(Courtesy: el Zorro)
Long gone are the days when the myth of Indian troops being deployed in Nepal was written off as Palace politics. Between the “nationalist till we come to power” Maoists and the “nationalist depending on political climate” SPA, the chances of Nepalis who spent their lives serving the Indian and British governments, monitoring Nepal’s fragile peace, is gaining momentum.
First it was Retired Indian Army General Ashok Mehta who suggested “volunteering” Indian Gurkha troops to “assist” in Nepal’s transition. Then came “General” Prachanda’s suggestion that former Gurkhas be employed to monitor the peace. Then came Retired Nepali Army General Chitra B. Gurung’s uncontrolled praise for his former UN employers (the General stopped just short of making the same argument as Pushpa Dahal and Ashok Mehta).
After this initial barrage came the statement from the Secretary of the Gurkha Ex Servicemen Organization (GAESO) Mahendra Lal Rai, that ex-Gurkhas have the technical knowledge to carry out monitoring duties. Finally, the UN Secretary General’s Envoy, Ian Martin, made a technical suggestion that the UN may consider “supervising” ex-Gurkha servicemen to carry out its official mandate in Nepal.
Is this sheer coincidence or a string of logical events that were calculated in advance? Is the idea of using Nepalis to monitor a cease-fire agreement in Nepal brilliance or stupidity?
Logically, the most important attributes of personnel involved in any peace-keeping capacity are the following:
Complete independence
Complete impartiality
Nepalis (whether they have served for the Indians or the British or whoever), fail the tests of independence and impartiality by virtue of being Nepali citizens.
One does not need military skills to observe a cantonment site. Why not mobilize any combination of the 1000 plus NGOs that perform all sorts of services instead? Why not give Nepal’s civil society leaders the option of observing the peace accords? The answer is the same. Because being Nepali means disqualification on the grounds of independence and impartiality. Nepalis of all ethnicities and backgrounds are party to this conflict by less than 2 degrees of separation.
Below are some thoughts on why Nepalis are getting a raw deal on the execution of the peace process.
2 comments:
Thanks for this. Points are.
1. Ex-Grokhas, may or may not be Indians of Nepali origin. That is, those
from Darjeeling, Kumau, Gorakpur etc.
Note: General Nepali confusion has always remained with making distinction
between Nepalis of Indian origin ( as in Terai) and Indians of Nepali origin
( as those from Assam, Gadwall, Darjeeling or even Banarash).
2. Those Ex-Gorkhas, in Nepal can or cannot be those used by the Maoist to
train them in the use of arms, planning strategies for various attacks and
those below 55 being a part of both the Maoist fighters (PLA) and the Maoist
militia and informants and signalers.
Those in touch with the field situation for the past 11 years know. But....
Ret. Gen. C. B. Gurung is trying to be popular with the Maoists' after being in such a long service of RNA and thinks being in the UN a few years makes him great. He is in illusion and being baught by the RAW agents of India.
People like him shoul die twice once while living and the other when he really dies as an agent.
Post a Comment