NEPAL: where is it headed?


Aside from mountains, what does Nepal have to offer any occupier?

It’s not exactly a quick route to the sea for China.

editted: cleanup…jds

On the contrary, I am genuinely interested in Nepal

[quote=“Mother Theresa”]my brother

editted: cleanup…jds

Nepal consists of a subsistance economy in the countryside, and two towns plus several trekking routes whose major industry is tourism. Tourism has been underperforming lately, so that leaves foreign aid as a source for government money.

Neither the Marxists, the army, the politicians, nor the king are terribly competent. Let’s look at them one by one:

The Marxists don’t seem to actually control any territory, though they do wander around and hit people up for money. They could win elections, perhaps, like in West Bengal, and become politicians (see category 3).

The army looks pretty, with uniforms and drilling and all that, but isn’t good for much. They tried to avoid taking sides during the civil war for the longest time, though they belatedly backed the king (who pays them). Given that they can’t beat India or China, this raises the question of what exactly the military thought it was for. Anyway, they get military aid from India (and I think now from the U.S.).

The politicians are hopelessly corrupt. When you think how little people get paid over there, and throw in thousands of years of culture which takes baksheesh for granted as an institution, you can imagine how that works.

Nobody much likes the king. Nepali citizens and foreign aid donors put up with him for much the same reasons Americans put up with the Supreme Court decision elevating Bush to the presidency–for lack of any other convenient way of choosing a leader. Unfortunately, Gyanendra has now spooked aid donors, without making any progress on the Marxist front.

Unfortunately, that doesn’t leave many other possibilities within the country. Outside the country, Nepal might end up one day as a state of India (like Sikkim before it). The disadvantage for India is, this would irritate China, and also, they would then have to run Nepal.

The king has turned to China for backing. Maybe you noticed a few days ago when he kicked the Dalai Lama’s office plus UN refugee workers out of the country? Some Chinese maps show Nepal as a territory “lost” to imperialism, on the theory that since parts of it paid tribute to Tibet, the transitive principle requires that Nepal be Chinese. But realistically, the only thing it’s good for (for the Chinese) is tourism, or as a place to invade India from.

Russia, with apologies if you were indulging in irony.

Cambodia as well. You’ve been reading your Che book too hard MT – it has affected your thinking processes :wink:

Death to you imperialist lackeys!!! The revolution shall prevail. :wink:

Actually, you’re right, I have been engrossed in the Che bio lately and that must be why I was thinking commies v. military dictatorship.

Anyway, I agree with whoever said that Nepal has little to offer an occupier and I agree with JT’s assessment for the most part. It’s an incredibly backward, inefficient, impoverished nation – when I was there I met a girl who was walking 5 days and then taking a bus to get to the city to buy lightbulbs (in the US we wouldn’t walk 5 minutes to get to a store). The place is truly medieval. I don’t expect or hope for the US to intervene. I simply found it interesting what’s going on there. Obviously the government’s got a tough job protecting itself from the rebels who attack and kill hapless policemen in remote outposts, but it seems that the king took a very wrong approach to dealing with the problem. As for the Maoist rebels, I wonder if they truly believe that they could create a better society, or are they just a bunch of thugs like the Abu Sayaf.

Nepal has its progressive side too, you know. Why, just a few years ago they outlawed slavery. (rimshot)

Those “hapless policemen” are a big part of the problem. Many of them are corrupt and abusive, lording it over villages which have no way to control them.

Time to dig up this old thread as things are looking promising in Nepal. My brother has been stuck there since mid-December (trying to finalize the paperwork on an adoption) and keeps sending me photos of truckloads of soldiers in the streets trying to enforce daytime curfews, but the nation has been on strike continuously and hordes of ordinary citizens take to the streets protesting the oppressive king, demanding democracy and now it looks like their efforts may be paying off.

From today’s NYT:

[quote]Nepal’s King Gyanendra broke his silence Friday after more than a week of pro-democracy protests in which four people have died, calling for dialogue with opposition political parties.

Thousands have filled the streets daily calling for the restoration of democracy and ouster of Gyanendra 14 months after he seized power. Many of the demonstrations have deteriorated into clashes with police.

In a message for Nepal’s new year, Gyanendra called for ‘‘the active participation of all political parties committed to peace and democracy,’’ and he again said the country should hold a general election, although he did not specify a date.

The king’s call for elections is in line with a roadmap back to democracy he announced shortly after seizing power in February 2005. It has been roundly rejected by his opponents, who demand that a special assembly be convened to rewrite the constitution and possibly limit his role, if he is given one at all.

Sentiment in this Himalayan nation is apparently hardening against the king.

Police on Thursday fired rubber bullets and tear gas at lawyers protesting royal rule in the capital of Katmandu while thousands of other demonstrators marched to chants of ‘‘Hang King Gyanendra!’’

Gyanendra said he took control of the country 14 months ago to stamp out political corruption and end a communist insurgency that has left nearly 13,000 people dead in the past decade.

Many of Nepal’s 27 million people at first welcomed the move. But the insurgency has since intensified and the economy has worsened, fueling the discontent seen in the protests that have gripped Nepal since its alliance of seven main political parties called for a general strike starting April 6 to demand the king restore democracy. . .[/quote]

A decade of violent acts by Maoist rebels haven’t changed a thing for the better, but I believe the will of masses of ordinary people will bring about a change. I liked this picture of someone’s mother/grandmother. :bravo:

Looks like the political situation in Nepal may be approaching the tipping point. Here’s what my bro, who’s been there for the past 4 months, wrote a few days ago:

[quote]The protests are escalating, but localized at 2 or three places; north of the city at gongabu and west at the university campus of kirtipur. I think at one yesterday there were 20,000 people. The sense here is that things will continue to escalate now until there is change. People seem to feel that now is the time; that otherwise things will simmer back down and continue on and on.

It’s hard to see what could happen. The king is unlikely to step down voluntarily. There is increasing pressure from international front. The US Mission Thursday allowed non-essential personel to go home. Now, I think they ordered the same.[/quote]

And here’s from today’s NYT:

[quote]Nepal’s crisis grew bloodier Wednesday when security forces fatally shot four pro-democracy protesters as [b]the government imposed a curfew in the capital to prevent a huge rally urging the king to loosen his grip on power.

Two weeks of often-violent protests and a general strike against palace rule have paralyzed Nepal, leaving cities short of food and fuel and the country at its most volatile since the monarch seized power 14 months ago.[/b]

The royal government has responded harshly, claiming Nepal’s communist insurgents – who are now allied with the opposition – have infiltrated rallies to sow violence. Police have beaten, tear gassed and arrested thousands of protesters.

A total of 10 Nepalis, including the four Wednesday, have been slain by security forces in this Hindu kingdom once known as Shangri-La since the opposition launched a general strike April 6. . .

The shootings reinforced fears of more bloodshed Thursday, when the opposition hoped to mass 100,000 people onto the ring road that skirts Katmandu.

Trying to off head the march, which would dwarf previous protests and undercut government claims that demonstrators lack popular support, authorities announced a Katmandu curfew from 2 a.m. to 8 p.m. Thursday.

Soldiers and police were ordered to shoot violators, and no passes were issued to diplomats, journalists and Nepali human rights monitors – groups that had received passes in the past.

‘‘The events show how desperate the present royal regime is. It is becoming paranoid,’’ said Dhruba Adhikary of the independent Nepal Press Institute. ‘‘The movement is getting popular, it is expanding and growing.’’

The opposition campaign has brought ordinary Nepalis into the streets alongside students and political activists. On Wednesday, some 250 professors held a protest. All were arrested.

A few thousand people also protested in Katmandu and demonstrators hurled bricks at police, who responded with tear gas, rubber bullets and baton charges.

While nearly all here said they were hoping Thursday’s protest would be peaceful, many said they did not fear violence.

[b]’‘If we are faced with violence tomorrow, we will burn the palace,’’ said Ankil Shresthra, a 22-year-old student. ‘‘The king will die.’’

Nepal’s Hindu royal dynasty was once revered as godlike, and the recent chants of ‘‘Hang the king’’ in Nepal’s streets are a major departure from past protests[/b], like the 1990 uprising that led his older brother to introduce democracy.

King Gyanendra ended that experiment in February 2005, saying he needed to crush the Maoist insurgency that has killed nearly 13,000 people in a decade.

While many of Nepal’s 27 million people at first welcomed the king’s power grab – frustrated by squabbling politicians – the worsening insurgency and faltering economy have fueled discontent. . .[/quote]


[quote]King Gyanendra of Nepal faced the greatest challenge to his rule so far yesterday as tens of thousands of protesters marched on his capital and at least three were killed by police.

Anti-monarchist demonstrators defied a curfew to advance on Kathmandu from outlying villages only to be met first by tear gas, then rubber bullets and finally live ammunition.

According to human rights monitors and witnesses, one victim was shot dead by a senior policeman execution-style with a pistol at close range. . .

In a separate incident security forces opened fire on protesters in the south-western town of Gulariya. The ministry of defence said 26 people were injured.

Yesterday was the 15th day of protests called by the opposition aimed at forcing the king to reverse an army-backed coup in which he seized power at the beginning of last year. . .[/quote]

The end is near for the King. All day curfews every day and shoot-to-kill orders for anyone caught violating the curfews have not deterred hundreds of thousands of people from marching peacefully through the streets demanding that he step down.


Ok folks, this is an older thread and needed some cleanup. Looks good now.

jdspicandspan :rainbow:
IP co-modem

Hi, it’s Bob’s wife. Excuse me for interupting the conversation. I love the moving graphic (the cute girl) you have there. Could you tell me how or where do I get it?

Nepal demands Communism!!! … est3bx.jpg

That’s BS, King Wu.

Seven political parties in Nepal are united in opposing the King, who seized power 14 months ago and has eliminated many basic civil rights and tenets of democracy. One of those seven parties is the Maoists who have been waging a war against the various governments, and people, for the past decade. But most Nepalis have been alienated by the brutal Maoists and do not support them at all. Most Nepalis want democracy, not communism and not a monarchy.

But even after putting aside your false and ridiculous boast, there still remains the serious issue of “after Monarchy, what next and how do they get there?” My bro sent me this interesting discussion from Newseek (sorry I can’t find the link):

[quote]Nepal is Burning
Returning power to civilian politicians, even abolishing the monarchy, may not be enough to restore stability to the Himalayan kingdom.

By Amitabh Dubey
Newsweek International

May 1, 2006 issue - King Gyanendra’s decision last week to restore power to Nepal’s democratic parties was long overdue. But it hasn’t ended the country’s volatile political crisis. At the weekend, the king’s failure to accept the protesters’ chief demand

[quote]“Women represent a great productive force in China, and equality among the sexes is one of the goals of communism. The multiple burdens which women must shoulder are to be eased.”
~ Quotations from Mao Tse Tung [/quote]

Right, half the sky and all of that. A resounding success. You have been to China I take it, king wu? I’d really like to know.


From another website, posted by a Nepalase:

[quote]I called my family back in Kathmandu today. Everybody is scared and everything is in chaos. Armed Maoist outsiders have infiltrated the valley, like textbook Communist takeover, and every neighborhood from what I hear is in virtual lockdown.

Maoists are knocking at every house to take young men out to fight the police and the army for the final takeover. My family is in the area already known to have Maoist infiltrators. The number of strange faces in the slums and thugs roaming the streets at night have increased significantly in the last couple of hours.

My cousins are in hiding for the fear that they will be taken as cannon fodders. The elders and women in my family just say that the men are already busy in protests.

Nobody except the police/army and aristocratic families in Kathmandu own arms. They themselves are having hard time and awaiting the final fight. The rest of us are left at Maoists’ mercy, should they decide to kill off those who own house/business or not of the oppressed class/caste/ethnicity/race.

I hope the maoist infiltration of the valley is not as widespread as our neighborhood, but I fear the worst. The politicians do not want to stop the protests and even if they want to, the Maoists and their Communist lackeys would not let them.

The final battle seems emminent. I can see 3 possible outcomes now:

  1. Maoist infiltration proves successful. Maoists defeat the army and take over Kathmandu - Nepal falls to the Maoists. India will have an excuse to invade Nepal.

  2. Army kills the Maoist infiltrators in the final battle. The protests die down as the Maoists are gone. King takes over control.

  3. Army and Maoists clash. Both are severely destroyed… politicians take over and declare Nepal a Democratic Republic.[/quote]
    also - posts by the OP -


The agitating seven-party alliance (SPA) announced fresh nationwide protests on Sunday, vowing to bring a mass of 2 million people in the capital, Kathmandu, on Tuesday.

I don’t know how many of “2 million people” would be Maoist infiltrators. The politicians are dumb basTURDS and are facilitating the Maoist takeover.[/quote]

[quote]This “protest” wouldn’t have been so effective had it not been for the Maoist infiltrators. [color=red]The “seven party alliance”(of whom 5 are communist parties) is allying with the Maoists.[/color]

The party rationale is that once the monarchy is overturned, it is they who are going to rule. But, the Maoists have a different agenda in mind. The Maoists think that they are using the parties for the Mao-style takeover. And Maoists are armed. The parties are not. The parties are losers at the end because the Maoists don’t want multiparty democracy – they want one party Communist utopia under Chairman Mao’s banner.[/quote]

[quote]“Wouldn’t China be a far more likely invader?”

Why would China invade a Maoist Nepal? It is India that will do it. India is facing Maoist insurgency itself, and will now have backing of the world.[/quote]

[quote]“Is this China funded/inspired?”

The Maoists are Chinese inspired. After all, they are Maoists and fly the Maoist banner.

But they are not funded by China. In fact, China is publicly supporting the King. It might be because a Maoist Nepal does nothing for China. A Maoist Nepal gives India the excuse to invade and erase the bufferzone Nepal is at the moment. Chinese aren’t stupid. Indians aren’t stupid. They are both playing this game.

If Nepal becomes Maoist, India will have a valid excuse to invade. In fact, USA would be pressuring India to invade and take control of the situation. And China does not like it… and they cannot do anything about it, except support and arm the King and the army.

Very complex, indeed, no?[/quote]

[quote]Nepal is already under Indian cultural influence. At least that is entertaining(to an extent). But it is no fun being under Indian political influence. It might not be as horrible as being under the Chinese political influence(ask Tibetans), but it ranks up there in undesirability.

Besides, Nepal as a country is older than India by almost two centuries. Nepal was founded in 1768 precisely to escape Indian(back then – British) Raj. We don’t want to be under Indian political influence.[/quote]

More info links: … s&id=47690 … 24&sid=WOR

Chinas hand behind this?
Nepal as a distraction to India?

Or just more communist murdering and increaseing Mao’s bodycount?
A sad fucking scenario.

And in a closely related story, we see the Indian comrades of the Maoists at work:

Fearful tribes hosting Communist rebels are revolting against them
Monday, April 24, 2006, BY NEIL SAMSON KATZ

“They fooled the rural people, saying that they would work for them,” said Soyam Muka, a tribal teacher whose brother was killed by the rebels. “But instead they are torturing them. They are killing them.”

Like revolutionaries in neighboring Nepal, the Indian rebels, called Naxalites, preach economic justice for the poor and violent confrontation with the government or anyone opposing their mission. Both uprisings, while largely independent of each other, take their cues from the playbook of Chinese Communist revolutionary Mao Tse-tung.

The Naxalites take their name from Naxalbari village in West Bengal state, where a Maoist uprising occurred in 1967.

During the past 39 years the Naxalites have, by fits and starts, carved a “liberated zone” in a strip of heavily forested territory that stretches from India’s southern region to its northern border with Nepal. (more story at link) … xml&coll=1
Just click the blue link (out of USA) on the sign-up screen, it will take you directly to the srticle w/out having to sign up!