| Sajha.com Archives | |
| Username | Post |
| Biswo | Posted
on 07-Apr-03 04:55 PM
A few more days, and one more dictator is going to vanish from the earth, though in a way that most of us would not approve of.The good news from the sandstorm and rubbles of Bagdad is that none of the 30 British casualties include a Nepali. -- It is interesting that in Nepal, there are some people who manage to protest in support of Saddam, and there are some people who has good words about even Uday, the elder son of Saddam who is considered to be the most ruthless.[See Nepal in www.kantipuronline.com for some of those comments.] Opposing war is good, and I do that, but supporting Saddam? that's too much. And in these days when 700 Nepali are committed to this war, hoping for quagmire for allied force is nothing but callous disregard for our countrymen, now fighting in Basra and other parts of Iraq. -- For those of us interested in Chinese movies, I hope we remember Leslie Cheung from 'Farewell My Concubine'. This gay actor noted for his superb acting ended his life recently by jumping from a tall Hongkong hotel. They say he ended his life because his partner was no longer interested in him. Sort of Farewell My Concubine deja vu. I often wonder, after reading about the 'prem diwaanaa' like Salman Khan and Leslie Cheung, whether these actors are in the illusion of their own roles of their movies. More than their audiences, they seem to believe in the efficacies of the relentless insolence for love that they reprise in their various movies, and they want to repeat such acts in their life. Sadly, that doesn't seem to be the case. -- Pu Yi, the last emperor of China, was , unlike Romanov of Russia, spared by Mao's men, and he later rose his way up to the leadership rank of the Chinese communist party. In Nanjing, I met a old man who was the watchman in Nanshan Hotel , where I lived as a student of Chinese language, who vividly remembered the euphoria of Nanjingites who waited for the arrival of King Mahendra [ma-in-de-la]. It was the time when the 'liberator' of China were gleaning for friends in the world, and they dressed down the street of Nanjing with the Nepalese flags, president Liu Shaoqi himself went to the airport to receive the guests, and in Nanjing, they arranged a visit to the local Radar school, and lined up local population in the street to welcome the King of Nepal. The old man said he was impressed by the gait of the king, and the pulchritude of the queen. "She was very beautiful", he told me, and praised the king as a steadfast friend of China. I asked him, why he thought the king was invited to China, and accorded such welcome despite the fact that the communists were not fond of the king. He had the answer ready, "They wanted to show the world that the communists don't kill the king. They wanted to show the actively communist cadre, Pu Yi, to him." The king, it seems, found propinquity and warmth in the dictatorship of China. He loved them, their way of development, and in the subsequent years, he courted communist leaders of home, adopted Maoist ideologies in his ill-conceived Panchyat and ruled the nation with the same antipathy for public opinion that the rulers of China displayed in those days. |
| surya | Posted
on 07-Apr-03 05:19 PM
It's always fun to read your original posting Biswo. Even though I am not really familiar with China, except from the movies such as the one you mentioned, your recounting of that meeting with the old man who told you the story, struck a real cord. The relationship of Nepal and China has always seemed a bit interesting anyway. I remember meeting a Chinese official in Kathmandu and how amazed I found it that this Chinese woman spoke Nepal flawlessly. It was amazing. It also amazed me to think that Nepal obviously mattered to the Chinese... and I always wondered what nature of interest could possibly engender such interest. Of course there was that India China dynamic back then, but there was also of course the relationship Nepal had with China only. Sort of our complicity in how the Khampa "movement" was curbed maybe or the role Nepal plays in that whole Tibetan diapora. And who knows what else all. There were certainly a lot of chinese acrobats that visited Kathmandu. But the story of a Nepali King receiving such attention from the Chinese, that something else. Because I thought it was just Nepal who did that kind of thing. I still remember lining up by the side of the road to cheer the foreign dignitaries. That was a different era. Feels like a totally different life time! |
| Logical Sense | Posted
on 07-Apr-03 05:42 PM
Biswo, as always interesting to read you writing. Suryaji, it does make sense what you are talking Suryaji. I have also always wondered why Chinese politicians visiting Nepal more often than you could think is necessary for a giant like China who can stand alone against the superpowers? China has, I think 14 or more neighbors (most for any country on earth), but, Chinese PM will visit Nepal almost once a year (I may be exagerating, but, just compare with any other PM). As Biswo eluded, it might be symbolic to show the world that size does not matter. But, I think Nepal does play strategic role for China in three/four important aspects: 1) A place to keep watchful eye on their suspicious neighbor India, 2) Nepal's more or less neutral view regarding Tibet, and also watch activities of Tibetan refugees 3) Keep an eye on activities of many other foreign countries by making a strong presence in Nepal. (Nepal being hub for many regional offices and other foreign organizations) 4) Or plain old social/cultural/religious relationships going back centuries - iti |
| Paschim | Posted
on 07-Apr-03 07:09 PM
Biswo's interesting story on Kings and Communists reminds me of equally fascinating cases from Indochina -- Laos, Vietnam and Cambodia. Cambodia's long-serving king, Norodom Sihanouk has led one of the most eventful lives, alternately crushing and befriending communists. A staunch anti-communist in the 50s and 60s, ironically, it was another anti-communist, Lon Nol, who ousted Sihanouk in 1970, with the help of a royal aide. The King then went to Beijing for refuge and was taken care of by none other than the ever charming Chou En-Lai, and of course Mao. From there he supported the communists' fight against the republican forces of US-backed Lon Nol. In 1975, when the rabid Red Khmers came to power, the king returned from Beijing and was re-instated as Head of State. Imagine communists re-instating a monarch! Upon return though, he was kept under a polite house arrest, until the regime collapsed in 1979. It was only much much later, though, around the time of the Paris Agreement of 1991 that Norodom Sihanouk finally renounced the Khmer Rouge and their crimes against humanity. In 1993 he returned to Cambodia and was re-instated as king for the third time. The Khmer Rouge are dead, but Sihanouk is still going strong as king in his 80s. Last time I visited Phnom Penh, he was playing a superb host to the Singaporean President, a gentleman of South Indian origin. No king in history has probably gone through such drama as Sihanouk has -- and survived. But no king has had a more graceful wife (in Princess Monique) either!! In Laos, when the communists came to power, its humble royal family was sent off to a labor camp, and later executed. The person who became president after Laos came under the communists was, however, a royal prince himself! A grandson of the last king apparently lives in Paris, and has been suspected of financing rebel groups that have set off small bombs in their otherwise tranquil capital. Throughout history, we have seen Communists ostensibly fighting domestic feudals, with monarchy seen as their chief patron; in Laos today, a royal prince is fighting the Communists -- quite seriously it seems, for he even went to see Bill Clinton to seek support in Washington in 2000. He was apparently rebuffed. In Vietnam though, the royals disappeared without much hulla. After the Vietnamese Communist Party's ascendancy, the countrys last emperor, Bao Dai, went to Paris for a quiet exile and died a forgotten man. Lesson that these kings and communists in Indochina have shown? When push comes to shove, forget ideology sideology hajur, do anything to survive. I think the evolving Raja-Maobadi chemistry in Nepal, or the earlier Raja-Communist linkages during the early days of the Panchayat will make an interesting case study too. |
| surya | Posted
on 07-Apr-03 07:56 PM
I know there is alwasy that reference to Raja Maobadi connection. I am curious whether people who make such assertions have any real proof of the liaison or is it simply anti-raja speake? The Maobadis have come out of the jungle and say they have stopped killing, but from what I can tell, they are still blackmailing the people into giving them legitamacy. The Raja Communist connection in the early days of the Panchayat system might have had something to do with Mahendra's populist c/self-help, theory of national sovreignity, self determination, and national self sufficieny of sorts. (that one could argue led to programs like Gau Farka which was later copied in post democracy nepal under some other name) rather than some devious l raja ra communist connection. Biswo's allusion to how Mahendra found some kinship (I looked up propinquity) with the Chinese dictators is simplistic in some ways. The relationship between Nepal and China seemed more complicated than than. Plus seems to me Mahendra, despite his" ill-conceived Panchyat," was not that unsophesticated leader. After all we are talking about an era in Nepali history where it first opened up to te world. Of course Mahendra sabotaged the nascent democracy and replaced it with the Panchayat system. But if you look at the history of the last 30-40 years, I think a lot of the problem has also to do NOT with dictators and bad leaders (whether we are talking about the King or some corrupt elected official or guerilla strong arming "revolutionaries"), but rather with our own capacity as a people - a people just coming to terms with this new age... with feudalism in our recent past with only 35% literate citizens with almost 50% supposedly under the age of 15? Surely Mahendra alone did not come up with the Panchayat system. So what of our public adminstrators, policy makers and all them people. Or did we even have those sort of people back then? Does then the system that failed also have to do with the short comings of those individuals who were the architects of the system? There is just a lot I have no idea about on all this, but am interersted to hear what folks think. and ruled the nation with the same antipathy for public opinion that the rulers of China displayed in those days. |
| Paschim | Posted
on 07-Apr-03 08:56 PM
Surya, if your reference to "people who make assertions without any real proof on the Raja Maobadi connection" was partly triggered by my last para, kindly allow me to clarify that I was careful in my choice of words when I talked about the *evolving* Raja Maobadi *chemistry*, nothing more nor less. This chemsitry incidentally has been on public display -- just hear the Maoist claims of the past 2 years: our "karyagat ekata with Raja Birendra" to "Hatyara Gyanendra lai manyata nadiun ra shishu ganatantra janmaun" to "agragaami agenda ma *shree paanch maharajdhiraj* ko pramukh bhumika rahanechha." No conspiracy theory or random assertion needed here. The 'evolving chemistry' is on full display. On the other hand, the Raja-Communist *linkages* in the early days of the Panchayat have been anecdotally asserted by some Zonal Commissioners (the all-powerful royal appointees in the Panchayat) esp. in the run up to the 1980 plebiscite. As an infant in those days, apart from later day newspaper accounts, I have no proofs on these -- but I note that you agree with this linkage by offering your own hypothesis. |
| Paschim | Posted
on 07-Apr-03 09:10 PM
On another note, I just heard from Dr. Devendra Raj Panday that he has passed on my previous Sajha posting (later sent to some friends as an article) to Baburam Bhattarai himself. That piece (from Gokul's thread on Maoists and Markov) was on the current Maoist Jaatra, historical parallels with 2007, and a call for justice in the form of trials or truth and reconciliation. I thank Dr. Panday for passing on my note (under my real name) to BRB. Should I get any feedback from Baburam Bhattarai on this, I will duly post them on Sajha. |
| babaal | Posted
on 07-Apr-03 09:47 PM
Does this mean that those days will soon be here when we won't be able to post anti-maoist stuff freely here at the sajha forums because THE leader will be reading/monitoring our posts? Or will this lead to more "healthy" and transparent discussions because we will be communicating with Him direclty instead of some middle-men. Then again, I am good at counting the chickens before they hatch. :-) |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 07-Apr-03 10:39 PM
Biswo, Interesting! Didn't know the actor of "farewell my concubine" committed suicide. It was an way off-track Chinese movie, nonetheless interesting. Anyway, regarding other things, many things can be said. Pu Yi was spared because of "class-justice" and "fairness". As far as I know, Pu Yi never rose to any leadership position. He was brought back to Gu Gong from a prision in Manchuria, and at Gu Gong, he spent the rest of his life working as a gardener. I am quite busy with some work, so, I'll definately get back to you on this one. The Mahendra Connection has a lot mre to do with as Logical Sense pointed out.. many things. So, I'll write on those too later. China's "modern" Nepal connection starts from the early 50s. The relations have been problem free for the most part exceprt for "ramailo mela kanda" and when King Mahendra didn't agree to the Chinese demands on the Khampas. Anyway, xian zai wo hen mang.. suoyi bu neng xie.. wo yi hou-- wo you shi jian de shi hou-- xie hen/tai chang de POST, hao ma? |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 07-Apr-03 10:46 PM
Gu Gong= The Forbidden City |
| surya | Posted
on 08-Apr-03 11:33 AM
Paschim: Thanks. I understand there is obviously an "evolving chemistry" between Raja and communists as you point out (with examples:). Which is understandable as both are in some ways vying for power, position and legitamacy in nepali national life. I am interested though about whether there has at any time in our history been a real agreed upon "pact" between the royals and the communists... You mentioned the 1980 elections? What sort of stuff are we talking about? Are there any political historians who are documenting these things? that would be really intersting. Some one said how we have such a culture of silence in Nepal and how we are not learning from our past. I guess the "silence" could be attributed to cultural norms and the way we conceive history, versus just the reality of the danger for a historian who would venture to document these truths. I read "Shadow Over Shangrila" some years ago and I have to say it was a wakeup call really and made me question my own naive, sheltered, Kathmandu upbringing and the extent of the political intrigue and corruption. ... and also besides the Maoist claims of ekata with Birendra. How complicit was Birendra to the crimes of the Maobadis? Was his fault meerely his inaction? It is one thing to have a soft spot for communist ideas, quite another to enable and support. So I am I guess interested to know if there is real and credible evidence to support the idea that there is more than a "chemistry" between raja and communist. And BRB reading your posts?! Cool! Will look forward to reading your post should you hear from the man himself. Babaal, interesting isn't it the thought that BRB and the Maoists might be reading Sajha! I wonder who all else reads Sajha! and what DO they think about all this halla here. I guess Sajha is a petri dish of sorts... sort of skewed though, becaue it seems to have a particularly north american bent with majority of readers and contributors being expats living in North America and largely pretty privledged... so in all honesty, you could hardley say we represent Nepal's full spectrum? Anyhow............ lunch is over. |
| surya | Posted
on 08-Apr-03 11:35 AM
i am sooo confused! i thought i lost the above post and wrote another post recapping the first. but now i see the first is here, but the second is gone! . . . . . . . . is it friday yet! |
| Aliciaa | Posted
on 08-Apr-03 11:42 AM
I am not understanding what you are talking about logical sense. Nice and interesting stuff biswo.I enjoyed it.Looking forward to read some interesting stuffs. |
| Biswo | Posted
on 08-Apr-03 02:10 PM
Surya and Logical Senseji, First of all,let's not overestimate Nepal's importance in Chinese foreign affairs. But, if any of us take time to read state mouthpiece China Daily, we can find that each visiting dignitary is expected to parrot their support on Chinese claim that "Taiwan and Tibet are the integral part of China, and that there is only one China, and that is PRC." From little Burma to Big Russia, foe and friends alike, are expected to repeat this in their every visit to China. Since Tibet is close to Nepal, Nepal matters to them. And let's not forget that if China pays millions to the ruler of small country like Niger to shift Niger's diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to China, it can do a lot of things to appease Nepalese leadership. Paschim, It is nice to know about kings of Laos and Vietnam. I never even heard of them, didn't know Laos' king was killed, but I am not surprised to know that. Sihanouk is an interesting person. He is a familiar face in China, and he spent a lot of time there. I thought he was a very anti-American person even in his youth, and when he was still a king. Time had reproduced his letter to Time in 60s or70s, in which he didn't hesitate to label himself as an antiAmerican. I think he started the letter by something like, "As an anti-American, I...". Also looking forward to BRB's response. It is interesting [and right] to see that BRB and his gangs were rebuffed by US embassy. It is so disgusting to see multiple faces of parties in Nepal: they try to make populace anti-Indian, anti-American etc. for their petty gain, and in the other hand, they try to curry favour in embassies in KTM. IFji, I am pretty sure he held some government post, and was some kind of representative to National People's Congress. Looking forward to insightful updates from you even in the future when you will be in Beijing.And I am sure you won't be rightwinger anymore:-) kaiwanxiao, laopengyou. Aliciia, Thanks for your appreciation. |
| surya | Posted
on 08-Apr-03 04:55 PM
Biswo, I agree let's not overestimate. Nepal matters enough to China for its own reasons and obviously Nepal too enjoys benefits, be it $$ or just the security of being on the good side of the giant next door. Though it is also interesting to consider what that "relationship" can be rightly called. An alliance of equals it certainly isn't. Now if that man in Nanjing had also told you that this was how the town would have received other foreign dignitaries were greeted, that would have been something to note in estimating China's estimate of Nepal. Would the ruler of Niger be greeted like Mahendra was? Who knows! Interesting! |
| Biswo | Posted
on 08-Apr-03 05:27 PM
Surya, Believe me, there are some rulers in Africa who are treated with great respect in China. And if I remember correctly, among the current rulers, Jimbabwe's Robert Mugabe is among them.Also, if a ruler is switching his diplomatic relation from Taiwan to China, like Mandela did after apartheid era or Niger, and Senegal etc did in different times, he is likely to get a great respect. It is worthwhile to remember that Chinese citizens are asked to line up and pay respect to foreigners, they don't do it spontaneously. I sincerely don't think they really knew anything about Mahendra when he was visiting Nanjing. That said, Nepal is still regarded very positively: may be because we are the only country that didn't have any diplomatic trouble with China in recent history, and may be because we pushed for their entry into UN when we could.[We were member of security council in UN in late sixties.] We also didn't do anything when they invaded Tibet,although we had significant business interest there, and Tibet was obliged to pay us 10,000 gold coin every year. In stead, we accepted a few crores rupees in lump sum assistance from China and shut up. And that was a big help from a small neighbor to the big country next to it. |
| surya | Posted
on 08-Apr-03 06:31 PM
Exactly, Biswo. I am curious about if anyone else remembers going to the bato to receive dignitaries. I was young enough that every step away from home was a welcome adventure. And couldn't tell you whether lining by the road in Kathmandu was "madated" by the state. It just seemed like everyone from the neighborhood would be there and taking the opportunity to talk other neighbors. I wonder if people went because "to not go" would have been frowned upon? I remember the visits were announced and the route and time of arrival... anyone remember? anyhow................................. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 08-Apr-03 07:01 PM
IFji, I am pretty sure he held some government post, and was some kind of representative to National People's Congress. Looking forward to insightful updates from you even in the future when you will be in Beijing.And I am sure you won't be rightwinger anymore:-) kaiwanxiao, laopengyou. Biswo, Don't be so sure: Pu Yi has an interesting history. He haeded the puppet government in Manchuria (manchukuo/manchuguo) for a breief period. In 1945, he was captured by the Russians. He was a star-witness at the Tokyo war crimes Trial. Then the Soviets handed him to the CCP. The CCP made the ex-King go through a process of re-education and he spent 9 years in prision during that re-education period. After that Mao released him and gave him the work of a gardener at the Forbidden City. So, I don't know if in mao's period working as a gardener counted as Government Official Work. Surya: UN when we could.[We were member of security council in UN in late sixties.] We also didn't do anything when they invaded Tibet,although we had significant business interest there, and Tibet was obliged to pay us 10,000 gold coin every year. In stead, we accepted a few crores rupees in lump sum assistance from China and shut up. And that was a big help from a small neighbor to the big country next to it. Surya, Not quite true. Regarding Tibet, I am of the opinion that Tibet was a part of China from the very VERY beginning. Sying that the Dalai Lama once ruled Tibet is like saying, Pahsu-pati ko mulbhatta rules the Pashupati-Chabahel-Battiputali area. Also, China became a UN MNember in the 70s and Nepal's vote didn't matter whatsoever in China's gaining the UN seat. The UN Seat was a step towards the amelioration of Sino-US ties and China's entry to the UN was backed by the US government. Also, after the defeat of Bahadur Shah led campaign, we never recived any godl from the Tibetans, instead we became the Tribute-Paying State of the Chinese empire. So, I don't know what you are talking about. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 08-Apr-03 07:02 PM
IFji, I am pretty sure he held some government post, and was some kind of representative to National People's Congress. Looking forward to insightful updates from you even in the future when you will be in Beijing.And I am sure you won't be rightwinger anymore:-) kaiwanxiao, laopengyou. Biswo, Don't be so sure: Pu Yi has an interesting history. He haeded the puppet government in Manchuria (manchukuo/manchuguo) for a breief period. In 1945, he was captured by the Russians. He was a star-witness at the Tokyo war crimes Trial. Then the Soviets handed him to the CCP. The CCP made the ex-King go through a process of re-education and he spent 9 years in prision during that re-education period. After that Mao released him and gave him the work of a gardener at the Forbidden City. So, I don't know if in mao's period working as a gardener counted as Government Official Work. Surya: UN when we could.[We were member of security council in UN in late sixties.] We also didn't do anything when they invaded Tibet,although we had significant business interest there, and Tibet was obliged to pay us 10,000 gold coin every year. In stead, we accepted a few crores rupees in lump sum assistance from China and shut up. And that was a big help from a small neighbor to the big country next to it. Surya, Not quite true. Regarding Tibet, I am of the opinion that Tibet was a part of China from the very VERY beginning. Sying that the Dalai Lama once ruled Tibet is like saying, Pahsu-pati ko mulbhatta rules the Pashupati-Chabahel-Battiputali area. Also, China became a UN MNember in the 70s and Nepal's vote didn't matter whatsoever in China's gaining the UN seat. The UN Seat was a step towards the amelioration of Sino-US ties and China's entry to the UN was backed by the US government. Also, after the defeat of Bahadur Shah led campaign, we never recived any godl from the Tibetans, instead we became the Tribute-Paying State of the Chinese empire. So, I don't know what you are talking about. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 08-Apr-03 07:12 PM
Biswo, You missed out on a very crucial point. Nepal always supported the rightful Chinese claim on Tibet because Tibet was always a part of China. In the letters we have at the National archives and some copies of Prajna Paramita written/recieved during the periods of Rana Bahadur Shah to rajendra Bikram Shah have dates in Maha-Chin Sambat (for more on this look at Mahesh raj pan'ts Nepal-sambat ko anauchitya-ko barema). Also, if you visited Beijing and Huangzhou, you find that many many Buddhist monastaries survived the Cukltural revolution. They weren't destroyed because in beijing it had Arniko connection and China used it to prove that Nepal - China relations is nothing new. It started almost 800 eyars ago.In Huangzhou, they used the Buddhist temnples etc to prove to the other Buddhist leaders of the world that they (communists) too respect religion etc. A briliant move by Zhou. Also don't forget the issues relating to Nepal-India relations, Nepal's opening up with the world and the then Cron Prince's visit to China. That visit marked a new opening. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 08-Apr-03 07:17 PM
also, regadring Tibet and taiwan: Even the US govt has, although in a vague diplomatic language, accepted that taiwan is a part of China in 1973 (Shanghai Communique). Why nepal-China relations is smooth? One thing: Indian threat. Enemy of your enemy is yoiur best friend.This theory applied in the 60- 90s. However, things been changing now. aaba pugyo.. |
| surya | Posted
on 08-Apr-03 08:04 PM
La I have to disagree with you IF about Tibet always being part of China! The Chinese might have had influence in Tibet and the Dalai Lama and the folks who ran Tibet were under the patronage of China, but I am not convinved that means they have a legitimate claim to Tibet. Maybe there are things I just don't know about how Chinamight have a righful claim on Tibet. In that case, please edify me. But when is "very VERY beginnig " anyhow? How far in the "beginning" are we talking about here? and the question more inerstingly then is what makes a "nation." Should we be looking at whether Nepal was in the very Very a part of India? The Indian's certainly seem to think so. I think not! We are talking about different ages and conception of nation. The cultural political ties of ancient times does not give the modern state of India or China rightful claim over Nepal or Tibet. It seems to me the Tibetans are a cultural and linguistic group in themselves. They seem to have a pretty distict geographic area that they can claim based on original population and demographis. And lastly, the political will of the people... the refugees speak for themselves when they leave China occupied Tibet enmass and seek foreign soils to escape the iron hand of China. I have heard and read that things have changed a great deal in Tibet in the last five years. The demographic seems to be changing in Lahsa for instance as more mailand chinese northerners start working and living there. And also China really seem to have eased off a bit. You don't hear as much about the atrocities like we did in the 80s and 90s. And surely, the new generation of Tibetans who have grown up with Chinese rule have normalized their presence and see the benefit of the patronage of the Chinese. But going back to the time when the Chinese officially took over Tibet and Dalai Lama went into exile, THAT was nothing more than one country conquering another and disposing of the leader. That seemed to me about appropriating the Tibetans' right to self-determination and self-rule. I am not saying Dalai lama and a theocracy is a better alternative to Chinese Communist Oligarchy. But that should have been a decision left to the Tibetans to decide for themselves. Hoina? |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 08-Apr-03 08:14 PM
surya , alik hoina.. tibet was under full chinese control or chinese rule during the Yuan (mongol) dynasty. The Dalai Lama was appointed by a Mongol Emperor. I haev to look at the facts but i think the chinese rule on Tibet can be traced as far back as to the Tang dynasty (or even farther)... I'll definately get back to you on this tonight...k garne.. this week is just craazzzy.. |
| surya | Posted
on 08-Apr-03 08:18 PM
okay. i will look forward to it. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 08-Apr-03 08:21 PM
surya, here's an url, check it out at your convenience. a friend of mine did it more than a year ago. http://www.chakrapath.com/tibetans.htm That will answer some of your queries. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 08-Apr-03 08:22 PM
surya, here's an url, check it out at your convenience. a friend of mine did it more than a year ago. http://www.chakrapath.com/tibetans.htm That will answer some of your queries. |
| Biswo | Posted
on 09-Apr-03 12:17 AM
IFji, WIll write about your contention re Tibet soon. Meanwhile, I found these two very funny articles and posting it here before going to sleep: From Today's Onion: http://www.theonion.com/onion3913/oil_wells_liberated.html And this is an advertisement from a tourism agency that sells airtickets from USA to Nepal: http://www.dream-travels.com/about_us.htm [Its first line says: Dream Travels Unlimited has been in business since 2000 and offers its customers 20 years of experience.] Twenty years of business by a company that is in business since 2000? |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 09-Apr-03 09:57 AM
La I have to disagree with you IF about Tibet always being part of China! The Chinese might have had influence in Tibet and the Dalai Lama and the folks who ran Tibet were under the patronage of China, but I am not convinved that means they have a legitimate claim to Tibet. Maybe there are things I just don't know about how Chinamight have a righful claim on Tibet. Surya, Good, valid arguments but let me write a few lines on Tibet always being a part of China. Tibet was an independent Kingdom during the Song and Tang dynasties China. However, Kublai Khan in 1279, 8 eyars after naming his dynasty Yuan, Tibet, like many other provinces of China came under the direct rule of the Central governmnet. Furthermore, the Yuan dynasty established Xuan Zheng Yuan (Comission for Buddhist and Tibetan Affairs) in Beijing to keep track of or run businesses in Tibet. Also, the local administration was tightly controlled by the Yuan court. Any administrative appointment in Tibet was required to get the approval of the Yuan court. Furthermore, historical evidence prove that the Yuan dynasty set up postage stations and held a census in Tibet. The Ming dynasty, which succeeded the Yuan (mongol) dynasty also kept Tibet nder its jurisdiction. All teh appointments in Tibet were made by the Ming court. The Qing dynasty which succeeded the Ming didn't loosen their grip on Tibet either. The Qing actually came up with a set of polices, often known as 29 Artciles ordinance" to run the daily affairs of Tibet in 1729. After the Nationalists take over in 1911, the Chinese governmnet restored the title of the 13th Dalai Lama. In 1913, Panchen Lama was conferred with the title " Zhizhong Chanhua" In 1929, the Nationalist (GMD) governmnet set up a commission to look after the Tibetan and the Mongolian affairs. The Chinese constitution of 1912 states: The territory of the Republic of China includes 22 provinces as well as Inner and Outer Mongolias, Tibet and Qinghai" John King fairbank, Jonathan Spence and other noted American Sinologists agree that based on the historical evidence, Tibet was under the direct Chinese control in the 17th century. And I see no reason not to believe these scholars. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 09-Apr-03 09:58 AM
Also, Janak Lal Shrama and Dr Prem Raman Uprety, both Nepali historians seem to believe that Tibet was under a tight Chinese control in the 17th century. According to Dr. Uprety, the Chinese had set up the Amban office in Tibet. Ambans were officials that controlled Tibet and implemented the policies pased down from the central governmnet in Beijing. Ann Paludan, educated at Oxford and one of the first women to enter the Foreign Service in the UK before turning a BBC correspondent for China seems to belive that Tibet came under the Chinese control at the time of the Tang Emperor Xuanzong (712-756). She writes: After a successful campaign against the Tibetans who had broken a Peace Treaty, the frontiers remained largely peaceful and border regions were placed under military governmnets who were also responsible for civil administration. She further writes: .. Emperor Kangxi (1661-1722) re-established China's dominance on Tibet. .. In 1720, Kangxi sent a force to Tibet, thus securing China's frontiers in teh north and west. ************** In that case, please edify me. But going back to the time when the Chinese officially took over Tibet and Dalai Lama went into exile, THAT was nothing more than one country conquering another and disposing of the leader. That seemed to me about appropriating the Tibetans' right to self-determination and self-rule. I am not saying Dalai lama and a theocracy is a better alternative to Chinese Communist Oligarchy. But that should have been a decision left to the Tibetans to decide for themselves. Hoina? alik hoina. The Chinese didn't invade Tibet, the Chinese reclaimed the territory. If you are of the opinion that the Chinese shouldn't have claimed their territory because the Tibetans are a different group altogether, its like saying, yeah, why not declare panchthar, Ilam and other Khumbuwan areas in the east and all Madeshis areas in the south of Nepal independent? Based on all the reasings I have done on China, I firmly believe that Tibet was indeed a part of China by modern definitions of state and sovereignity since the 12th/13th century. If we start considering granting independent status to all the independent kingdoms/countries during the 12th 13th centuries, then well, I have nothing to say. Also, we all seem to have somehow bought the Cold-War propoganda and believed that the Tibetans are actually demanding an independent Tibet. The Tibetans, in the words of his holiness the Dalai Lama himself are NOT looking for an independent Tibet. He wants an autonomous TIbet, not a Free Tibet. Anyway, enopugh on this. If you want to read more on this: 1. China: A New History (John King Faibank) 2. Treason by the Book (jonathan Spence) 3. Chronicle of the Chinese Emperors (Ann Paludan) 4. Social History of Tibet, China: Documented and Illustrated (China Intercontinental Press) 5. Hamro Samaj Ek Adhyayan (Janak Lal Sharma) 6. Nepal: A Small Nation in the Vortex of International Conflicts (Prem Raman Uprety) 7. The Dragon in the Land of Snows (Tshering Sakya) 8. Yale University and the European Parliament Speeches of His Holiness. 9. Nepal Sambat ko Anauchitya ko Sambandhama (Mahesh Raj panta) |
| surya | Posted
on 09-Apr-03 10:21 AM
I might seek out some of those books, IS. Thanks for taking the time to write about the chronology of CHina Tibet relations. However, it still seems to me, TIbet having been under the jurisdiction of China off and on, bet it for centuries even, does not mean they have a "rightful" claim to Tibet or that Tibetans do NOT have the right to self-determination and self rule. Yeah, we probably would not give the terai to Tibet because the Maithilis might want self rule, but that analogy is not adequate when talking about Tibet. Tibet is a larger area in the first place. Yes, Tibetans are not saying they want a free Tibet... at least not all. But most likely most would agree on "self-determination" and "self rule." Even if the Chinese have been around in Tibet since the 12th century... does not mean they could not be ousted. There is a precedence after all... even the 800yr occupation of Spain by the Moors ended Also, I see that you mentioned "The Dragon in the Land of Snows" by Tsering Shakya, that book is probably the one I would trust best when judging the Tibet China nexus. What matters is the present and and what Tibetans want today. History is great, but it does not give automatic grant legitamacy to claims of entitlement. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 09-Apr-03 10:35 AM
I mentioned Tsering Sakya's book because despite his biases he provides you with some "historic" evidence to suggest that Tibet was once under China's control. Also, I don't agree with your claim that Tibet, just because its bigger in size should enjoy freedom. Check out Treason by the book too, its a novel but oi page 279, I guess, there is a line on Tibet.. on how the emperor Qianlong senty some "odrers" to Tibet. Fairbank's book has a paragraph on Tibet on tax-collection by the manchus. page no., birse. Ann's book has the history of Yuan dynasty, their fascinatioon with Buddhism and their control of Tibet. Social History of Tibet has pcitures of actual documents that were exchanged between the Chinese and Tibetan authortities from the 12th century and even earlier. Hamro Samaj Ek Adhyayan by Janak Lal Sharma has a chapter called "abhicharjanya samsarga" in which he writes on the feudal Tibetan medicinal practices.. and Jung Bahadur coming up with laws in Nepal to stop Nepalis from folowing those unhealthy practices. Also Henereich Harrer's book Seven Years in Tibet mentions of the feudal medicine. The book by Prem Raman Uprety (1st chapter) gives you a clear idea of the Chinese control of Tibet during the 18th and 19th century. The Yale University and Strutgart (?>?) speeches give you a clear idea of his holiness's view oin TIbet and the 5 strategies that won him the nobel peace prize. The book by Mahesh Raj Pant mentions of teh correspondence between the Nepai rulers and the Chinese rulers in the 18th century. |
| jhilke kyailan | Posted
on 10-Apr-03 02:50 AM
".....if you look at the history of the last 30-40 years, I think a lot of the problem has also to do NOT with dictators and bad leaders (whether we are talking about the King or some corrupt elected official or guerilla strong arming "revolutionaries"), but rather with our own capacity as a people - a people just coming to terms with this new age... with feudalism in our recent past with only 35% literate citizens with almost 50% supposedly under the age of 15?" Suryaji, are you blaming the people themselves for their own troubles? Ask yourself who created the feudalistic system and for what reason. Who benefitted and who didn't? Why are only 35% literate...did they not want to get educated or were they not allowed to? Are the people backward because they wnat to be?????? "Surely Mahendra alone did not come up with the Panchayat system. So what of our public adminstrators, policy makers and all them people. Or did we even have those sort of people back then? Does then the system that failed also have to do with the short comings of those individuals who were the architects of the system? " If it wasn't Mahendra who was it....BP? Pushpa lal? Ganesh man????? During the time of the panchayat who were the leaders? Who controlled policy you ask? Isn't it obvious....And don't you find it surprising that today, the same people ( and their familial connections) who were benefitting from the "ONE PARTY DEMOCRACY" are today the ones with the loudest voice shouting, that multiparty democracy isn't working, that political leaders have failed, that the king was right to (unconstitutionally) dismiss parliment and set up a puppet govt.......Some go as far as to say Nepal isn't ready for democracy.....not ready for a system of govt that has safegaurded the rights of billions of people around the world and has been the basis of mass economic development? NOT READY eh?....who is going to make them ready...infact, answer me this WHY aren't they ready.......Ultimately the failure of a society is a reflection of the failure of leadership and who were the leaders of Nepal....... |
| surya | Posted
on 10-Apr-03 06:47 AM
It isn't an "Either OR" proposition that I am making. I don't have time this morning for a long response, other than to say DO read my comments again and reconsider what YOU have picked out to PICK on vs. what MY messge is. However, I will respond again later tonight. Thank you for reading my comments JHILKE. :) |
| surya | Posted
on 10-Apr-03 07:32 AM
Anyway, could not help but add another short comment..... blaming the "leaders" alone is not enough. And at least not just the most obvioous "figure heads" alone! For a Hitler there are the Goebels in this world who not only "follow orders," but are the minds and hands behind the atrocities. Thats what I had in ming. What's with dropping Ganesh Lal in the mix? Please. So with the maoist bloodshed, it's not just BRB... . . . so there. |
| paramendra | Posted
on 21-Apr-03 04:16 PM
A most interesting thread that I discovered only today: (1) China-Tibet-Mahendra. Wow. What a cocktail .... --- It amazes me when people defend Mahendra. He was a crook. Period. He pushed back Nepal by three decades. There is no other way to look at his "Panchayati" stunt. --- China and Tibet. India and Kashmir. Russia and Chechnya. Tibet: independence or autonomy? A multi-party democracy in China that guarantees human rights where the Buddhists may have the Dalai Lama back in Lhasa the way the Pope is in the Vatican, that is the model I see unfolding, or hope it does. The past does not provide enough clues, and the question whether or not Tibet is part of China becomes mute. I don't think we want a religious leader for head of state. But then Chinese atrocities in Tibet are well documented. They were/are wrong. --- The idea that democracy might be a western concept not conducive to Asian soil keeps creeping into Sajha forums. That is the propaganda line of the Asian elites who would like to cling on to power. Democracy is a human concept: nothing east or west about it. (2) BRB and Paschim. Paschim, watch out! Or maybe BRB is officially tamer these days, or so we hear ..... :-) |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 21-Apr-03 06:16 PM
--- It amazes me when people defend Mahendra. He was a crook. Period. He pushed back Nepal by three decades. There is no other way to look at his "Panchayati" stunt. NO matter how much i like to respect your views, your strong statements without any suppoort makes me ..well, say, discredit them totally. Refrain from that because I more and more believe that you are an indian agent working on Sajha. PERIOD. since you didn't corroborate nor provided any support or referense to your mahan statement on His Late Majesty Mahendra, I don't think i don't need to provide you with any proof nor arguments nor anything when I say, you are an Indian agent or going to be one soon. Namaste ! |
| paramendra | Posted
on 21-Apr-03 06:27 PM
i-freak: "I don't know who knows what but all I know is "its time for the King to take another major step." "...you are an Indian agent ..." The Panchayat era might be over. But you continue to have a Panche mentality. You have a right to your opinion. It is just it is so yesteryear. |
| MainBatti | Posted
on 21-Apr-03 06:36 PM
IF, I thought you were gonna call Mahendra as Sri 5 Badaamahaaraajdhiraaj Mahendra Bir Bikram Saahadev Sarkaar . :) On a serious note, though, your response does not put you in any better position than Paramendra. He came up with a claim without any proof. You also came up with claim--that Paramendra is "an indian agent working on Sajha"--without prove. You prove you are not inept by showing the world that you can hold elections on time. If you can not, better not call someone inept. Similarly, if you can not prove that a claim someone else has made is wrong, you better make sure that you have enough *facts* to prove the claim(s) you are making. You can not simply act smart by calling someone proofless and providing another proofless statement. ------------- Paramendra add the following to your list: 3) Isolated Freak and Paramendra: Just like Deuba and Gyanendra (Deuba being Paramendra). ----------- Namaste! |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 21-Apr-03 06:55 PM
Mainbatti, The world has progresed a lot in the last 100 years and Mainbattis are already replaced by halogen lights. So, go back to my posting again and read the last paragraph carefully. I have all my "bases covered". |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 21-Apr-03 07:01 PM
I don't think i don't need to provide you with any proof nor arguments nor anything when I say, you are an Indian agent or going to be one soon. Read it as : I don't think I need to provide you with....... |
| paramendra | Posted
on 22-Apr-03 01:58 PM
Iso ------- MahendraBhakta. I guess we all have a right to choose our heroes. It is just that I feel sorry for your choice. Mahendra was a third rate dictator. There is nothing else to him. And you make no effort to hide the fact that your nationalism/patriotism is a barely masked anti-Terai sentiment. Terai = India. And India is bad. So the Terai folks can go to hell. That little software loop in your mind is pathetic. How does one PROVE Mahendra was a jackrabbit? One states. Or, in short: the guy put an end to a nascent democracy. Need I say more? |
| NK | Posted
on 22-Apr-03 02:13 PM
This is the most amusing thread is sajha ,especially the last six postings starting with Isolated Freak :) Sajha *is* amusing. Some threads are really really amusing. Even if a thread is not amusing, it will become one. Sooner or later. Take it from me. :] |
| paramendra | Posted
on 22-Apr-03 02:32 PM
NK .... :-) |
| NK | Posted
on 22-Apr-03 05:09 PM
Paramendra... :)) and also :D |
| sparsha | Posted
on 22-Apr-03 05:37 PM
Arre! Bhad me jaye sab ka sab! Jab hamare mananiya atithi PK Bhagat sahab kuch farmarahe ho to phir sab jantako mil julke bada aadmi ko pranam karke sun lena chahiye ki ab kya ho ra hai. PK sahab se bada bidwan aur koi hai kya? hai koi mai ka laal? Bhagat sahab se door darshi aur bada neta na to kabhi paida huwa hai nahi hoga, chhat maiya ki kripa se. Maalum nahi hai ta likho abhi "Na bhuto na bhabisyati...ek ho PK bhagat dusaro nasti". Khamakha PK sahab se panga lete hain janta log. Ab tak to Amrika ke President ho jana chahiye tha PK sahab ko lekin saala Nepali -pahade- janta logke anwarat discrimination se Bhagat sarkar abhi tak truck se nikal nahi pare hai....bas ghum rahe hai idhar se udhar...lekin dekhna...dekhna janta log...PK sahab ko...dikha denge ek ek ko...kisi din subaha.... hanh! dekha denge...fir mat kehana kuch...hum ne tyam se pehele hai "barning" de diya hai... |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 22-Apr-03 06:38 PM
Parmendra, I am against Indian policy on Nepal but I AM NOT ANTI TERAI. Beign an anti-Indaian policy on Nepal does not make me an anti-Terai person because I don't connect the whole of TErai region with India like you do. The Terai region is OUR land. Nepal's Land, the people who live there are as much Nepalis as i am. HOwever, I am against your ill-informed views. The people from Terai have as much rights in Nepal as I do and I am sure 99.9% of the Terai basis can't relate to you or your experiences. Come on don't try to portray yourself as someone who cares for a tarkari-bechne dai or Khali sis dai becuse we all know you don't. You can't even relate to their experience because you were born with a silverspoon and you are now in the US. So keep your Terai propoganda with you or at least don't use them on ME. PERIOD. Go check the facts on your mahan democractic leader Indira Gandhi before you babel Mahendra Sarkar anything. See Parmendra, most of the time, I support my views with evidence.But when I respond to you, I am free to speak my mind because your's are statements that don't need to contradicted using logic or any evidence. And hey , i don't want to get into a cyber squabble with you. Namaste Don't worry your MB freind will come to your rescue ~! |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 22-Apr-03 06:41 PM
NK, its not going to be intresting.. because if parmendra virus will eat this thread up like SARS has been eating the east-asian economies. I am still trying to see the pics that yoiu posted.. they are HUGE... takes forever to load if you are using a dial-up network or whatever it is. Namaste. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 22-Apr-03 06:45 PM
omit the "if" |
| NK | Posted
on 22-Apr-03 06:46 PM
IF, sorry about that, I mean the pictures I posted. It is a truly a nuisance to try to post pictures in Sajha, isn't it? And t to view them? Forget about it!! Now, San must be fuming... :) |
| MainBatti | Posted
on 22-Apr-03 07:20 PM
>>>Don't worry your MB freind will come to your rescue ~! Freak, listen, I am not defending Paramendra as a person. There have been numerous times where I have spoken against him. I respect his views. And may be I do that more than you support Gyanendra or Mahendra. The reason is clear: Paramendra makes sense! And he makes sense of what he is saying not by using 100 exclamation marks, 15000 dots, tsks or anything, but by telling it in English! It's true there are more pertinent issues right now to care about Teraibasis. But the agonies of Teraibasis are not very down the list. Sadbhawana can not solve the problems we have, but we have all been observing, Mr Freak, that a man with a country's army and resources at disposal could not solve our problem either. I did not come here to defend Paramendra, assured. But the mere fact that he lives in the US does not mean his care for Teraibasis is not genuine. Arundhoti Roy--who, I am glad to know, will be coming to my place soon--was behind the Narmada Bachaau Abhiyaan. Does Roy's not being one of the victims of the rehabilation program make all her efforts not genuine? And I do not want to get in a very heated debate with you here, but, yes I will be coming to "rescue" Paramendra--or any other person who makes sense for that matter--as long as you--and many freaks like you--do not learn that yours is not the only right opinion in this world. We can talk about the rest during summer. They just told me that they will pay my airfare! Bhawadiye, "hopeful that people will learn to go by facts and not just by beliefs" MainBatti |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 22-Apr-03 07:28 PM
mainbatti, ahhahahahahahahaahahhh nibhna lageko batti dherai balcha re~!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
| NK | Posted
on 22-Apr-03 07:32 PM
There you go! sEE? Doesn't this whole episode amuse even the dourest person?? Better than Seinfield, better than Six Feet Under, and much much better than Soprano. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 22-Apr-03 07:34 PM
And I do not want to get in a very heated debate with you here, but, yes I will be coming to "rescue" Paramendra--or any other person who makes sense for that matter--as long as you--and many freaks like you--do not learn that yours is not the only right opinion in this world. Its yoiur choice. I am not forcing you to. Do whatever makes you happy. And seems like you post in a haste without reading what the others have posted. I said in clear, simple English that I too am not up for any cyber squabble with Parmnendra nor his allies, because its not worth it. After re-reading the last two lines of the above paragraph, i get the feeling that you are ofa belief that *its only your opinions on things that are right*. And it proives that you are no different than me. A little more sophisticated freak, but you too are a freak, not someone worthy of being taken seriously. "We can talk about the rest during summer. They just told me that they will pay my airfare! " Make an appointment first, at least 2 months in advance. Then, if i have time, depending on my schedule, i will decide whether i can spare some minutes to meet you. Expecting some more from you. I hope you won't disappont me. |
| MainBatti | Posted
on 22-Apr-03 08:26 PM
>>Make an appointment first, at least 2 months in advance. Then, if i have time, depending on my schedule, i will decide whether i can spare some minutes to meet you. Hehehe, so you think I am striving to meet you? Wait, did I see what I just saw? Well, you can bask on your self-claimed/promoted stature but just to let you know, I will NOT be the one to write to you first and ask you for an appointment. I will have better things to do. If you think you are smart, you should be able to convince the dumbest person on earth, they say. If I ever happen to meet you, I will check if I am smart! Namaste, MainBatti. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 22-Apr-03 08:36 PM
MainBatti, You seem to have a very bad short-term memory. I don't know the exact name of the disease but check out the web site of Mental health Association of America. A. First, it was you who proposed we meet. B. Then I said, email me first, at least 2 months in advance. c. Then you say, you are not striving to meet me or at least meet me by making an appointment. Now, don't expect me to write to you. I have better things to do than meet a self-proclaimed "smart" person. I would rather spend my time doing some interesting things than meet with someone who is not a match for my WIT. PERIOD. "If I ever happen to meet you, I will check if I am smart! " HAHAHAHH that is if you ever GET to meet me. I have no intention nor time to meet with some of the dumbest people. namaste. batti nibhnai lageko cha.. dherai bali sakyo!~ |
| paramendra | Posted
on 23-Apr-03 07:41 AM
Nk. What does this mean: :D Is that the dot com lingo for a loud mouth? Or a BIG smile? Chat Maiya Sparsha ------ Shayari ho tyo? :-) i-freak: By now I dread discussing the Terai issue at the site. The conversations on the topic tend to go round in circles. You and I have totally different views on Mahendra. Well. Let's discuss Mahendra. No need to get into name calling, as you have done. And your name calling is totally to do with my Terai background. If I were a Paramendra Shaha (!) or a Paramendra Subedi, and not Paramendra Bhagat, your name calling would have not made any mention of India. Right? Actually, if I were a Paramendra Shaha, you would be worshipping me. Going by your sentiment for the other Indra: Mahendra. "I am against Indian policy on Nepal ...." And what policy is that? "The people from Terai have as much rights in Nepal as I do and I am sure 99.9% of the Terai basis can't relate to you or your experiences." So you know a Teraiwasi's plight better than I do? Yeah, a Teraiwasi now has a right to vote. And that can be a tool to achieve equality. But that equality has not been achieved yet. "...and you are now in the US. ..." It is more like I am ALL OVER this freaking country... "...your mahan democractic leader Indira Gandhi ..." I am a great admirer of Indira Gandhi. For a subcontinent where women are where they are, I think it great that Indira called the shots in India for so long. But how does that make her MY leader? Again, your anti-Terai prejudices getting the better of you? For that matter, I like Bill Clinton also. It is an admirations for the political skills of the likes of Gandhi and Clinton. "...your MB freind .." What's MB? Oh. Ok. That would be MainBatti. ".....Better than Seinfield, better than Six Feet Under, and much much better than Soprano...." And only the other day I was dreaming what a Nepali Seinfeld or Friends might be like? The script, I mean. "...that I too am not up for any cyber squabble with Parmnendra nor his allies..." A discussion is no squabble. As long as we refrain from personal remarks. For example: the topic of Mahendra. Let's talk some more about it. Why not? Maybe both of us will end up better informed, if only of the other's ignorance, by the time we are done. MB and IS kind of took a detour here, looks like ............. |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 23-Apr-03 09:28 AM
Parmendra, Good points there. Before I continue with this, let me make one thing clear: I didn't call you any name. So, don't call me a name caller. Also, as far as my own self asessment goes, i am not that big (or bad?) of a racially biased person either. And I am sure your lines on you being somebody else was "in error" so, i'll skip those and move on to the next level, i.em an intellectual discussion. Let's carry on with our discussion on Mahendra instead. Like you said, we can turn this squabble into a meaningful discussion and learn from each other. I for one, having gone to a school where critical thinking is encouraged will keep on challenging your views with credible references and I hope you would reciprocate. Will get back to you in a while. |
| paramendra | Posted
on 23-Apr-03 09:36 AM
Ok, IF, let's talk. |
| paramendra | Posted
on 23-Apr-03 09:39 AM
A quick Google on Mahendra:
|
| paramendra | Posted
on 23-Apr-03 09:59 AM
Some observations: "Within a span of ten years, the king had, in effect, reclaimed the unlimited power exercised by Prithvi Narayan Shah in the eighteenth century." "Tightening his absolute grip on power, the King dissolved parliament, banished political parties and imprisoned many democratic leaders ushering in the Panchayat era generally acknowledged as one of repression, corruption and stagnation marked with unbridled hollow nationalism." "...King Mahendra divided the kingdom of Nepal into 14 Zones and 75 Districts." This is so arbitrary. |
| Biswo | Posted
on 23-Apr-03 01:10 PM
I used to wonder why even educated people support Mahendra. Direct beneficiaries of Mahendra's rule aside, I don't see any reason why Nepali people need to 'like' the man who put an elected leader in jail for almost a decade without even daring to go to court with the accusation he made in radio. But here is a solace analogy. A poll at http://www.pollingreport.com/music.htm lists one of the CBS poll that Tony Blair also mentioned to Jose Aznar some weeks ago: there are even those people who think Elvis Prisley faked his death, i.e. he may still be alive! Great to see Paramendra after long time! |
| isolated freak | Posted
on 23-Apr-03 11:15 PM
Ok, I am at it: 1. Mahednra was a visionary leader. 2. He wasn'ta dictator. He was a much liked and loved leader. 3. Hadn't it been for Mahendra Sarkar, we would have ended up like Bhutan. 4. In international arena, he was one successful diplomat. 5. His ideas/views were somehow socialist. For example: His famous quote 'Communism taxi chadera aaundaina" and feelings portrayed in poems "hey bir hida aghi sari nahatai pau rati bhari.. nagarik haak timrai ho.. leu kadh ma kaadh gari" and "santan thari tharika". 6. Persuasive leader: Got Kesharjung Raimajhi jasto Communist to work fro him. 7. Understood Nepal like no other did. His speeches, words, quotes and actions all hint at one thing: he wanted nepal to proisper and free fom any dforeign influence. He also wanted and worked all his life to break our dependency on india, and was sucessful to a major extent. 2017-2028 ko nepal ma jati bikas bhayo, it never happened. I compare Mahendra sarkar to statesman like Charles deGaulle and Lee Kuan Yu. Like deGaulle he focused on independent foreign policy and like Lee Kuan Yu, he foucsed on development. Shri Panch Mahendra Amar Rahun.. ahile lai pugyo, aaru pachi lekhaula. |