Calling a "Spade," a "Spade" - "The Antics of Maoist Collaborators in Nepal's Parliament"

(Courtesy: Name Witheld)

A short piece on http://www.nepalnews.com/ published on September 18 was titled “Lawmakers criticize Moriarty’s statement; demand his expulsion,” Another blurb from http://www.kantipuronline.com/ read “MPs flay Moriarty for his political statements, ask govt. to send him back.”

How many "Lawmakers" and "MPs" from the entire House of Representatives are we talking about? An overwhelming minority of two!! – Mr. Lilamani Pokhrel and Mr. Narayan Man Bijukche.

Let’s try and piece this puzzle together. When one of India’s top communist leaders (Sitaram Yechuri) arrived to inaugurate the first session of Nepal’s re-established parliament, this was deemed a good thing and all our politicians were ecstatic. When an official Chinese delegation arrived in Nepal and spent more time with “terrorists-turned peace-loving Maoists” (than with the ruling SPA government) this was no big deal.

But when an appointed emissary from a third country traveled to the most remote and desolate parts of Nepal, in an attempt to ensure that funding his country generously provided the Nepali people, was being put to good use, the media cries bloody murder!!

Why? Apparently because Ambassador Moriarty happened to drop in at an Army barrack or two, (probably the only infrastructures within 100 mile radii of where he was), to greet Army personnel and express gratitude for providing the security that enables America’s generosity to reach its intended target; without being siphoned off by Maoist parasites.

Instead of highlighting the funds that Moriarty secured to help Nepal’s flood victims or the funding he has lobbied for, to help spread democracy in the country, reports from Nepali media remained fixated on the army barrack(s) that the Ambassador visited.

Judging by the nature of the mainstream media reports, it was as if Moriarty’s sole purpose was to visit Army installations in the remotest parts of Nepal which makes absolutely no sense because if the military was what Moriarty was interested in, the Army HQ is a 10 minute drive from his residence. Why travel to the corners of Nepal to visit army personnel when the majority of armed Maoist combatants are in and around Kathmandu?

Instead of the asinine questions the media asked in support of ludicrous conspiracy theories, here are some relevant questions (the answers to which can be authenticated by hard numbers and facts): How many so-called student leaders has America hosted over the past five years? How many Nepali students have had the opportunity to obtain world-class educations in the US? How many professors and doctors and civil servants and politicians has the American Government partially subsidized (or completely sponsored) to the benefit of Nepalese world-wide? How many Army lawyers and mid-career Officers have received the benefit of an American Staff College education that stresses above all, human rights, the rule of law and the function of security within democratic frameworks?

To contextualize this issue further, what number of Nepalese received aid from American funds that James Moriarty provided to flood victims? How many Nepalese received something at a time when our government provided them nothing?

Questions such as these seem to have missed the media’s attention. Instead, the media focused on comments that Lilamani Pokhrel and Narayan Man Bijukche (both hardcore communists and known Maoist sympathizers) made in Parliament. A question from one of these MPs was whether the Nepali Ambassador to the US is “allowed to go on an inspection visit of the army barracks there and make political statements?"

Just the manner in which this question is phrased erases any hope of common sense (or intellect) in Nepal’s top communists. Capacity to thrive off of conspiracy theories? High. Ability to demonstrate appreciation of common sense? Nil.

Let’s get the facts straight. First, in case the MP who asked the question hasn’t noticed, the government he’s in has been so busy making earth-shattering progress on the peace process that they haven't had time to appoint a Nepali Ambassador to the US. This aside, hypothetically, if the Nepali Ambassador to the US was on a visit to Nepali government sponsored projects (or relief efforts) in some remote part of the US that relied completely on the presence of an army base for area protection, the odds are pretty high that that installation would be where the Nepali Ambassador would go, to catch a breath and perhaps a cup of tea or coffee. No violation of diplomatic norms here!

Second, it is highly unlikely (a complete understatement) that the army barracks visited by Ambassador Moriarty was housing Nepal’s nuclear stockpile – a direct threat to American interest in South Asia??? Judging by where he was, the most Moriarty could have “inspected” would have been a few brick buildings (if that) and a barbed wire perimeter housing a group of salt-of-the earth, dedicated and selfless individuals who by the way, are also Nepalis, not Americans (if this is where the conspiracy theory is meant to go).

Third, if the MPs consider Moriarty’s observation (that the Maoists are not playing by the same rules as the SPA), a politically motivated or a biased statement, they need to do a couple of things: One, they need to visit their constituents outside of Kathmandu and inquire for themselves, what the situation is like (side note – they shouldn’t forget to take permission from the local Maoist Commissar before visiting their districts); Two, they need to pick up yesterday’s paper and make an honest determination whether Moriarty is creating a “political statement” or repeating documented facts; Three, if they have any self-esteem or courage or even an ounce of self-respect, these MPs need to come clean and admit that they are Maoist agents in the SPA government. Why else would these two cry foul, hyping a non-event that exposed (perhaps negatively impacted) a single group – the Maoists?

Neither the American government nor its emissary in Nepal was under any compulsion whatsoever to travel to the remotest parts of the country to give hope to Nepalis who had lost everything.

The Chinese, the Indians (our closest neighbors), the British, the Finns, the Norwegians, the Germans..… no media reports on what their Ambassadors did to help Nepal’s flood victims and this is fine. Such unconditional support is a luxury, not a right and our clueless MPs should appreciate this fact more than anyone else.

Nothing on the UN with all its might either. Apparently, there’s enough funding to support a UN team to help with the refugee crisis (on-going for nearly a decade), another team to bring the human rights situation under control (human rights after the April movement tip top according to Maoist "victims" who provide the underlying data) and a third team to help with the peace process (moving ahead at lightning speed). Unfortunately, no help was available to uphold the most basic human right – the right to life – or to relocate internally displaced persons. Any wild guesses on what it costs to employ a P4 or P5 UN Officer? And yes, people do get displaced when natural disasters occur.

The shameless display of ingratitude and ignorance by Lilamani Pokhrel and Narayan man Bijukche is a dismal microcosm of the larger leadership crisis that Nepal faces. Hypocrisy oozes out of these individuals as they criticize Moriarty for highlighting the root cause of Nepal’s lawlessness while simultaneously calling for the Home Minister’s resignation. Is this not a contradiction?

Even as these sorry excuses for elected officials hide behind a pretense of in-action based guilt, (what material contribution did either make to victims of the flooding or the victims of any tragedy in Nepal?), they demonstrate an utter inability to refrain from carrying out public stunts that detract attention from the real issue at hand – the management of Maoist arms.

These are supposedly die-hard Nepali communists, fighting entrenched feudalism in Nepal. The same feudalism that confuses individuals with the policies of nations (Moriarty with American policy) and representatives with the functions of their organizations (Ian Martin with the UN). It will be a miracle when Nepal’s communists actually practice what they preach and dispose of their own feudal, individual-based mindset, in favor of modernity.

Aside from the hypocrisy, the propagation of idiocy and the downright disgraceful conduct of Mr. Pokhrel and Mr. Bijukche, there is a silver lining in their wild allegations. How funny do accusations of violations of diplomatic norms sound, coming from two MPs who in all likelihood, probably don’t even have Nepali passports? Can anyone recall the last time either of these buffoons went on a trip beyond India?