising, all it can do is blockade. And its not the first time its has imposed a blockade (this time albeit an undeclared one – so not to be ridiculed at International stage). If it didnt destroy Nepal in the past then with China that is looking to increase its influence in Nepal it surely wont destroy now.
Again you need to change your ways of trying to cram everything into your Ukie-Russia world view. It coudln’t be more further from the truth when comes to India Nepal relations. And most importantly if try to double down on your ignorance at reply me with same old half truths and your own facts please dont expect me to reply because I am not a native English speaker and I cant type too quick (its already been hard too hard with this). I am not interested in entertaining your misinformed views on the matter unless you come up something interesting and fact based then, I cant help myself but engage further.
A few days ago, when “Uncle Bob 1” State Chinese is the most racist people under the sun without supporting facts, I have suggested to him stop making any comments as if he is speaking authority. Here I have to state again, “Uncle Bob 1” is clueless, his comments regarding Asia should be ignored.
***anon, don’t attack other commenters…I’m surprised you got through – modaa
Really? Well unlike your comments all anybody has to do is check history on my comments and they will find them 100% accurate.I’m sorry if the truth hurts you.But unlike some I don’t need to “twist” history to make a point.
Where is support for so called “truth” of yours? Chinese know who they are, what ever you say does not change the fact.
***Anon, if you don’t stop being rude to one of the best commenters on this site…I will personally see that you don’t get comments posted anymore here. – modaa
Modda, Your best commentator making a outrageous comments of without fact support. Why not you call him out as well!
like it or not, he has no insight to Chinese way of think, not facts to support of his view on the ground. Even Whoever has explained what is really happened in Nepal, and he is refusing to acknowledge. your ” best commentator” is clueless on the matter, and clueless about China as well.
Please, feel free to block me.
***yeah ok, I don’t mind you being on the opposite side, but no personal attacks…just hold you tongue except to define your position…don’t throw eggs after your argument buddy. – modaa
People with thin skin should not be in business making unsubstantiated, outrageous comments. I threw no eggs, but state facts.
***I don’t think Uncle bob has a thin skin…but I do, so watch out – modaa
Threat and insult do not work on me. However, I will respect your reasonable wishes because you are the moderator of this site.
We’ll have to see how this works out .But don’t be surprised if what I said pans out.
“All historians and demographers class the Madhesis as Nepalese.They were split with India when Nepal lost all that territory to India.And then again when the British gave land gifts to the Nepalese monarchs.But there are over 6 million in Nepal.With not even a million in India”
I forgot to adress this part. I wont comment on historians who have their own agenda or some of them are totally misinformed. But the problem is not that. The problem is not Madhesis that were inside Nepal from a very long time ago. Nepal had accepted them as Nepalese regardless of whether they migrated from India or were indigenous. But what you’ve these days is since then a large influx of Indians from Bihar and UP has concentrated inside Nepal who also identify themselves as Nepalese(because they look similar) and demand citizenships and furthermore that these naturalized citizens also be allowed to hold highest posts in government. Thats the problem. And most of the territories Nepal lost to India are still inside India. They have a big Nepalese speaking population(not Madhesis). They are fighting against the Indian government for own right which the Indians aren’t interested in listening to although Indians are quite good at playing minority card in other countries. And the territories returned to Nepal were minuscule compared to what it lost and not all of them living there were Madhesis. You are mixing two different things together and confusing yourself and others.
the earlier article from atimes.com given by whoever is a great article on this topic.
Off topic but related, I have always wondered by in the Indian subcontinent, instead of one BIG country INDIA, there are these small countries like sikkim, bhutan, and Nepal. Of course, I know the history of India/Pakistan/Bangladesh, but it’s those small countries that I wonder about. There must be some reason why they managed to remain “independent” rather than “absorbed”.
The British were interested in “control” of them.Not in uniting them into one big country.In the aftermath of the Mogul Empire,which had united most of the Sub-Continent no other native dynasty was strong enough to defeat the British and unite the lands.As long as the small native rulers would obey the British were happy to leave them in power.The large areas the British directly ruled were mostly gained over a couple of centuries from rulers that disobeyed them,and lost their lands.The British united those areas under their rule.And left the others under native Princes (some Muslim,some not).Though all the area came officially under the Raj.When the British pulled out they told the Princes they had to pick which country India or Pakistan to join.That presented a problem for several of them.And is the crux of the problem in Kashmir.Kashmir was mostly Muslim,but the Prince ruling them was Hindu.He picked India,against the wishes of most Kashmiri.A opposite situation was in Hyderabad in India.The majority of the people were Hindu,but the Prince was Muslim as well as a large minority.Unlike Kashmir that state was totally surrounded by Indian territory.The Indians sent troops to join it with India.Because they were afraid the Prince would pick Pakistan or declare Independence.Both the Indians and Pakistanis dethroned the ruling Princes in their territories over the first years after independence.
I dunno. Nepal is I think rather less globalized than most places, less dependent on trade. And they got geography like Switzerland on steroids. Attacking really mountainous places is unwise; we saw as much in Afghanistan . . . many times. So if India doesn’t have so much that they need, and if Nepal would be a massive pain to invade or hold, what is India’s leverage really? No doubt substantial due to sheer size, but less than would seem on the surface.
India cant achieve what it wants by covert operations like Russia did if it were start a war. It would have to intervene openly. The Madhesis arent much renowned for fighting unlike Nepalse who are fierce fighters (remember the Gurkhas?). The country went through a period of infighting so there is is a sizeable battle hardened general population and the army with enough battle experience if India starts a war and I think China would supply arms and ammunition to the government side. And there are 20,000 Nepalese serving in Indian army. Wonder what would happen to them if the war were to start. If India doesnt openly intervene then Nepalese should pound the crap out of the Madhesis. I dont know what will happen if India intervenes openly but it wont be pretty for them either. India doesnt have good relations with anyone of its neighbors so it wouldn’t be wise to start a war in the region where everyone is hostile to them. But I dont see things going that way. You can tell know if the war is brooding and theres is nothing to suggest India and Nepal are going to fight it out. Korybko is going to far with his proxy war prediction(if you can say that?). Its more like trying to imagine a worse case scenario. The two factions are sitting on table and talking from time to time unlike Ukies who simply refused to negotiate. So it is not going to happen.
As much as I was amused by the comments and self-incriminating statements of several people here who have absolutely no background on the Indian subcontinent or it geopolitics, I did pause at your following comment:
Madhesis arent much renowned for fighting unlike Nepalse who are fierce fighters (remember the Gurkhas?).
I would characterize your comments regarding Gurkhas being militarily ‘superior’ to the madhesis as quite I’ll-informed: you are making a racially based claim of military superiority of one ethnic group over another, that kind of ignorance based comment belongs in 19th century Britain. You seem to denk forget that leader of the successful maoist rebellion (1996) belonged to the madhesi related ethnic group, he is not a Gurkha. You also seem to be ignorant of the fact that it was a combination of marginalized minorities and lower-castes that brought the Gurkha based “Royal” Nepalese army to a defeat during the 1996 Maoist insurgency.
Given that I have Gurkha relatives (through marriage) and close friends in the same community, I can tell you that they are nearly as bombastic and irrational as your comments seem to imply (Thank God), on the contrary they’re very humble about Gurkha military accomplishments and consider themselves lucky that they survived actually combat (as you’d expect from people that actually walk-the-walk and not just talk-the-talk).
Given the lack of objectivity in your other comments and repeated the admonishments from the moderator to you, it doesn’t appear to me that your comments are objective and fact based. Therefore, they do appear to lack credibility, this is a shame given the amount of time you spent writing your long posts. With due respect it might have been better if you had used some of that effort backing up your statements with proof and actual sources.
“I would characterize your comments regarding Gurkhas being militarily ‘superior’ to the madhesis as quite I’ll-informed……..You seem to denk forget that leader of the successful maoist rebellion (1996) belonged to the madhesi related ethnic group, he is not a Gurkha”
Yeah, what do I know about my country after all I’ve lived here only for 28 years!! You really are a good laugh! None of the most influential leaders of the Moist groups are Madhesis! Only a few in what you call second level or further below that. The Maoist insurgency was most successful in the western mountainous regions of Nepal who used guerrilla fighting tactics and most of the fighters were Pahedias (or lets just call them Nepalese to keep things simple) not Madhesis. Madhesis live in the more open and flat terrain on the southern side of Nepal bordering India. Any adventure or attack they tried to mount on those flat terrains all ended up in a disaster. The most successful ones were always on the western hilly regions of Nepal.
“You also seem to be ignorant of the fact that it was a combination of marginalized minorities and lower-castes that brought the Gurkha based “Royal” Nepalese army to a defeat during the 1996 Maoist insurgency.”
The first part about marginalized minorities is true but I dont remember seeing much Madhesis in combat clothes in Maoist camps after they came to truce (yes, there were few Madhesis but their number was minuscule). There are plenty of minorities and marginalized people who arent Madhesis. The root cause of Maoist insurgency was poverty and centralism of Kathmandu (the capital) and lack of development projects health and educational facilities in the regions where it later proliferated; the cause of marginalized minorities was only a subsidiary. As for the second part about Gurkha based Royal army let just say its hard for me to respond to anything that is this.. how do I call it… stupid. If you know about this then please provide facts (I mean data not some article written by a foreigner who creates own facts than actually reporting them because of his lack of grasp of the subject or ideological slant). There are Scandinavian and EU countries who are trying brew tension between different ethnicities and people by giving them money and persuading them to pursue this ‘marginalized agendas’ by totally overblowing things.
My comments about Gurkhas may sound bombastic but it is true(proven time and time again).
“… and consider themselves lucky that they survived actually combat.”
This is just a an emotional claptrap devoid of any real value which doesn’t in anyway alter what I said about Gurkhas and their fierce nature. Or as I was typing I suddenly realized how you might have been confused. I said fierce in the battlefield, not in normal day to day life. Haha…
“Given the lack of objectivity in your other comments…… With due respect it might have been better if you had used some of that effort backing up your statements with proof and actual sources.”
If you are so sure I’m making things up, then what is stopping you from providing facts that counter what I said and back up by them by actual sources? Just like you want things to be.
As for some of my comments being moderated, I got emotional during my early comments that what was happening my country was being misreported and misrepresented but in my later comments I adjusted the way I was posting replies and comments and everything seems to be running smoothly now. Just because moderator deleted some of my lines doesnt means what I posted was fiction. Rather he wanted me to try not to make things personal.
Glad you wasted your time responding in such a verbose manner Denk typo (I didn’t read past the part where you mention you’re 28 years old.)
You must feel particularly impotent and frustrated that you waste so much time myth making about stuff that you cannot do a thing about.
The fact is that Uncle Bob1 has beautifully demolished your obviously poorly researched and conspiracy riddles posts. In addition, you’ve made Indian Nationalists look reasonable and sane compared to your near fanatical propensity to see an Indian hand in everything that’s gone wrong on your life and in the lives of that failed state known as Pakistan.
I didn’t have to respond to you even once, I just watched Uncle Bob1 demolish your claims by simply supplying facts and logic.
What’s next? You’re going to blame the earthquake in Nepal on some secret nefarious Indian super weapon? An earthquake generating subsonic resonance device? It must have been responsible for the Pakistani Kashmir quake too (where thousands on Pakistanis were killed and wounded but only 6 people died on the Indian side)
Woooo! Must have been that Indian super earthquake weapon!
***ok, this comment has personal attacks in it. Please refrain from these in future or your whole comment will go to trash. – modaa
Thank you for your patience and time.
I freely admit that my post contained personal sarcasm towards user “whoever” and his other personas. If you look at the utter troll like behavior he has exhibited here almost akin to vandalism you’ll see the effect. Compare that to the reasoned, fact-based and calm responses from Uncle Bob1. The information flow, discussion and atmosphere gets polluted with disinfo and personal invectives lowering the intellectual bar.
I simply wanted to highlight and expose further that individuals lack of credibility and personal biases. I thank you for giving me that opportunity. I’ve accomplished that goal and do not need to expose user “Whoever’s” lack of objectivity or facts on this topic any further nor waste your time any further, from my part, my point was made to him and this thread is closed.
Thank you again for time and dedication.
“(I didn’t read past the part where you mention you’re 28 years old.)”
So you have a problem with reading? If thats the case then you’ve come to the wrong place my friend. There is nothing else to do here in this site but to read. If you would have told me that earlier then you would have saved both of us from wasting our time.
“You’ve made Indian Nationalists look reasonable and sane compared to your near fanatical propensity to see an Indian hand in everything that’s gone wrong on your life and in the lives of that failed state known as Pakistan.”
Haha… that part was particularly hilarious. Not even once have I typed Pakistan or said anything about Pakistan before this during my entire time here at this thread. You seem to be caught by the same delusion like ‘Uncle Bob 1’ in thinking that some of the ‘Anonymous’ exchanges with ‘Uncle Bob1’ are mine. Well, its not. Well at least the site mangers should know that anyway because of the IP address.
Ha Ha. These foolish Nepalese really think we chinese are going to help them in war. We have our own interest and that interest is huge Indian market, not that crappy resourceless landlocked country Nepal. See, I am not trying to be rude but as a Chinese I can clearly say we have no interest in Nepal and we will definitely not help you guys during war. So settle your problems yourself, even by force for that matter. It’s your guys fault that you allowed Indians to conquer your lands and now you are asking us to spend money on you guys for the mistake you guys did. Indians might help Madeshis because Madeshis=Indian but we won’t have any advantage by helping ethnic Nepalese.
Bob, China and Nepal are neighbours. China is not making a fuss in Nepal-India is. The Chinese are just offering neighbourly friendship, as they ought to. India, suffering its perennial dyspepsia at being continually outshone by China, is picking this fight, to ingratiate itself with the USA. Modi has to offer some distraction for the Hindutva mobs he has unleashed at home.
I don’t blame China.My point is that China shouldn’t come between India and Nepal,for whatever reason.It can’t end well for them.And the loss of India to the US would destroy any idea of the maritime route.Complicate the Silk Route.And make relations for Russia very difficult (which of course is one reason the US would be happy about that).I don’t know how to get India fully on board.I think it would be best to let Putin work on that.But feeding “red meat” to the Indian nationalists is not a good way to do it.
It’s very revealing all the people here who are parroting the Pro-India line on Nepal, even as they pose as opponents of the American Empire and Zionist Israel. India is increasingly close to both of the war criminal nations and indeed has adopted their tactics–with even the Israeli Mossad reputedly operating with the India military and RAW spy agency in nations like Kashmir.
In general, India would like to turn Nepal into another Bhutan, which is to say another India-dominated satrap, even more than it is already is.
India has thus been covertly backing various anti-government groups (like the Madhesis) in Nepal in order to pressure Katmandu from developing any independent foreign policy and moving out of the Indian orbit towards China.
India’s policy is a “bottom-up” one alright … like that of its close ally, the United States of America, which routinely backs and supports anti-government/ethnic groups against a targetted country or government (see Syria, Libya, etc.) to effect regime change or pressure it.
Also much like America, India disguises its aggressive moves behind the veneer of “democracy” or humanitarianism. Hence, the comical boasts about India being the world’s largest (apartheid) democracy…. replete with an equally large apartheid caste system to match.
For those who are ignorant–willful or otherwise–India has a (Hindu) nationalist dogma called AKHAND BHARAT, which calls for India to rule over the entire subcontinent from the Kush Mountains in Afghanistan to Pakistan to Nepal to Bangladesh to Sri Lanka.
This ideology implicitly drives Indian foreign policy and is crucial for undestanding its intentions towards nations like Nepal.
M.B.I. Munshi has edited a seminal book entited _The India Doctrine_ which exposes and documents India’s agenda towards the subcontinent.
The India Doctrine (1947-2007): A Contemporary Study on Indian Hegemony and Geo-Strategic Perspectives on South Asia
Book Review – MBI Munshi’s ‘The India Doctrine’
THE INDIA DOCTRINE (1947-2007) by M. B. I. Munshi
Anon, Akhand Bharat sounds awfully like ‘Eretz Yisrael’. No wonder India under Modi and Israel are such good friends. India is careering towards Hindutva fascism under Modi. Yet another disaster for Indians and humanity. Modi is clearly just as dangerous as anticipated.
I’m sure the ZPC/NWO oligarchy would love to see China and India clash over Nepal and are working hard to make it happen. Given the sods have tried this before on India and China, these countries hopefully won’t be suckered again.
It wont happen. China will not suck into such thing. But it does not mean Nepal can not choose who they want to be friendly with, or Chinese will be bothered by Indian’s I am world power, I suppose to own every where from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Tibet, to even Burma ego.
Chinese will always help Nepal. I hope the train route will be built, transportation will be get better, and Nepal will not have to depend on India along. Indians can keep shooting it self on the foot.
For those who think India can help your course, you need to wise up, and exam how the conduct their affairs, and see if it is state worth bothering.
I am very pro-India in the religious sense, but I can see from the comments that India is a bad guy here.
Poor Nepal. Such good people. Have been there…
The ancient Hindu culture or civilization is not what today’s India is interested in. The hindu nationalist like Modis go to Putin espousing the benefits of Yoga and other things while he acquiesces to corporates inside the country. You should try familiarize yourself with Arundhati Roys interviews/writings on the Naxalite movement and Kashmir issue of India to get the sense of soul of today’s India. The most important thing for India is how to be a superpower so that the outsiders wont look down upon it. Any dissent or differing view that hinders that aim is to be crushed down ruthlessly.
So, the plan is to federalize, and a locally-concentrated minority group who could be expected to dominate one or more of the resulting provinces is upset about it? I don’t really understand this article.
I’m also wondering what happened to the parliamentary split between the Maoist ex-insurgents and everybody else. Is this a united parliament proposing this, or what?
I’ll try to simplify this for you:-
What the problem now Nepal is facing is the Madhesis who look favorably towards India are being played by India to gain more influence inside the country more than it already enjoys (perhaps more influence than US in Mexico or Canada). The scale of its influence its unprecedented. Literally, Nepalese leaders shit or piss whenever they are told by Indian government. But the Indian greed has grown ever so more because of our useless politicians that now, basically India wants to turn Nepal into its vassal state(if not outright annex it like it annexed Sikkim – which it has planned in the past ever since India got independence from British). Everything else the rights about Indian concerns of minorities in Nepal is just a some screen (India treats its own minorities like dirt). Thats the truth and everything else is trying to appeal to peoples emotions hide the real thing.
Thanks. That’s useful information, although I didn’t really want it simplified–to the contrary, I wanted it complicatified, enough info about different factions to make some sense of the apparent contradictions.
Here are some basics about Nepali politics.
1. ‘Establishment’ faction :-
All of the influential parties use anti-India rhetoric when they are out of power and are soft spoken towards India when in power. Meaning nothing is to be trusted from what comes out of their mouth. The bastards that are in power haven’t even enough balls to say that India is imposing a blockade and make it international. If they know they can solve it without making India look like a really bad guy then they have got nothing but my best wishes. But nobody sane believes in their ability to diffuse this crisis. Even though they fight with each other and seek India’s blessing to get in power one commendable thing is that they have unitedly refused India’s over the top demands.
Here is the list of India’s demands -: http://kathmandupost.ekantipur.com/news/2015-09-23/india-wants-seven-amendments-to-nepals-constitution-confidential.html
As you can see amendment 3 is simply unacceptable.
2. And there is this outsider faction or mainly the Madhesis that are refusing to accept the new constitution voted in favor by more than 84% of members of constitution assembly. Nobody knows what compromise the both faction are willing to make. But one thing what is sure is that if India says to drop their all demands then they will drop it right then and there.
3. And there are Tharus – indigenous to Nepal and generally in line with the majority of the population that isn’t too keen on Indian influence inside country. They used to be close established to establishment faction but the stupid leaders of our country have manged to piss them off too by disregarding their real concerns about the boundaries of would be states once federalization is implemented. Their areas of concentration has been broken off so as not to disturb the influential leaders constituencies from which they get elected. So i cant really blame the Tharus. And now they have aligned themselves with Madhesis in protesting the new constitution although not their demands are same as that of Madhesis. Our stupid leaders have done a wonderful job of bringing them together.
And there are some who want rights of certain ethnicity to be put before others in certain areas. They use to quite prominent during the First Constitutional Assembly which failed to deliver the constitution because of their demands and we had a second elected assembly after first one was dissolved. But now they are more like a looney bunch of few that hasn’t much clout and cannot challenge the process after parties trying to divide the countries along ethnic lines heavily lost their seats in second election. That includes Madhesis as well but unlike them Madhesis can affect the process because of India’s backing.
So you see, from the inside its should looks a tussle between Madhesis and other Nepalse but infact at heart of the matter is India’s influence. As for who is willing to compromise how much nobody from the outside knows. As for Madhesis some of their demands can be accepted but not all and the ones that help increase India’s influence in the name of giving Madhesis more power is just not acceptable to the general populace of Nepal. And Indian behavior tends one towards thinking that they are trying to play hardball with those demands which are really harmful to Nepal. So we will have to see how it pans out. I hope this helps.
If you are familiar with the term “gerrymandering”,that is what Nepal’s government is trying with those provinces.And that is what India is asking them to amend.They are splitting that ethnic group over several provinces so as to lessen their votes.They would always be outvoted in the elections in the provinces.Its extremely clear what the plan is.The Ukrainians try that all the time.When giving poll data for a region they take areas not historically part of that region with Ukrainian speaking majorities,add them into Russian speaking areas to lesson the Russian speaking regional numbers.Its an old trick,used in many countries.The US is an expert at it.We do that to minorities all the time in election districts (to our shame).
First of all the delineation of the states is yet to be finalized. So dont get too carried away with it. Secondly if gerrymandering is what Nepal is trying to do then by the same logic how could India be free the same accusation that it is trying the same by cramming those areas where there are more Madhesis into one region as gain more influence. If your whole aim isn’t to try to show Nepal into bad light how could you leave the other side of the same point so conveniently? Are you an Indian nationalist? I’m starting to think so.
So this idea of delineation is highly contested. And the problems facing it are not so cut and dried. Not all the areas near India-Nepal border are dominated by Madhesis. There are plenty of Nepalse too that are there. So, there is no way one side could all of what it wants. Moreover, this is just one issue. I see you have even refused to address other highly controversial demands pushed by the Indian side(see seven amendments link above) and try to paint the whole thing as being centered on this one single issue. And India wants to review constituencies every 10 year rather than every 20 year proposed by Nepalese side. For a country like Nepal which is plagued of instability it seems nothing more than another Indian ploy to instigate further instability. We have yet to have a government that have lasted full 5 year. So Nepal desperately needs some stability and India wants to gain a upper hand in the regions near it by trying to change constituencies every 10 year. While on the surface it might seem like a good idea but when you realize changing the borders of a constituency is never smooth and it is bound to create even more dispute among people in those areas. And India has never missed a opportunity to gain something in Nepal by instigating a clash among Nepalese as history shows.
And the most controversial issue is of course the Indian demand that naturalized citizen be allowed to hold top posts like Prime Minister or President or Supreme justice. There is guy who lost election in Indian state of Bihar right now in the Nepalse parliament representing one of Madhesis parties. You know whose interests will be his priority if he were to become a PM or President oo Supreme justice. But of course this is something you’d like to think as a fiction created by a Nepalese side to oppress ‘poor’ Madhesis.
I didn’t “refuse” to discus those issues.I frankly didn’t see anything in them out of the ordinary in most societies.The request said “birth” or naturalization by the way.So why would you object to the “birth” part.Is it maybe because you don’t consider those people “real Nepalese”.Its the classic ultra-nationalist argument.One ethnic group isn’t legitimate in their eyes.So shouldn’t have the same rights as the other.The Ukrainian Bandera are playing that now.If Ukrainians are Russian speakers they aren’t “really worthy” to be part of the society.We see the trouble that causes.And in the ME,we see the same thing around religion.If you aren’t “this or that” religion you aren’t “really” a part of that particular nation. I’ve seen it throughout history,and always reject it.As for being an “Indian nationalist”,not really.There is no country I can think of without some faults (certainly my own has plenty).But,I take issues on a case by case basis.And some countries I might oppose on one issue,and support on another.I try to look at all countries with a “right or wrong” view on issues.And not oppose,or support a country based on pure nationalism.You should try that sometime,and not let nationalism consume you.You could also give that advise to your anonymous alter-egos as well (yes,I realize the game).
Man not only its nauseating to discuss with you, it was border line paranoid or you think you are way too smart than you actually are, that you think Anonymous and I are the same people(isnt that what you mean, my English is not so good). I dont know whether to laugh or be to be really angry when you try to sound so confident by adding ‘yes, I realize the game too’. Your problem seems that your own ego is stopping you even considering the thought that is there a way I could have been wrong. This is Internet mate its no big deal if you are wrong. Nobody will know you anyway.
As for the birth part, I dont know what it exactly means but I think it means a birth that takes place inside Nepal from foreign citizens(parents) that is to accommodate Madhesis demands that children of migrants who are infact Indians that come from India be given citizenship. I dont know how much more accommodating Nepal could have been here. They could have simply refused to grant citizenship citing that they are children of foreigners. Its was within Nepal’s right. And Nepal decided that those who acquire citizenship that way cannot hold high posts in the government. I know this isnt way things are done in Western world I guess, but I can see the logic behind at work here: the loyalty of the child is questioned because of nationality of their parents. But, the children of those who acquire citizenship that way cant be barred from holding high posts because they would get their citizenship by descent. So it looks nothing more than a safety precaution on Nepal’s part that such citizens by birth not be allowed top posts, but their children in the future can hold such positions. If you think this is nationalistic, racist than do whatever you want. Again if we were trying to disenfranchise these people(like ere are omnipotent gods that can do everything) then how did the President and Vice President both happen to be Madhesi? Please answer that.
And why do you keep bringing the Ukrainian issue again and again when I’ve tried to tell you so many times that this is totally different. You have a very narrow way of thinking which I think originates from you limited knowledge which in turn you try to compensate by accusing others of being nationalistic, or accuse them of trying to trick you by using two different names. Man you should calm down and get a rest or something. Its taking a toll on you. And please dont expect to reply if you do decide to respond because I dont think I can bear you any more. Good night.
Debating with ultra-nationalists (if I can borrow the joke of Putin’s about Obama) is like playing chess with a pigeon. The pigeon knocks over all the pieces, craps on the board and then struts around like it won the game. Good night to you too.
It is like living in twilight zone when people here accuses Nepalis pull a Ukraine on India.
Here is a article regarding Indian conduct in Nepal during earth quick relief, I encourage to read through the comment sections as well, and see how Nepalis see Indians, how Indian treat Nepalis, how Indians still encroach on their territories.
People should also keep up with news on how India treat every one of it neighbors and its minorities.
And it was written by an Indian himself. Even in the time of disaster Indian army helicopters were more interested in flying towards the border near China and made a couple of flights even without the permission deviating from the route the were given. Why? To spy on the Chinese territories. There was a report on leading Nepali newspaper that instead of carrying victims and injured most seats in Indian helicopters were occupied by Indian media personnel thus reducing the number of victims that could have been rescued. It looks like their main motive was to show India in good light what a wonderful neighbor it is than actually helping people in needs. And it backfired spectacularly.
History of Indian sub-Continent is witness that Hidus have never a unified country unless ruled by foreigners. The subcontinent had some 5,000 large and tiny States, ruled by Hindu Rajas, who kept fighting with each other. Islam came to the subcontinent through Muslim traders visiting Malabar and other western coastal areas during the 7th century. Malabar became the first state which produced local converts, who were persecuted by the local Hindu rulers and prevented them from performing Hajj – which prompted Syrian governor to send his 19-year-old son-in-law, Muhammad Bin Qassam to teach a lesson to Raja Dahir. Muhammad Bin Qassam defeated Raja Dahir in 711 and brough areas upto Multan (Pakistan) under Muslim rule. However, the Muslim invaders who made subcontinent their permanent home – came from North, through Khyber Pass from Afghanistan. In the eleventh century Mahmood Ghaznavi invaded northern part of subcontinent for 17 times – but never established a permanent occupation. It was during the middle period of Mughal Empire (1526-1857 CE) that almost entire Indian subcontinent including Afghanistan became one country ruled from Delhi. It was this country, less Afghanistan, which British occupied after the failure of 1857 Hindu-Muslim resistance, also known as first ‘Battle of Independence’.
You forgot that Ashoka’s empire included pretty much the entire Indian subcontinent and that was before there was even a glint of the Muslim caliphate. You can look at everything both ways.. Even quantum particles.. If you want to look at it positively the 50,000 tiny kingdoms that made up the Indian subcontinent, you could say their individuality and need for liberty was the main cause of it.
but since these people are all invaders.. pretty much over the entire world.. I say nuke it and get rid of the parasites.. That pretty much included 99% of the planet at this point. Don’t forget to add yourself to the mix.. We can hold hands and stuff waiting for the bright flash..
Ashoka empire, like the Hinduism, is a myth.
I suspect if the British had not taken over the Sub-Continent either the Mogul Empire would have reestablished itself,or another native (or almost native.After 300 years the Moguls were pretty native.Far more so than some dynasties in Europe from different countries.The British one being an example.From having a native Scot’s dynasty ,the Stuart.They now have a German origin dynasty.It took three generations of Kings from that dynasty to get one that spoke English fluently.),would have taken their place.The facts are that by then many Hindus and Muslims had come to accept each other.On a lessor scale maybe than Catholics and Protestants in Europe.But still without unending religious wars all the time.They even managed to work with each other during the “Sepoy rebellion” and until nearly the end,the campaign to free “India” from the British.While today,India is neck and neck with Pakistan as the Worlds second largest Muslim country.The Sub-Continent contains many “languages”. But basically there are only a few important ones ,with many dialects of them.India being ruled by European powers didn’t have the ability to do what was done in Europe at that same time,unite their dialects around one state language.So you ended up with many dialects becoming full blown languages, adding to the disunity the British needed.
India’s problem is that the power elites that are in charge were left there by the British. They do not see the world through the traditional Indian cultural outlook. This is something that is in contrast to the present Russian and Chinese leadership.
I do not have much hope for India to fulfill its natural role in the world as long as those elites remain in control.
However, often enough on this website comments are aimed at attacking Hindus for various violent acts. While there are elements of a western divide and conquer strategy between Hindus and Muslims in the Indian region, the huge demographic gains that the Muslim community have enjoyed during European rule and following on into the partition and post-partition sub-continent cannot be ignored.
If you are going to discuss various petty acts involving small numbers of Hindus or various revenge acts as in the case in the issues in Gujarat or at Ayodhya, why not mention what has happened to the Hindus in East and West Pakistan? If one fails to analyse the gradual and steady Islamising of the subcontinent – a process started over a century ago, perhaps much longer – that continues apace then I cannot see how you can truly understand the views of those termed Hindus.
If you want to discuss treatment of Hindus in in East and West Pakistan, should you started with how Indian has been threatening both Pakistan every opportunity you have? If you promise war, and destruction, promise you will take back Pakistan constantly, force the poor country spend very high percent GDP on defending herself, what do you think it will likely to happen?
By the way, India has 80% of Hindus, and is also force coveting many of those minorities to Hindus, let it be north eastern states, or Christens, or Muslim. I wonder how you going to treat those converts, untouchable?
Okay, I will respond, Anon, though from your words I see all too clearly your view. Apologies for taking my posts so far off topic.
Try to understand as I will make several points. Firstly, the conversions in favour of Hindus are very small in comparison to much larger conversion programs that are run by Christian and Muslim factions – of course, these programs have been continuing in one form or another for centuries and the current form should be seen in this context. Secondly, there is a very real demographic change that has occured and will continue to occur – this needs to be examined dispassionately – if you have a family/ethnic/religous stake in it that is fine, just put it aside and try to look at the trends. Third, there is a historical context to all this that has very south Asian tilt to it – the current south Asia is as we all know a consequence of the British policies of the East India Company and then the Empire itself – there are also civilizational outlooks to consider, namely the geo-political and cultural struggles that took place for this rich (at least historically speaking) region, e.g. Buddhism no longer exists except predominantly in East Asia (and Lanka and Tibet of course), why did this occur; or e.g. how did British/European policies affect changes in demographics between Hindu/Muslim/Christian populations; or e.g. what influence is exerted by certain rich and influential minority groups in modern India on policy, groups that were in effect handed control of the British educated civil society in India after 1947.
Also, you are using the word ‘untouchable’. You should understand that the present caste system in India is not just a direct consequence but more accurately a direct creation of the British conquerors of India. I cannot emphasis this enough.
Also, to paraphrase your opening sentence, if you wish to discuss the treatment of Hindus in East and West Pakistan, should you not open with the term and nature of genocide and cultural cleansing upon said Hindus in these regions?
Here is one of support link of conversion:
@whoever, @anonymous, thanks for the various posts on Nepal and India.
I had always felt that India itself, if it were not for the British, would not have been the current single large country.
It has too many different languages and customs (Tamil, Punjab, Kashmir, etc etc) all to me are different enough
that I believe if it weren’t for the British, would have been separate countries, almost like countries in Europe.
Of course that does not mean I think the British colonization was a good thing, far from it.
But it is what it is. I just hope that Modi, despite all the misgivings I have read elsewhere (mostly negative, such as,
he’s a Hindu religious fanatic, even a fasicst one) would have enough sense to do what’s best for India and the world.
It will soon be the most populous country soon, so perhaps 20% of world’s humanity depends on it!
I do feel however, that for whatever reason, many Indians, even the smart professional ones, somehow feel some
kind of “chip on the shoulder” type attitude whenever China is mentioned, even to the point of ignoring any “win-win” suggestions; and then it always ended up with many getting a bit smug by the “well, at least we are a democracy” type attitude. My only retort, as a “modern confucius”,
is, you cannot eat democracy – just make sure your masses have enough to eat as a first step.
I say this with all sincerity.
I remember a while back you boasted about how India got “trounced” by China in the 1962 border skirmish, of course your triumphalism came to crashing end when it was pointed out to you how Russia “trounced” China even more starkly in a Sino-Soviet border conflict in the early 1970s. It was also pointed out to you that unlike your jingoistic boast with respect to India, not a single Russia reader on this site boasted about the Russia/Soviet victory over China. That comment of yours was counterproductive toward rapprochement between our two peoples but indicative of your real attitude towards Indians.
You have only further damaged your credibility by regurgitating (perhaps unknowingly) “sour grapes British propaganda” of the 1950s as follows in your comment:
I had always felt that India itself, if it were not for the British, would not have been the current single large country.
It has too many different languages and customs (Tamil, Punjab, Kashmir, etc etc) all to me are different enough
that I believe if it weren’t for the British, would have been separate countries, almost like countries in Europe
This is almost verbatim the falsehoods spread by the British after they were given the boot and thrown out of India: back in the 1950s, they and their MSM/Newspapers/BBC kept wondering and hoping India would break up because of its diverse languages, etc.. It never happened – Too Bad! This is because Indians have been part of an integrated civilization that predates the Muslim invasions and the British rule by terror in India, it is this cultural glue that has kept India together, no colonial dictatorship was required (sorry to disappoint you and colonial minded Brits). It isn’t surprising that people who are ignorant of India, it peoples, it culture and it’s history react in surprise that such a diverse country is united without the need for a dictatorship, but it is not a surprise to Indians (because they have better understanding of their own culture and history than you).
I just hope that Modi, …..would have enough sense to do what’s best for India and the world. ….I say this with all sincerity
Thank for your “sincere” concern for our well being, I’m so sure you mean it, it’s touching.
You also state: “you cannot eat democracy “, interesting comment given that Mao’s single person rule lead to massive errors and massive famines. It’s only after China started providing its people with more freedom that China’s economy and culture boomed.
I do feel however, that for whatever reason, many Indians, even the smart professional ones, somehow feel some kind of “chip on the shoulder” type attitude whenever China is mentioned”.
Has it ever occurred to you that that might be due to the implicit smug attitude they pick up from you?
Most of the time you can see we have co existed with nepal,pakistan, ir srilanka et for almost 70 years …
With or without small wars and skirmishes…..
Its going to be the same for forthcoming decades…..
CHINA HAS BORDER ISSUES WITH ALL ITS NEIGHBOURS FROM VIETNAM TO INDIA….SOUTH CHINA SEA……ONLY ISSUE IT HAS BEEn ABLE TO SOLVE WAS WITH SOVIET UNION….
THAT TO SOVIET UNION SHOWED ITS FIRE POWER AND FORCED TO ACCEPT ITS TERMS…..
JUST LIKE TIBET CHINA WILL GOBBLE up NEPAL…..
Maoist problem originates from china…not india….
If anything falls out big in BRICS it will be because of chinas expansionist policies or …
INDIAS ALIGNMENT WITH ISRAEL AND USA
***Indian – I’m sorry to say, no caps allowed – no capital letters allowed like screaming – if you had not used caps we would all read your post…now no one will because its almost illegible – modaa
Sorry, indian, but China has resolved all its land border disputes with its neighbours bar one. Modi’s India that is rapidly devolving into Hindutva RSS fascism. And without the active US trouble-making in the China Seas, and the fascist Abe regime’s vicious refusal to hand back the Diaoyu Islands, unambiguously Chinese for centuries until stolen by Abe’s fascist Imperial predecessors. Why India, who could achieve great things in co-operation with China, instead prefers a policy of antagonism and abuse, is a mystery, and a very great tragedy, principally for India, but that happens when hyper-chauvinistic nut-cases take over a country.
Thank you so much for your insightful comments and regional perspectives on this hot topic. I’ve definitely learned a lot about the various sides’ perceptions of one another, and I think the general audience has as well. I’m glad to see that my article has succeeded in generating such passionate interest. Take care.
Hahaha,you laid a minefield with that article.Whether you knew that would be the case or not is another question.It was a good article though,thank you.
i hesitate to participate in this discussion cuz im tired of engaging posters who spew nonsense inspite of evidences staring them in the face, also some times i feel my comments are subject to some quota restriction.
there’r two things that prompt my response anyway.
 dear mod,
the poster anon twice insinuated that im imposting another poster *whoever*,
i suspect this anon is the poster *three cents* cuz he was the one who started this nonsense. i told him off last time that i dont play such silly game but for reason best known to himself he seems to be repeating it here again.
i resent such baseless attack on my integrity.
zweistein might not be familiar with geopolitics in south asia but im surprised unclebob also held the same view that china is *unduly barging into india’s domain* !
it should be common knowledge by now that china NEVER meddle in another country’s poltitics. but when nepal has been used as a base for destabilisation by the delhi/washington/london axis then china is forced to take counter measures.
rest assured that china wouldnt stoop to assasination/destabilisation/regime change like the unitedsnake and its cohort in london/delhi, but the least beijing need to do is try to prevent kathmandu from falling into the lap of the snake
wholesale. china is doing this by the way it knows best…economic cooperation.
in fact this is often done at nepalese request.
a case in point is the current oil embargo on nepal imposed by new delhi, kathmandu is re-considering to source its petrol from china.
the last time nepal ponder this move it was blocked by , u guess it , new delhi !
here’r my 2 cents, actually its all from the horse mouth, no bs.
nepalese view on india vs china,
* it is a matter of worriless that Nepal always faced threat from India. In that context, Nepalese scholar diplomat Keshar Bahadur KC said- ‘If there was no China, Nepal would have ceased to exist.’* 
on indian sponsored maoists,
*Permitting training camp for the Nepali Maoist insurgents and helping Nepal fight the Maoists at the same time is the worst form of duplicity, which the world community would not fail to take note.* 
on the 2001 palace bloodbath which wiped out the royal family of beijing friendly king birenda,
ex nepalese envoy to india,
*I have the feeling that the event was plotted by both India and the US. Because, nothing can happen in Nepal without India’s involvement. And the US is the world power thus no incident as such can take place without US information. Thus both are involved.* 
“im tired of engaging posters who spew nonsense inspite of evidences staring them in the face”. I agree. I am especially disappointed with a few people who write as if they know it all, but has little understanding of culture background, the facts on the ground, or issue at hand.
***anon…sorry to say this but most commenters also don’t like anonymouses…-modaa
*If anything falls out big in BRICS it will be because of chinas expansionist policies or …
INDIAS ALIGNMENT WITH ISRAEL AND USA*
u’ve never heard about the india/unitedsnake/israel triumvirate ?
brics is doomed, im afraid !
the rest of your post is testament to my observation,
*spewing nonsense even when facts are staring at your face. *
There may be an India China cold war but the thesis that Nepal is or will be the battlefield or be hotly contested between the two is not correct.
India has shot itself in the foot during the latest blockade and heavy handed method of handling its relations with Nepal. Prior to this, its support to the Maoists has also not worked out too well since it has pushed China to increase its involvement in Nepal. Before the Maoist campaign China’s involvement in Nepal was largely limited to providing financial/infrastructure aid to the tune of a few tens of million dollars per year.
India is 50 times bigger than Nepal. It is a real mystery why it feels the need to interfere in such a heavy handed, petty, mean spirited way to get what it wants from Nepal. Whatever the reason it is not an image of a mature state that fancies itself as a potential world power. Until India learns to deal with its neighbours in an intelligent, fair and principled manner it will always remain a regional power (bully if you prefer) instead of a world power.
India feels that it is entitled to become a world power but does not seem to realise that its actions doom it to be a junior partner to the Anglo-Zionist block. And as a junior partner it will get the short end of the stick.
The logical stance would be for India to totally embrace the multipolar world espoused by China and Russia as it has a better chance of at least becoming “one among equals”. The alternative is being a vassal with all its disadvantages. I forget the exact words but I think the Polish defense minister or PM explained it in very colourful language and the same will apply to India.
Maybe it is this realisation that makes India vent out its frustration or hapless neighbours? And thus exacerbating the problem.
But China is not interested to have a war with India, hot or cold, over Nepal. China wants only two things from Nepal- recognition of the one China policy and not allowing anyone to use Nepali territory to foment unrest in Tibet.
In the worst case China will simply seal off the Nepal border and let India deal with the Nepal headache that India will have created.