Note: the title of this diary is corroborated in this video.
In The Hindustan Times, a prominent journalist wrote an editorial titled: Why India must speak up strongly on Nepal
It started with:
Nepal’s top three political parties – Nepali Congress, Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist Leninist), and the Maoists – have decided to push through a constitution in Nepal. This was supposed to be the culmination of a long-running peace process, but it could now well be the cause of a prolonged conflict, civil war, and even a secessionist movement right across the open border.
For India, the stakes could not be higher. It is now time to shed the diffidence of not appearing interventionist, for developments in Nepal are already having a direct impact on Indian interests. India’s special relationship with Nepal, and active role in its politics, also gives it a more than legitimate space to do so, especially if the objective is to defuse a conflict.
The editorial presented a hardball analysis that included:
Why India must act
For Delhi, a lot is at stake.
This is a peace process that was conceived and signed in New Delhi exactly ten years ago, at the end of 2005. India has been an actor through much of the process in Nepal – from encouraging Constituent Assembly elections, mediating between the government and Madhesi protestors in the past to come to pacts, getting involved in government formation exercises and more. Some of this was legitimate, some of it was excessive. But given India’s deep engagement in the process, it cannot wash its hands off at this moment of climax, when the process itself is about to crumble.
He listed each leader and explained the psychology as to what they were getting out of it.
Predictably, the twittersphere erupted with criticism, some of which was unkind.
But that's not all that happened......
The Constituent Assembly started to vote on the Constitution, and heard speeches from the top leaders.
Tomorrow, a mass protest asking for delay in the constitution-writing process will take place.
ABC NEWS actually published a recap of the planned vote.
The Nepali Federation of Chambers of Commerce and Industry held a press conference in which they presented facts about the protest in Terai that has stopped all motorized transport. They listed the impact of the strikes. On the India side of the border, thousands of stalled transport trucks are pulled over, lining the road for 60 kilometers.
The International Committee of the Red Cross
The ICRC published a statement about the murder of the police man that took place Sept 11th. The statement read in part:
(Kathmandu) The Red Cross in Nepal expresses its deep concern at increased incidents of vandalization of ambulances in relation with ongoing demonstrations in Terai/Madhes in the past four weeks. The incident that happened on 11 September 2015 at Sonukhada of Mahottari district has astounded the Red Cross – an injured person in need of urgent medical care was taken out from the ambulance and killed; the ambulance was then torched.
According to both national and international norms, medical transports including ambulances, medical personnel and medical facilities, must be respected and protected, and their work must be facilitated. Injured people must have access to health care in safety in all circumstances.
It's not often that you see the word "astounded" in this kind of measured statement.
Health Care in Danger
I Googled the ICRC and found info on an initiative of theirs titled "Health Care in Danger" that describes the importance of respecting the neutrality of rescuers. On my other blog, the one that I use to reach nurses and doctors in Nepal, I wrote a blog entry on safe passage for ambulances in Nepal.
About forty people have been killed in Nepal (from all sides). On the scale of things, this is small potatoes - during the height of the Iraq war the main ER in Baghdad handled the same number before morning coffee. For Nepal, it's been a shock.
And the tension does not seem to be resolving.
The plan of the Kathmandu leadership is to finish the Constitution in one week.
5:24 AM PT: Sept 14th - Prashant Jha, the writer for the Hindustan Tiimes, wrote a long rebuttal to his critics, on FaceBook
https://www.facebook.com/...
"There have been some ferocious attacks after my piece yesterday on why it is time for India to speak up on Nepal. I knew it would not win me a popularity contest in Kathmandu, a capital which would beat many of its counterparts on counts of hypocrisy and conspiracy theories and national chauvinism. I also know that a trigger for the backlash is the sheer intellectual and political dishonesty of our leadership and buddhijibis on our relations with India. Many many people, indoctrinated with how we were never colonised and so we are purely sovereign, feel genuinely hurt at the prospect of someone inviting Indian role - they do not get the history and intricacy of this relationship and the nature of transactions between the Nepali political elite and the Government of India. I do not grudge them their hurt and anger and can even see why it would be an affront to their pride; I grudge Nepal's dishonest public sphere and its thought leaders who have never allowed a frank conversation about our dynamics with the international community in general, India in particular, and the culpability of our political elites through this process.
But this is a digression.
What I want to say is this. And Listen Kathmandu lords - and those who fall for their propaganda. It is clear that India has done very little, if anything at all, to try to hold the CA process and push dialogue, except perfunctory statements and a few meetings in Kathmandu. My piece outlined a series of steps - and hinted at the various tools India has to try to influence outcomes. It has used none of it, as far as I know. It has also not used the enormous leverage it has vis a vis our security institutions, the border, essential supplies, economy, political leaders. India is well known to have dropped bags of cash to split parties, or to shape government formation processes when it thinks this is in its interest. (Remember 2009-11). I am not suggesting India should have used these crude tools - but please note the fact that it has not.
And if this is true, logically, it means that the spin of Kathmandu - that this constitution is a proud 'national' document, defying international diktats - is, not true. Pahadi chauvinistic nationalism is being falsely fueled to earn political points, and to ignore the underlying domestic roots of the tension.
This brings me to my final point. There may be a policy line in Delhi advocating wide consultations, but there has been less than adequate follow up in terms of implementing the policy line. It may not be gleeful about developments, yet it has done little to block it. I don't quite understand what India hopes to gain from this strategy. It seems like a lose-lose proposition, where Kathmandu blames Delhi for this grand design of encouraging a Madhes movement. And Madhes can clearly see that Delhi has not backed its quest for a fresh political settlement with its might.
In the process of trying to please everyone, Delhi is on the verge of alienating everyone."