|
|
|
|
US jittery over
Nepal
By Ramtanu Maitra
The developments in Nepal since February
1, when King Gyanendra seized dictatorial powers
in an effort to quell a Maoist insurgency, have
put the foreign policy machinery in Washington
into high gear. On March 2, in a statement before
the US House of Representatives Committee on
International Relations, Principal Deputy
Assistant Secretary of State Donald Camp told
legislators, "I want to assure you and the
committee that the administration is deeply
engaged in helping to resolve the current crisis
in Nepal. President [George W] Bush's declaration
of the United States's support for freedom around
the world very much extends to Nepal."
The
pressure is on New Delhi to bring the Nepali king
to heel, and is expected to mount further when US
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice visits India
for a day on March 16. Announcing her visit, which
was set up on short notice, an Indian Foreign
Ministry spokesman said March 4 that the
discussions between Rice and Indian authorities
would include Nepal.
The ball has also
started rolling in Kathmandu. Nepali Foreign
Minister Ramesh Nath Pandey held talks with Indian
leaders during his "working visit" which began
March 7, the first high-level trip to India after
King Gyanendra's takeover of power, it was
announced. "Pandey is paying a working visit to
India and the current political situation of Nepal
will naturally dominate the bilateral talks in
Delhi," Nepal's Foreign Secretary Madhuraman
Acharya, who is accompanying Pandey, said.
Shared concerns
In New Delhi,
External Affairs Minister K Natwar Singh told news
reporters on March 6 that "the developments in
Nepal constitute a serious setback to democracy
and bring the monarchy and mainstream political
parties in direct confrontation with each other".
"In view of the current disturbed
conditions in Nepal, the question of military
supplies to Nepal is under constant review," Singh
added. "India is concerned that a further
deterioration of the situation in Nepal will
result in spill-over effects across the open
border, particularly in the neighboring states. We
have taken steps to strengthen security in border
areas."
New Delhi's concerns about the
suppression of democracy and the deterioration of
the security situation along the India-Nepal
border echo Washington's concerns. In his
testimony to American lawmakers, Camp stated, "We
are concerned about abuses and atrocities by
Maoists and human rights abuses by government
security forces including extra-judicial killings
and 'disappearances'. We continue to vet units
receiving US assistance to ensure that none is
implicated in human rights violations. An
amendment to the FY 2005 Senate Appropriations
bill stipulated that Foreign Military financing
could be made available to Nepal if the secretary
of state determined that Nepal was taking a number
of steps to improve the human rights practices of
the security forces. We have made it clear to the
government of Nepal that we expect to see
appropriate, timely and transparent investigations
of any credible allegations of abuse and that
failure to do so could jeopardize our ability to
continue assistance. We will continue to convey
our strong concern about human rights violations
by the security forces to the highest levels of
the Nepal government and urge swift investigation
and punishment."
Within hours of King
Gyanendra's dramatic move, New Delhi sent a clear
message concerning the abolition of constitutional
fundamental rights and the suspension of the
democratic system in Nepal. India's call for the
restoration of democracy may not be viewed
seriously by the Nepali king - or by the
international community, for that matter, as Delhi
has never been a stickler for democracy in other
countries - but the fact remains that it was New
Delhi who played the key role in helping bring
down the absolute monarchy in Kathmandu in 1990
and establish a parliamentary democracy in Nepal
in the first place. The latest reports indicate
that India has stopped arms shipments to the
Nepali king.
A complex coup
The
"royal coup" has triggered a torrent of confusion,
and raised many questions. What or who led the
king down this turbulent path? Does he know how to
avoid falling into the snake pits strewn across
the garden path? Who should he trust?
Analysts point out that the real intent of
King Gyanendra was never a secret. On that fateful
Friday night, June 1, 2001, in Narayanhiti Palace
in Kathmandu, when the then-Crown Prince Dipendra
reportedly wiped out almost his entire family and
then took his own life, Prince Gyanendra became
King Gyanendra. Soon after taking over, in a rare
press interview, King Gyanendra said that unlike
his brother, the murdered King Birendra, he would
not be an onlooker and allow the growth of violent
Maoists.
New Delhi, of course, did not
like the Friday night massacre, but quietly liked
the new king's determination to eliminate the
Maoists. After all, India's Maoists were gaining
ground and it is hardly in New Delhi's interest to
see Kathmandu soft-pedaling a Maoist movement
along its border. In fact, when the Indian
ambassador to Nepal, Shiv Shankar Mukherjee, who
was withdrawn in the wake of the king's takeover
but returned to Kathmandu on February 20, met
Royal Nepali Army (RNA) chief General Pyar Jung
Thapa in his Kathmandu headquarters soon after the
royal takeover, Thapa hinted at invoking the 1950
India-Nepal Friendship Treaty to seek Indian
troops to deal with the Maoist insurgency.
Officials say New Delhi was immediately
divided on the request: Natwar Singh insisted that
no assistance be given, while Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh urged a gentle, more measured
response, in view of the Royal Nepal Army's
extraordinary past contribution in working in
tandem with the Indian army. The Indian position,
as it was eventually communicated, was that India
could not deny troops if asked.
Indeed,
neither India nor the US or the United Kingdom
would like to see the Maoists gaining ground in
Nepal. If Gyanendra's purpose is to go after the
Maoists, none of these countries would be expected
to protest.
The China factor
But
there are wheels within wheels. To begin with,
some analysts in New Delhi claim the February 1
coup by King Gyanendra had the blessings of
Beijing. These analysts point to the fact that
Gyanendra forced the Nepali cabinet to shut down
the Tibetan cultural center affiliated to the
Dalai Lama following the Christmas weekend visit
to Hong Kong of King Gyanendra's son, Crown Prince
Paras, and the fact that the coup itself took
place after his second trip to Hong Kong in
January. The same analysts cite another reason for
believing King Gyanendra got some vocal support
from China: namely, the king's decision to open
the Lhasa-Kathmandu Road. This road had been built
but never opened. New Delhi thought it had a say
on this matter; but the king clearly thought
otherwise.
These two "events" preceding
the coup gave the impression to the US and the UK
that China was meddling in Nepal's affairs. This
was particularly upsetting for these two Western
powers and to India as well, because the Nepali
king was getting arms and weapons from all three
for his army.
The UK, the US and several
European countries have already expressed
reservations about continued arms assistance to
Nepal. This raises a possibility that the king may
turn toward China. China does not seem to share
the concerns of the other neighbors for a
situation it deems to be Nepal's internal affair.
What troubles New Delhi even more is the
response of Islamabad to the coup. Islamabad
summarily dismissed the fretting of New Delhi,
Washington and London by calling the coup the
"internal affair" of Nepal. New Delhi cannot
forget that during a visit to Kathmandu last June,
Pakistani Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz offered to
sell defense equipment to Nepal and was also ready
to provide financial assistance in this regard. He
said on that occasion that Pakistan was willing to
offer military aid to support defense and security
cooperation.
What New Delhi notes ruefully
is that Pakistan never really condemned the Maoist
movement within Nepal. China, by contrast, was
always categorical in condemning the Nepali
Maoists and supporting the royalty. Following a
mid-June trip to Beijing last year, Nepali General
Pyar Jung Thapa revealed to state radio and
television that China would step up "security
cooperation" with Nepal. This will improve
Kathmandu's ability to militarily counter the
anti-monarchy insurgency that started in 1996,
Thapa said. In Beijing for a week, Thapa held
talks with top military officials such as Defense
Minister General Cao Gangchuan and General Liang
Guanglie, chief of staff of the People's
Liberation Army. Neither side has revealed the
extent of China's military assistance to Nepal.
US aid to Nepal
"King Gyanendra
himself is reported to favor moving toward a
closer relationship with China, and has recently
conducted a high profile trip to [China]," said US
legislators Frank Wolf and Mark Udall in a letter
to colleagues criticizing the harassment of
Tibetans in Nepal.
But beyond the China
and Pakistan factors, India and others feel
betrayed by the king. The US has also become a
major provider of military assistance to Nepal,
allocating over US$29 million in grants to pay for
US weapons, services and training from October
2001 to October 2004.
US military
assistance to Nepal increased dramatically after
2001: in mid-2001, Washington anticipated spending
some $225,000 the following fiscal year (October
2001-September 2002) on the military training of
Nepalese troops and did not plan to provide any
financing (via grants and loans) for military
purchases by Nepal. After September 11, $20
million was added in a supplemental allocation. In
fiscal 2003, Nepal received $3.15 million from the
Foreign Military Funding program and $500,000
under another program. For fiscal 2004, the Bush
administration asked Congress for $10.6 million
financing.
The US had allocated $45
million in aid for Nepal in the year to September
2004, 10% of which was reportedly for security.
For fiscal 2005, $44 million has been set aside
with only one third for security-related
activities.
Following the royal coup, US
Assistant Secretary of State Christina Rocca went
to consult with European allies on Nepal, among
other issues. Washington has a series of military
arrangements with countries bordering China,
stretching from its new bases in the Central Asian
republics through Southeast Asia to its formal
allies in northeast Asia: Japan and South Korea.
The Bush administration sees the Nepal insurgency
as another "domino" in its international "war on
terrorism", arguing that the country could become
a "failed state" and hence a haven for terrorists.
It is not unlikely that Washington will
exercise its oft-used weapon of sanctions against
Kathmandu. Some time ago, it was reported that the
US was threatening to raise the issue of human
rights in Nepal in the United Nations and other
world forums. Nepal was threatened with expulsion
from the UN, the World Trade Organization, and so
on. According to Indian intelligence, Nepal has
approached China to veto any such threat. US
ambassador to Nepal James Moriarty, who was
recalled to the US for consultations in the wake
of the royal coup but has since returned, recently
hinted to the media that the US, India, the
European Union and others who have been supporting
Nepal's government will be looking for action soon
if the country is to avoid punitive action,
including aid cutbacks.
Ramtanu
Maitra writes for a number of international
journals and is a regular contributor to the
Washington-based EIR and the New Delhi-based
Indian Defence Review. He also writes for Aakrosh,
India's defense-tied quarterly journal.
(Copyright 2005 Asia Times Online Ltd.
All rights reserved. Please contact us for
information on sales, syndication and republishing.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
All material on this
website is copyright and may not be republished in any form without written
permission.
© Copyright 1999 - 2005 Asia Times
Online Ltd.
|
|
Head
Office: Rm 202, Hau Fook Mansion, No. 8 Hau Fook St., Kowloon, Hong
Kong
Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
|
Asian Sex Gazette South Asian Sex News
|
|
|
