http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0502/S00090.htm

After reading General Dipti Shah's article, one may be persuaded to accept the position the King has taken. Gen. Shah, as I understand, is also a former member of Parliament nominted by the Royal Palace. As Gen. Shah said, there is always a two-side of the story, his article argues strongly and rather persuasively in favour of one side only.

I wish Gen. Shah had not ignored the following realities in his otherwise well written article:

-With the ongoing situations of social injustice, ethnic imbalance and negligence, rampant corruptions by a few privileged groups in power, since last several decades, even if the Maoists had not come, an ethnic strife of the Sri Lanka type was brewing up at a fast pace. The Maoists are selling dreams to all those ethnic groups who have experienced the sufferings and see no relief in sight.

So, please do understand that it is not the Maoist challenge that should be recognized, but the bigger question for the long-term peace lies with the integration of all Nepalis into the mainstream.

-It is evident that the people had most grouse against the Royal Nepal Army and Police for arrest, torture, and killing of people without any regard to human rights. The revocation of seats at Sandhurst for RNA by UK is no big deal. This should have happened a long time back. After all, it is 100% clear that the coveted posts of the army officers are only the privilege of a few of those 2% that Gen. Shah has mentioned purely based on castes and contacts. The rampant corruption within the army shows that it is not limited to the corridors of the politicians only. Of all the government units, RNA needs most the changing of its image to make it more responsible to people, accountability and transparency.

-What about the goings on in the royal palace or the activities of the royalties that public is tired of hearing on a daily basis? This important factor is not even touched upon the article.

-By all accounts, the King was incharge since October 2002 after he sacked Deuba terming his as incompetent. Shouldn?t the King take responsibility for this period too?

I can go on and on and bullet-by-bullet agreement and rebuttal of the article but I see no need for it now. What is the need for it? As Gen. Shah says, only time will tell.

Basically, I am for giving a 3-year time period to the King as asked by him to restore peace and bring democracy. When we have given so much time to improve to these aire khaire, why not a three-year period to the King? Hopefully, we will get to do a report card for the first six-month period and then move on from there onwards.

I am not sure if the Jarsab is used to entertaining the opposing views but I get the feeling reading his analysis that he does take into account the various schools of thoughts. I do hope that we get to read more of Gen. Shah?s well-argued analysis in the near future. How delighted we will be if he chose to respond through Sajha. Is that too much to expect from him given his background and position? Only time will tell.

Jai Nepal!

This above mentioned article is by Mr. Dipta (Bdr) Shah, who is currently a graduate student at Columbia. He is not a General. He just happens to be a son of Ret. Lt. Gen. Sadip Bahadur Shah.

Swarnim must be thinking of Dipta Prakash Shah.

"Chip" is right. The author is Dipta Shah, not Dipta Prakash Shah. It is rather ironic that Dipta Shah's father was in the army, isn't it? But irrelevant.

But back to Swarnim's piece. I read Dipta Shah's piece with keen interest and while I do not agree with all of his underlying assumptions, he's certainly got some valid points.

One of his valid points was also that "there are two sides to the story" which "swarnim" has kindly highlighted for us again. To be honest, Dipta Shah's piece is the only credible story I've seen from the other side on cyber space. The rest of it is overflowing with news on how bad our situation in Nepal is. Nonsense.

Swarnim is absolutely correct that the "root causes" (development jargon) must be addressed. But this is the story of whether the "chicken comes before the egg." How does Swarnim, with his complete lack of faith in the security forces, assume that there will one day be stability in Nepal? Should the Maoist militia provide a security detail for swarnim's development work in addressing the "root causes?"

Swarnim has added a dangerous dimension to this debate. He speaks of class, caste and contacts being the only determining factors in the army's hierarchy. I would definitely that swarnim do his homework before making such claims. There is no need for assumptions here, the army's current hierarchy speaks for itself.

If this is "swarnim's" strongest argument, I would suggest he also dissect the ethnic composition of all political parties (Maoists included) and come out to say that Nepal's politics isn't dominated by one single caste/class.

Not very wise to make an argument based on class or caste "swarnim." After all, is it your goal to unite or divide Nepalis when we are facing the greatest threat of our time?

I have alerted Dipta Shah ji of this thread. I hope he will manage to stop by.

I was looking for Mallika Shakya's response to Dipta, a reply to which from Dipta is published in Peace Media. This led me to receive an email from Dipta ji himself. And I took this opportunity to invite him to Sajha.

It was a great pleasure and satisfaction to have a chance to talk to Dipta ji, particiularly when he wrote me that he finished reading my essay "Why Republicanism ?" from Sajha and was impressed too :-)

Thanks 132569 for commenting on my thoughts expressed here. Please know that I was giving my thoughts just as a common reader, not as a political analyst or some sort or something which I am not. Chip, thanks for confirming that the writer is Dipta Shah. Sorry I mistook the writer as the general who had resigned as Member of Parliament after expressing his dissent views. As I said, the analysis by Mr. Shah is very well presented and does carry the inside thoughts.

?Complete lack of faith? That is going too far. Just because I have pointed out some anomalies should not be read to mean a demonstration of complete lack of faith. There is a tendency among so called elites with disdain to Maoists to quickly label as a Maoist or a Maoist sympathizer when one expresses views that matches with some of the Maoists demands. At the risk of being labeled, I would still say that the root causes are the social injustice, discrimination, corruption, ethnic imbalance, bad governance, etc.

I was only pointing out the reforms needed in keeping with the time. Not me, sir, seems like it is you who would need to do a lot of homework to understand the feelings of a foot soldier who is at the bottom of the hierarchy. What do you have to say when the soldiers are constantly used for menial labour such as constructing or renovating a private house for an army officer? Some even say, although again I won?t go that far, that there would have been a revolt if an outlet like Peacekeeping force was not available to a common soldier. Longing for a reform in keeping with the time is not a dangerous dimension. When you say the army?s current hierarchy speaks for itself only shows an air of arrogance by giving a dangerous twist to the discussion here.

I know it irks certain people, mostly those who continue to enjoy the privilege of the successive governments and would like to see it perpetuated, when you bring an ethnic factor into the current problem. This is a reality whether or not I bring it up. It is going to dictate the future course of action. Needless to say, I have heard the dissent voice from close, and was always afraid that the Maoists going to capitalize on it. They do now. All I am asking is that a serious effort should be made to bring all groups into the mainstream. Is this a crime to ask that all Nepalis be given equal opportunity?

In the last 14 years, we have seen how the parties have mismanaged the affairs of the state and I know the sufferings of the common people. I never felt that Maoists are going to be able to deliver all what they have promised or even fully justified. It is in this vain that I expressed my suggestions for addressing the root cause (be it a jargon).

In the similar vain, I do strongly feel that we ought to give the 3-year period to the king to restore peace and bring democracy. If the king can address the root causes, more power to him..

Sorry to bring this up and my apologies for going out of the context, but let me point out something very deceiving going on in this thread. This is not the same Swarnim(aka Paschim) as the most of us know. I was deceived badly once before, so thought of reminding other good friends and well-wishers of Swarnim..

emodus wrote:
but let me point out something very deceiving going on in this thread. This is not the same Swarnim(aka Paschim) as the most of us know. I was deceived badly once before, so thought of reminding other good friends and well-wishers of Swarnim..

Really ? Then I really am deceived. I wrote to Dipta that this posting is indeed by Swarnim Wagle, without verifying it. Harey Shiva !

Nepejee, I see the nick Swarnim being used on sajha around very interesting times--I am aware of at least one occassion when the King fired Lokendra Bdr. Chand cabinet. The posting this person "Swarnim" made back then was quite unusual of Swarnim (Paschim) that I knew of, so I verified with him personally and he was puzzled too.

Hey "kaanta laga" aka "... freak" .. is this you?

I was not aware of existence of another Swarnim on this forum. My apology for confusion. As I have strongly espoused a cause of ethnic integration into the national mainstream, you figured it out obviously that I am not that Swarnim you thought to be initially.

In any case, as the forum here allows anonymity in the discussion and one can take it to any length within the civility, it is important to discuss on the contents and views expressed in Sajha, rather than who wrote it and who is where.

As a Nepali at heart, I express my views free of fear and with the interest of all Nepalis at uppermost in my mind. I do not have a network of good ole boys that support each other in their postings here even if it is rubbish. Let me tell you, I am not one of those who pretend to be a believer of equality in social talk outwardly and then go on trashing others who support equality in Nepal. Sincerety must come from the heart.

You are deceived of what??

I am not one of those who despise ongoing corruption in Nepal on a daily basis in a talk or writing outwardly, while, inwardly, still being a beneficiary of some form of a corruption practiced by parents or relatives. How many of us can raise our hands and put our chest in open with pride and say my parents or relatives never indulge in any form of corruption? There are a few and I salute those from the bottom of my heart. It is one thing to write big words, preach others, and do an analysis of a situation, but one must look at the ground he is standing on.

The crux of the problem lies in there. That is where you are DECEIVING yourself.

If the Monarchy goes under, it will spell the end of
Nepal as we know it: consider what happened in Tibet
(end of the institution of the Dalai Lama) and in
Sikkim (ecplise of the House of Namgyal). End of a
venerated, traditional institution: obliteration of
the territorial space and occupation of the vacuum by
the next-door dominant force.

Of course, it is true that there are many, many
factors that led to the Maoist insurrection, some of
them going back into ancient history. Also, there are
other ails of Nepali society that have nothing to do
with the present situation.

However, at this time, when the political parties had
clearly failed (after being given a free reign for so
long) or were incapable in doing any thing about the
challenge or practically siding with the Maoists
(perhaps in the naive belief that they would be spared
if the Maoists ever came to power) what was the King
to do? What would anyone do in his place?

He has now staked his all: it's for all patriots to
side with him, unless, of course, they want to take
their chances with the Maoists who make no bones about
their admiration of the Gang of Four, Pol Pot and so on.