02-27-2005, 07:04 AM
Dailypioneer
Swapan Das Gupta
It doesn't pay to be lofty
It is bad form to overhear conversations. Unfortunately, I was guilty of that offence last week while rummaging through the shelves of my favourite bookshop. With unconcealed excitement, the shop assistant told his underling to collect all copies of Manjushree Thapa's Forget Kathmandu, a novel set in the backdrop of Nepal's royal massacre of 2002. "There's a big order from the Ministry", he smiled.
It is heartening that South Block mandarins have graduated from reading files to enjoying fiction - and, in too many cases, penning it. It is equally heartening that they should be patronising writers from neighbouring countries, particularly those who sing the virtues of democracy. No wonder the persecuted Bangladeshi writer Tasleema Nasreen has asked for a permanent stay here.
It is even better that democracy is the colour of the season all over. Last Thursday, President George W Bush was in Bratislava, publicly engaging Russia's President Vladimir Putin on democracy. Earlier in the week, he implored EU to join hands to "tilt the scales of history" in favour of freedom. In Washington DC, everybody who is anybody in the Republican establishment is reading Israeli Minister Natan Sharansky's The Case for Democracy. It's the book that has shaped Bush administration's democratic evangelism, not least because it links freedom to national security.
The love of democracy is truly becoming infectious. In a speech on February 14 that has been described as a new South Asia doctrine, Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran said: "India would like the whole of South Asia to emerge as a community of flourishing democracies." Speaking out against "short-term expediency", he argued that only democracy could guarantee "peace and co-operation" in the subcontinent. Sharansky couldn't have said it better.
We even appear to have put the doctrine into practice. Incensed by King Gyanendra's Constitution-sanctioned takeover on February 1, India has cut off all arms supplies to the Himalayan kingdom. Britain has followed and the US has approved. Policy wonks in Delhi say that this too-clever-by-half King has to be taught a lesson. Meanwhile, Indian Intelligence has boasted preliminary contacts with Maoists who are said to control three-fourths of Nepal.
In the land of Gandhi and Nehru, it's pays to feign loftiness. We even outdo the Americans in this department. Our track record is noble - slavish endorsement of the Soviet invasions of Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan, generous support for corrupt African dictators, nurturing the LTTE in Sri Lanka and cutting deals with generals in Myanmar. Yet, as Saran said in his speech, "Our sympathy will always be with democratic and secular forces."
It's great to have a slogan. In statecraft, however, it pays to pursue realism. The immediate conflict in Nepal is only peripherally between democracy and monarchy. If only it had been so simple. The war is between the Nepali State and Maoists. There may be lots wrong with the present dispensation in Kathmandu, but let us not forget that Maoists began their insurgency in 1996 when Nepal was an infant democracy. In December, the Maoists were saying they would not negotiate with a puppet Government but only with the King. Now they are calling for the overthrow of the monarchy.
Democracy is incompatible with Maoist agenda. They are Communist variants of the Al Qaeda. A Maoist victory in Nepal would be akin to a Talibanised Afghanistan on our doorstep. The implications for national security would be catastrophic. Their literature is quite categorical about the fact that their revolution will not stop at Nepal's borders. To survive, a Maoist Nepal will need complementing "liberated" zones in India.
The issue is not our personal equation with King Gyanendra. What is necessary is to emulate Mao Zedong and identify the "principal" enemy - ironically, the rationale behind the UPA Government. If South Block genuinely believes we are better off with Comrade Prachanda and the progenies of Charu Mazumdar, it should pursue its democracy agenda unwaveringly. Alternatively, beginning a constructive dialogue with Kathmandu is the most worthwhile option.
Swapan Das Gupta
It doesn't pay to be lofty
It is bad form to overhear conversations. Unfortunately, I was guilty of that offence last week while rummaging through the shelves of my favourite bookshop. With unconcealed excitement, the shop assistant told his underling to collect all copies of Manjushree Thapa's Forget Kathmandu, a novel set in the backdrop of Nepal's royal massacre of 2002. "There's a big order from the Ministry", he smiled.
It is heartening that South Block mandarins have graduated from reading files to enjoying fiction - and, in too many cases, penning it. It is equally heartening that they should be patronising writers from neighbouring countries, particularly those who sing the virtues of democracy. No wonder the persecuted Bangladeshi writer Tasleema Nasreen has asked for a permanent stay here.
It is even better that democracy is the colour of the season all over. Last Thursday, President George W Bush was in Bratislava, publicly engaging Russia's President Vladimir Putin on democracy. Earlier in the week, he implored EU to join hands to "tilt the scales of history" in favour of freedom. In Washington DC, everybody who is anybody in the Republican establishment is reading Israeli Minister Natan Sharansky's The Case for Democracy. It's the book that has shaped Bush administration's democratic evangelism, not least because it links freedom to national security.
The love of democracy is truly becoming infectious. In a speech on February 14 that has been described as a new South Asia doctrine, Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran said: "India would like the whole of South Asia to emerge as a community of flourishing democracies." Speaking out against "short-term expediency", he argued that only democracy could guarantee "peace and co-operation" in the subcontinent. Sharansky couldn't have said it better.
We even appear to have put the doctrine into practice. Incensed by King Gyanendra's Constitution-sanctioned takeover on February 1, India has cut off all arms supplies to the Himalayan kingdom. Britain has followed and the US has approved. Policy wonks in Delhi say that this too-clever-by-half King has to be taught a lesson. Meanwhile, Indian Intelligence has boasted preliminary contacts with Maoists who are said to control three-fourths of Nepal.
In the land of Gandhi and Nehru, it's pays to feign loftiness. We even outdo the Americans in this department. Our track record is noble - slavish endorsement of the Soviet invasions of Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan, generous support for corrupt African dictators, nurturing the LTTE in Sri Lanka and cutting deals with generals in Myanmar. Yet, as Saran said in his speech, "Our sympathy will always be with democratic and secular forces."
It's great to have a slogan. In statecraft, however, it pays to pursue realism. The immediate conflict in Nepal is only peripherally between democracy and monarchy. If only it had been so simple. The war is between the Nepali State and Maoists. There may be lots wrong with the present dispensation in Kathmandu, but let us not forget that Maoists began their insurgency in 1996 when Nepal was an infant democracy. In December, the Maoists were saying they would not negotiate with a puppet Government but only with the King. Now they are calling for the overthrow of the monarchy.
Democracy is incompatible with Maoist agenda. They are Communist variants of the Al Qaeda. A Maoist victory in Nepal would be akin to a Talibanised Afghanistan on our doorstep. The implications for national security would be catastrophic. Their literature is quite categorical about the fact that their revolution will not stop at Nepal's borders. To survive, a Maoist Nepal will need complementing "liberated" zones in India.
The issue is not our personal equation with King Gyanendra. What is necessary is to emulate Mao Zedong and identify the "principal" enemy - ironically, the rationale behind the UPA Government. If South Block genuinely believes we are better off with Comrade Prachanda and the progenies of Charu Mazumdar, it should pursue its democracy agenda unwaveringly. Alternatively, beginning a constructive dialogue with Kathmandu is the most worthwhile option.