| Username |
Post |
| Puru Subedi |
Posted
on 20-May-03 10:11 AM
From this week's Dristi Weekly..
-PS
cd]l/sL ;]gf g]kfn cfpg]
sf7df8f}+ . g]kfndf dfcf]jfbL ultljlw ;"u;"u} ljb]zL ;]gfx¿sf] rnv]n a9\g yfn]sf] 5 . o;} qmddf g]kfnsf] e"agf]6 cj:yfsf] cWoog ug]{ l;nl;nfdf o;} ;ftf cd]l/sL ;]gfsf] Pp6f 6f]nL sf7df8f}+ cfpg] s'/f cd]l/sL /fhb"tfjf;åf/f hf/L lj1lKtdf hgfOPsf] 5 .
dfcf]jfbLx¿ o'4lj/fd u/]/ zflGtjftf{sf] 6]a'ndf al;/x]sf] a]nf g]kfn cfpg nfu]sf] cd]l/sL ;]gfnfO{ cy{k"0f{?kdf x]l/Psf] 5 . o;} ;ftf sf7df8f}+ cfpg] cd]l/sL ljz]if ;}Go 6f]nLn] ljz]if u/L /fhwfgL / ljleGg lhNnfsf] cWoog ug'{sf ;fy} kxf8L e"agf]6df dfcf]jfbL cft+ssf/Lx¿;"u s;/L n8\g'k5{ eGg] af/]df g]kfnL ;]gfnfO{ k|lzIf0f lbg] atfOG5 .
cd]l/sL ;]gfx¿n] o;eGbf cufl8 cfkm\gf] ;}Go lzlj/ /x]sf b]zx¿df dfq o:tf vfn] k|lzIf0f lb"b} cfPsf] eP klg g]kfnnfO{ k|d'vtf lbPsf] 36gf eg] of] klxnf] xf] . cd]l/sL ;]gfsf] o; k|sf/sf] ;xof]unfO{ cGoyf glnOP klg o'4lj/fdsf] a]nfdf g]kfndf cd]l/sL ljz]if ;]gfsf] e|d0fnfO{ w]/}n] z+sfsf] b[li6n] x]l//x]sf 5g\ .
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 20-May-03 10:32 AM
What a dumb piece of news.
Why Would Americans want to come to Nepal? They won't in this context. If Nepal had officially asked for the American help in combating the insurgency, the the White House would have probably considered sending the army. I hate to say this but Nepal is not a strategically important country anymore.
Regarding the training to be provided to the RNA men, its NOT a new thing. The army men have been conducting joint training programs, in Nepal and elsewhere. Not only the US but many countries send their troops and trainers to Nepal on various joint training programs.
The US institutions in Nepal and elsewhere are however, guarded by the US Security Personnels along with the security personnels of the host country (-ies).
There's no denying to the fact that the great powers sometimes indulge in information gathering but its not to put the host country in danger, but to help their (great powers) governments to make more practical policies towards the countries that they are in.
Yo communist patrika haroo.. they should have published a joke if they were running short on news.
|
| Taxing_Under_Influence |
Posted
on 20-May-03 11:18 AM
It's good news!!! Bush knows that after Saddam's regime the only remaining fascist regime is that of GBBS', and therefore is a great threat to American security. So, Bush is sending his troops to kick GBBS' and his loyal (including PKD, BRB and alike) butt.
Go.... Bush...Go!!!!
|
| Jhilke Kyailan |
Posted
on 21-May-03 08:51 AM
To say Nepal is not a strategically important country is, for me anyways, a sign that the person has really no idea about international relations. If one reads the Huntington book and does a complete analysis, it is so obvious how important a role Nepal can play in the coming" POST IRAQ continuing WAR AGAINST TERROR" world.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 21-May-03 11:06 AM
To say Nepal is not a strategically important country is, for me anyways, a sign that the person has really no idea about international relations. If one reads the Huntington book and does a complete analysis, it is so obvious how important a role Nepal can play in the coming" POST IRAQ continuing WAR AGAINST TERROR" world.
True, true.
However, if you alow me to put forth my views:
1. Sam Huntington's book, whioch I read a long time ago for a class, if I remember correctly pin points among other things geography, political ideology, etc. etc. etc. and increasing economic co-operation among nation states as factors contributing to Globalization and as a result of which, individual's identity would be linked to the broader framework of civilization/religion and to promote and to save identities, there will be "fundametalist" movements, and that would result in a clash between civilizations.
True. Yes, there have been movements in India and in the Arab world to promote/preserve their racial/religious identities. However, there hasn't been a direct clash between the civilizations except for the Iraq war. The War in Iraq did not last long and it became a war between the nations, not between the civilizations. Had the Arab world united to save Iraq and had the other European and other non-muslim nations had backed the US and the Western power, then there would have been a major clash of civilization and would have triggered the third world war. However, it didn't happen. The other Arab nations chose to refrain from the war and except the UK, the European nations with a significant Christian population remain uninvolved in the war. Actually, they (the European nations) saw more protests against the war than any other place in the world. The protests in Europe was a sign that sent a powerful message to the rulers worldwide that the general public (aged 18-40) is not interested in any war--whether ideological or any. And Huntington says, the age range (18-40) will be the ones who will be involved in various fundamentalist movements to search for and protect their "identities". Actually, I find Friedman's theory more convincing when he says that the chances of a third world war happening is almost to none because of the McDonaldization of the world.
Now, again getting back to Huntington to do an analysis of a "likely" clash between the Confucian and the HIndu civilizations, I don't think it will happen. With both countries now focusing more on Economy and faced with the problem of over-populaton, they are more likely to opt for the peace in the region than resort to wars. Actually, seems like both India and China (Hindu and Confusian civilizations) will be increasinng co-opeartioon in the coming days and will be working together in their development "process". This leaves us with one "likely" clash between India (hindu) and Pakistan (Muslim). However, this also seems vcery unlikely because both are nuclear armed, and both are dependant on the US for economic reasons. And the US interest is to avoid a war between these two nations.
2. Now, talking about Nepal: Nepal has lost its strategic importance. If the Cold War was still on and if India and China were in really bad terms and if the US Foreign Policy's major objective was to disintegrate China, then Nepal would have remained a strategically important country . Now, the world has changed. The Americans have more interests in China and India than in Nepal. Of course, the war on terror has changed the US's policy on South Asia, especially India and China, but Nepal.. come on, we still remain a strategically unimportant country because the US has no interest--economic, military or other--in Nepal.
Let's hear your analysis on nepal's position vis-a-vis Iraq war and the clash of civilizations.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 21-May-03 11:12 AM
The Americans have more interests in China and India than in Nepal. Of course, the war on terror has changed the US's policy on South Asia, especially India and China
read this as
......... especially India and Pakistan
also
However, if you alow me to put forth my views
as put forwrad
other errors, correct thm as you read,. time pugena
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 21-May-03 11:23 AM
3. India and China both don't find Nepal as a strategic important nation. If Nepal was nuclear armed nation then that would have somewhat been a strategic equalizer of the Indian and the Chinese powers, but we have none except a few thousand M-16 A2s and Khukuri. Furthermore, with the disintegration of the USSR and China's impressive economic and military developments, it is very unlikely that these two nations would opt for a full-fledged war in the near future. If they were to engage in a war, then Nepal would have remained a strategically important nation for both India and China for survelience and other activities and this too is over-estimating Nepal. With the developments in survelience rquipments and a sound diplomatic relations between India and China, both know about ech other more than any time in the past. India does not need to send a Wesh mountainner to climb the Furla Mandhata to collect information on the Chinese movenemt in Tibet and China does not need to use and rely on covert intelligence operations to know about India.
So, what are we? a small nation trapped between the two emerging world powers. nothing more.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 21-May-03 11:41 AM
does not need to send a Wesh mountainner to climb= Welsh (??) (from wales) to climb GURLA MANDHATA.
|
| mirador |
Posted
on 21-May-03 02:12 PM
Why is Nepal Important to India? Because of its perennial worries about Pakistan friendly government in Nepal. Ever hear of senior Indian leaders complaining about infiltration of Pakistani terrorists to India via Nepal?
Why is Nepal important to China? Because China is fiercely against pro independece/pro-autonomy Tibetans running their activities in Tibet with bases in Nepal. Within mainland, it can control who enters and leaves Tibet very well (you need separate permission from Chinese authorities to visit Tibet). Nepal is a little harder to control, especially without a friendly government.
Why is Nepal important to USA:- Because Nepal could be hideout for islamic militants. Quite possible given a permanently turbulent Nepal. Example of that would be the hijacking if an airline that took off from Kathmandu few years ago. Plus the anti-communist sentiments in USA (communists are evil!) stoked up by anti-USA rhetoric of the Maoists(capitalists are evil!).
American Interest in Nepal has significantly increased with the rise of Maoists in Nepal. US army officials admit this. They also admit that Nepal has been getting INCREASED military training/supplements within the last few year(good news for the arms industry!). The military attention is not as big as that recieved by countries with Muslim rebels but nevertheless it exists.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 21-May-03 08:40 PM
Mirador:
Your points are:
India needs Nepal to counter the ISI activities.
China needs Nepal to preserve its terretorial integrity.
The US needs Nepal to prevent the Al Qaida members coming to Nepal and to wage another War on the US.
Valid points but do they actually make it to the Foreign Policy objectives and agendas of the US, India and China?
India needs Nepal to counter the ISI threat/activities: This is a pure propoganda spreda by the Indian Government. The Indian intelliegence agency RAW (Research and Analysis Wing of India) is more active in Npal than the ISI. The Indian governmnet's strategy so far has been to:
1. label everyone who is anti-Indian as ISI agents working in/from Nepal. The India Today report published in 2000 is a good example of this.
2. Then create a bad image of nepal saying we (nepal) harbor terrorists.
To say that the hijacking of the Indian Airlines is mainly due to nepal's pro-Pakistani attitude is quite old now. With the 9/11 everything has changed. Both India and Pakistan have stopped and or lessened the funding of the terrorist organizations oeprating from ech others' territory. For example, Pakistan has arrested more than 2000 Lashker-e-Toiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad members and India has started to put an end to funding communal/ethnic violence in Karachi and Peshawar.
Furthermnore, the US's presence in Afganisthan has changed the whole game. With frequent vists from the US secretaries (assistant and deputy ect.) both India and Pakistan are forced to stop all they had been doing and the recent move toards truce with pakistan by the Indian PM hints at that. Also, the Maoists in Nepal and LTTE in Sri Lanka have to do with the UN Resolution 1373 which forces the nation states to not to let terrorist organizations operate in/from their countries.
So, the Indian interest in nepal has always been Economic .
Paskistan's interest is to be in good terms with Nepal.
2. China needs Nepal to preseve its terretorial integrity: Ah, quite not true. If it were the 70s and the Khampas still being funded by the West, you could have said this. However, with the sino-US rapprochment of the early 70s and both China's and the US's growing dependance on each other, its very unlikely that the US or any other nation will try to disintegrate China. The US's policy on China and especially Tibet is changing. There was a bill filed at the US senate, nov. december (2001) on opening a US consulate in Lhasa. Which means, the US governmnet wants the things way they are now.
Also, the Chinese government knows that with both India and the US unfunding the Free Tibet movement in Nepal, it has nothing to worry about. China raises its concerns on growing instability in nepal from time to time, that's it. China does not need Nepal to curb Free Tibet activities. China knows that the movement will come to an end, that's why they put a blind eye on Tibetr issue these days.
Now, the MAerican interests: H E Malinowski also said the same thing: The US does not want the Al Qaida to come to Nepal. True true. But given the high degree of the US survelience in the Afghan-Pakistan, Pakistan-India border, the US does not need to look toward Nepal. Most of the al-Qaidas get arrestyed in those areas. However, if some do manage to come to Nepal, then the US intelligence will work with the Nepali authorities and do what needs to be done. That's why the Terrorism something understanding was signed between the tow nations.
The US will keep on strengthening the military. This is where I agreee with you. The US will do this because as a part of their commitment to curb terrorism and that's it. No vested or hidden interests.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 21-May-03 08:43 PM
and the US will certainly not GET involved in Nepal unless and until Osama Bin loaden starts issuing statements from Chovar ko Gufa.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 21-May-03 08:47 PM
also,
you forgot one thing:
Almost all the governmnets are formed in Nepal after getting the Indian approval.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 21-May-03 08:55 PM
To continue with the Clash of Civilizations debate:
Huntington did not forsee the formation of aliances in his book. The American dominance(hegemony) now faces a challenge from the Alliances and the alliances aren't necessary between the nations who share religious and Cultural similarities: Russia-China-Arab League alliance, Fraco-German-Alliance, Franco-German-Arab-European Alliance and so on are unofficially in the making. So, the fundametalist movements (except terrorism) which Huntington says could be very well replaced by the economic and military alliances among the nations with different ideologies and historical/cultural origins.
|
| mirador |
Posted
on 21-May-03 10:10 PM
Myth #1 : All alleged ISI activity in Nepal is Indian propaganda.
Methinks not. Even the incompetent Nepali police arrests few pak consulate workers on spying/money laudering (presumably to support ISI agents) etc.
>>To say that the hijacking of the Indian Airlines is mainly due to nepal's pro-Pakistani >>attitude is quite old now.
Nobody has said that. The hijacking was presented as an exaple of presence of terrorists.
>> China does not need Nepal to curb Free Tibet activities.
Not the whole truth. A pro Dalai Lama government in Nepal would encourage and make it easier for Tibetans to go into exile. China already has cowered Nepali government to hand over most of the Tibetans (those who get caught) trying to escape to Chinese authorites.Thereby, also encouraging Nepal to violate international laws on refugees. These unlucky souls, have been known to end of in concentration camps where they are 're-educated'.
If Nepal opened its gates to all the Tibetans wanting to flee Tibet, it would not only be a huge embarassment for China but the Tibet issue also start to resurface in international agenda. The republic has been known to intensely dislike foreign interest in its 'domestic' issues, which, of course, includes ad hoc justice comparable to those dispensed by the Maoists in Nepal.
I don't know how the CIA or the Pentagon thinks about Nepal turning into a hiding place for the islamic fundamentalists (read evil muslims) but they sure would hate to see Nepal turn into a communist state. Purely as a matter of principles, I am pretty sure most of America (the government even more so) believes that communists are evil. Anybody faintly acquainted with American history would acknowledge that.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 21-May-03 10:54 PM
Methinks not. Even the incompetent Nepali police arrests few pak consulate workers on spying/money laudering (presumably to support ISI agents) etc.
No, you are right. yes, the nepali police have arested a few Pakistani diplomats on various charges and the MoFA issued them persona non grata. However, no link has been established with the ISI and other acrtivities.
"Nobody has said that. The hijacking was presented as an exaple of presence of terrorists. "
It will be too immature to believe that the hijacking proved that nepal has international terrorist or other organizations operating on its soil. The hijacking was nothing new, come on.. even planes flying from the most secured airports get hijacked. If we had other evidence to prove that there are therrorists on the loose in Nepal, then we could say, eyah.. we have terrorists operating in/from Nepal. But, nothing has happened after that incident.
re: China
The Chinese governmnet always wants a stable nepal. Always easy tod eal with one person than 200 persons and China's policy towards Nepal has been just watch and if there's anything, ask whoever is in the govt. to stop those right away. The Free Tibet factor is not even in their agenda. With many nations of the world agreeing that Tibet is a part of China, China does not need to worry about Pr-Dalai Lamas creating havvoc in Tibet or in the Mainland.
There's been rumors of Nepali police handing over the illegal Chinese immigrants of Tibetan origin to the Chinese police and there's nothing wrong with it. Tibet isn't going throgh a war, nor tehre's an ethnic cleansing going on nor anything's happeninbg in Tibet that would force them to flee Tibet and enter Nepal.
"If Nepal opened its gates to all the Tibetans wanting to flee Tibet, it would not only be a huge embarassment for China but the Tibet issue also start to resurface in international agenda. The republic has been known to intensely dislike foreign interest in its 'domestic' issues, which, of course, includes ad hoc justice comparable to those dispensed by the Maoists in Nepal. "
Why would nepal invite unnecessary trouble? With the Bhutanese refugee crisis now coming to an end after 12 years, we don't need another influx of the Chinese with Tibetan origins.
The Chinese foreign policy is based on the principle of non-interferance (There are exceptions though:Korea and Vietnam) and they want the other nations to reciproacte. The Chnese FP is more concerned with protecting and Preserving its territorail integrity than to get into other countries' internal affairs. So, China wouldn't be interfering in Nepal, although they might raise certain objections regarding some policies.
The Tibet issue is almost dead now. If the Chinese economy and development start sliding downhill, then the Tibet issue might resurface, but the chances of ths happening is next to none. Furthermore, if nepal allowed the Tibetans or the Chinese people of Tibetan origins, it will hamper us, not the Chinese.
"I don't know how the CIA or the Pentagon thinks about Nepal turning into a hiding place for the islamic fundamentalists (read evil muslims) but they sure would hate to see Nepal turn into a communist state. Purely as a matter of principles, I am pretty sure most of America (the government even more so) believes that communists are evil. Anybody faintly acquainted with American history would acknowledge that"
Now you are talking about the Domino effect theory and that Communism is a monolith and has somewhat a multiplier effect. Yeah, this has been the main concern of the American FP from the beginning of the Cold War, and you are right in your assessment that the US will no-be-happy to see a maoist governmnet in Nepal. But the US knows this: there won't be any Maoist governmnet in Nepal and their helping out Nepal is more like a chori-pitera buhari tarshaune, which is using Nepal to demonstrate to the world that the American govt . is after all the terrorists no matter where. But in reality, the AMerican govt. isn't too worried about the Maoists. IF it was, then it wouldn't slash the defense aid which it promised last year. The US is more concerned about the organizations, terrorist or fundamentalist in countries like Indonesia and Pakistan because they (pajkistani, indonesian) terrorist networks are specifically targeting the Americans and the American isntitutions, the Maoists so far haven't. And the US knows it welkl that the maoists aren't capable to attack the US institutions in Nepal..
The strengthening of the Army by the US is apart from helping curb lileky clashes between teh governmnet and "future" rebels, nonetheless will help the Nepali army men elarn the latest techniques of the Guerilla warfare.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 21-May-03 10:58 PM
, the Maoists so far haven't. And the US knows it welkl that the maoists aren't capable to attack the US institutions in Nepal..
aren't capable of attacking the US institutions and Citizens in Nepal.
|
| mirador |
Posted
on 21-May-03 11:25 PM
>>There's been rumors of Nepali police handing over the illegal Chinese immigrants of >>Tibetan origin to the Chinese police and there's nothing wrong with it. Tibet isn't going >>throgh a war, nor tehre's an ethnic cleansing going on nor anything's happeninbg in >>Tibet that would force them to flee Tibet and enter Nepal.
Illigal Chinese immigrants of Tibetan Origin? You are confusing between people fleeing prosecution (and persecution) from those who migrate for economic reasons. It's hard for me to believe that the Tibetan refugees are economic migrants, especially given China's human rights record in Tibet.
Check china's record on Tibet. Here's passage from Amnesty International to make your life easier.
Go to Amnesty.org for more details. China is one of the worst human rights offender in the world.
UN Convention on refugess (which has been ratified by both China and Nepal) states that host countries are responsible for protecting the refugees. Nepal has, instead of offering protection, been handing over some of the refugees to the governmnet they are running from to avoid jail, torture and other nasty things you don't want to happen to human beings. You may not think there is anything wrong with that but international law says otherwise.
|
| mirador |
Posted
on 21-May-03 11:26 PM
I guess html tag made the paragraph disappear. Here it is.
Human rights violations against Tibetan Buddhists and nationalists continued in Tibet. Over 250 prisoners of conscience, many of them monks and nuns, were known to remain imprisoned. The ''patriotic education campaign'', launched by the Chinese authorities in 1996 to control monasteries and nunneries and undermine the influence of the exiled Dalai Lama, continued, as did restrictions on religious freedom which had been extended to the population at large in recent years. Some monasteries and nunneries were closed down by the authorities, and monks and nuns expelled. Reports continued of torture and ill-treatment of detainees and harsh prison conditions. Many Tibetan prisoners suffered health problems because of poor food and sanitation, harsh working conditions or beatings. Arbitrary arrests and unfair trials also continued.
http://web.amnesty.org/web/ar2002.nsf/asa/china!Open
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 22-May-03 12:09 AM
Illigal Chinese immigrants of Tibetan Origin? You are confusing between people fleeing prosecution (and persecution) from those who migrate for economic reasons. It's hard for me to believe that the Tibetan refugees are economic migrants, especially given China's human rights record in Tibet.
Yeah and here['s why:
1. Tibet is a part of China.
2. Tibetans are Chinese citizens because they have chinese citizenship.
3. There's no reason to flee Tibet these days, unless you haev committed crimes.
So, technically speaking, the Tibetans entering Nepal are Chinese citizens of Tibetan origin.
Furthermore, those entering Nepal from Tibet aren't REFUGEES. They are immigrants. So, Nepal does not need to abide by the International Law.
About the AI report, well many reports get published each year on Human Rights. Since, AI also relies on second hand information on Tibet, I would doubt the authenticty of that report.
Also, to say that the chinese govt. is cracking down on the monastaries and other religious isntitutions in Tibet is not true. The Chinese are actually starting a religion-revival campaign by encouraging its citizens to go to temples/monastaries and churches. The Chiense ghovt. spent money on building a pagoda in Lumbini.. now that tells a lot about the changing perception of the Chinese govt on religion.
|
| Jhilke Kyailan |
Posted
on 22-May-03 12:57 AM
IF jui, you clearly have some insight into what you talk about and your analysis is illuminating. However, I was only pointing out the fundamental point of the book, when you go past a lot of the (in my opinion) literal booby traps he elaborates on. What I got from the book was the following......
The greatest threat that the US faces is from the Chinese and militant Islam. Western (American) power is being diluted by the emergence of these two entities as political power houses and to counteract that America must form an alliance (as one of its many alliances) with India. However, he clearly does not declassify India, as well, as a potientially challenger civilisation. Thus we, Nepal are smacked-daap right in the middle between two of the Wests' (America's) rivals. How we can play that is up to us....Thus I believe that the importance of Nepal for Western Strategic interests has increased, no matter how much certain sources say other-wise.
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 22-May-03 01:07 AM
>So, Nepal does not need to abide by the International Law.
IFji, I know you wouldn't like me to jump the 'bandwagon'. But I would like to correct something for the sake of fairness and accuracy.
Nepal needs to abide by international law no matter what. There is no reason why international law on immigration should not be applicable to immigrants from Tibet.
>The Chinese are actually starting a religion-revival
>campaign by encouraging its citizens to go to
>temples/monastaries and churches.
I have a few first hand experiences that might be helpful to clarify this issue, because I assume both of you don't have a long first-hand experience of China. IF has been to China for a few months, I know, but whether he knows sufficiently about these issues is still unknown to me.
It was during 1995 summer when I was touring Lhasa. The authorities in Qinghai province were strict on issuing permit to visit Lhasa, because rumour was that they had just crushed an uprising in Shigatze(?, I know in Chinese it is ri-ka-zi, and is a resident city of Panchen Lama). We were however able to make our way to Lhasa anyway by invoking thousand-years-long Nepal China relationship, and our love to China in plain mandarin that the authorities there had no problem in understanding.
In Lhasa, I saw people 'freely',yes, that is what I saw, worshipping Buddha and even our own Bhrikuti. They would sleep in floor, and prostrated, something like our Dandawat Pranam, they would offer their pray. I was so young, and curious then, and It surprised me a lot.
We were accompanied by an official Tibetan guide. He then took us to Dalai Lama's summer palace. It was something like an old palace of the king of Kaski.At the end of our tour, I met a Lama, who told me he respects Nepal, he loves Nepal and that he feels repressed there. The guide told me when we were alone, in his broken English, that "we Tibetan people are waiting for Dalai Lama to come back."
In my way back to Nepal's border, almost every shop I went into on my way had a picture : that famous picture of Dalai Lama and Mao's meeting before 1959. Dalai Lama on the left, in his trade-mark yellow-red garb, and Mao in his trade mark blue Sun Yatsen Jacket and its accompanying pants.
The most poignant moment came in Shigatze, when we saw an old lady whose incisors were absent, and who was counting beads in a small religious garland. We were taking picture of the palace of Panchen Lama at the time, and she waited until we finished having pictures. Then she said "Nepal" and made some signals with her hands. A person who could speak some broken Chinese came to our rescue and translated the same old thing: that she loves Nepal, and that she has some relatives in Nepal who went there after the occupation of 1959.
Now, why would an old lady do that to some strangers from another country? Would my grandma in Pokhara do that kind of signals to a group of Indians from Ahamadabad? No. They must be feeling great pain. The lady had no financial gain to expect in the twilight of her years. I am sure she felt repressed there. Reports coming from Tibet say that the situation is improving , but not enough. It is like a glass half of water: we can say it is full, and we can say it is empty.
The tour changed my view of Tibet. I had always regarded Tibet as some kind of enemy country that we repeatedly defeated in the past, but who schemed against us by inviting the Chinese and is now paying price for that. The Tibet, it seemed to me, was not that simple.
As a leader, I will never let Nepal be a place of anti-Chinese activities. The Tibetans can't do anti-Chinese politics in the comfortable soil of Nepal, and more than anything else, we can't let anti Indian activities/antiChinese activities in our soil. But do I support the Tibetans morally? You bet. Tibetans are our natural friends, and we will remain so for probably infinitely long time to come.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 22-May-03 01:35 AM
Jhilke kaliyan,
WOW, this is what i call a real challenge. You have forced me to think, and I'll get back to you on this tonight.
Biswo,
Thanks for highlihting the statement. I wanted to say was that: nepal does not hae to follow the rules pertaining to refugees when dealing with the Chinese governmnets. nepal's own immigration laws are suffiient to deal with them.
Also, I amjored in the Chinese Studies:-),so I think I know what I am talking about for the most part. But any correction from you will be highly appreciated.
I will get back to you on the post hai.. its been a busy and quite a stressful afternoon here. But, i'll certainly get back to both JK and Bisow.
And ofg course, I don't mind you jumping the band wagon.
la vare bhetula hai
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 22-May-03 01:53 AM
Biswo,
Thanks for highlihting the statement. I wanted to say was that: nepal does not hae to follow the rules pertaining to refugees when dealing with the Chinese governmnets. nepal's own immigration laws are suffiient to deal with them.
Biswo,
hatar hatar ma dherai error bhayo..
so read tyhe above paragraph as
Thanks for highlighting the statement. I wanted to say was that Nepal does not have to follow the rulkes pertaining to refugees when dealing with the CHINESE IMMIGRANTS of TIBETAN ORIGIN. Nepal's own immigration laws are sufficient to deal with them.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 22-May-03 10:59 AM
OK, finally after running around all day, I am here ....
Jhilkey Kaliyan:
I got your point. And you are correct in your assessment that the West vs. Confusian and Islamic civilizations will result in a major clash and for that the US and the West have to rely on India's co-operation and an aliance thus will be formed between the Hindu India and the Christian West to contain the Confucian China and the Islamic Middle East.
But how likely it is for something like this to happen? Will the US and the West unite and will China and the Arab World unite to fight each other? I doubt this because the direction we are heading today is not that of establishing military domiunance but that of establishing economic dominance. Huntington point is based on the fact that China will be supplying arms to teh Middle East, thus there's a chance of China getting into the US's way if it decides to invade the Middle East.
I don't think it will ever happen. Because, the US and the West cannot simoltenously wage a full-fledged war with China and the Middle East . Also, the Chinese non-involvement in the Iraqi War and the Arab nations silence on the Taiwan issue (in Which the China and the US were close to fighting a war not long ago), tells us that all civilizations consider the US as a power house that shouldn't be messed with, unless you are fully prepared. The full preparation is a daunting task. The US won't let others prepare themselves for a war with the US throgh trade sanctions. So, I personally don't think that China + Arab world will be willing to get themselves involved with the US+West. Also, the trade issues: Will China and the middle east and the US and the West be able to survive without each othet? Any alteration in the equation will have a devastating effect on the world economy, including that of the Great Powers.
And Will India be ready to forge an alliance with the US? I don't know much, but as far as my little thinking goes, India has an independent foreign policy stand just like that of the DeGaulle's France. And just as DeGaulle didn't wnat to do anyting military with the US which resulted in the breaking of the Atlantic Alliance, India too wouldn't want to do anything with the US given their independent FP stand and their past affiliation with the USSR.
I remember reading this in Meisner book:
When asked why the Asian countries are supportive of China, one Thai PM replied: China has been here for the last 3000 years and will be here for another 3000 years, where as the American involvement in Asia has not even raeched 300 years. So, its better to support China than to allign with the US against China.
(Maurice Meisner, Mao's China and After).
So, don't you think, India will say the same thing? I am seeing something different here: instead of an Indo-US alliance, the chances of Sino-Indian aliance in the making. And there's no strategic importance in the new world order and the post-Iraq war world order.
Just my views.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 22-May-03 11:01 AM
of the Atlantic Alliance, India too wouldn't want to do anything with the US given their independent FP stand and their past affiliation with the USSR. = gioven its independent FP stand and its past affiliation with the usSR.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 22-May-03 11:04 AM
And there's no strategic importance in the new world order and the post-Iraq war world order.
= And there's no strategiuc imnportance of Nepal in the new Post Iraq-War world order.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 22-May-03 11:24 AM
Now, getting back to Biswo:
"In Lhasa, I saw people 'freely',yes, that is what I saw, worshipping Buddha and even our own Bhrikuti. They would sleep in floor, and prostrated, something like our Dandawat Pranam, they would offer their pray. I was so young, and curious then, and It surprised me a lot. "
I saw people praying/worshipping Budhha, Christ, Mohammad, Lao Tzu and the Eight Immortals and Confucious everywhere in China. I was fortunate enough to get to travel a lot and from SHanghai to Xian to Huangzhou to Putuo Shan to Suzhou to Beijing, in all the temples, mosques, monastaries and churches taht I went to have worshippers who were worshpping FREELY. In the monastraies of huangzhou and Puto Shan monks and others are seen prostrating and offering batti and dhoop.
Also, when I met some monks in Beijing and Putuo Shan, after learning that I was from Nepal they would say about Buddha, Guru Rimpoche and some would even ask me about Pragyan Paramita, a buddhist scripture written in Nepal and which made its way to China.
Also, the Buddhist monks in China chant "namo amitabha" and in a monastery in Puto Shan I saw a big prayer wheel with Sanskrit and Tibetan engravings of "om mani padne hum".
"The guide told me when we were alone, in his broken English, that "we Tibetan people are waiting for Dalai Lama to come back."
Well, depends on the people you met. Not long ago, Yubaraj Ghimire was in Tibet and he wrote some good artciles for the Post and Kantipur, inw hich he wrote that the Tibetans are happy with what's happening in Tibet right now.
I don't disagree that a segmnet of the Tibetan population wnats the Dalai Lama to come back to Tibet but the majority does not wnat this. China's full control of Tibet has given rise to immense economic oppurtunities and of course has liberated them from the slavery and anicent lifeways. Read Henerich Harrer's Seven years in Tibet and learn the conditions of Tibet before the Chinese control, and compare the description of harrer's book to the Tibet you saw.
". Tibetans are our natural friends, and we will remain so for probably infinitely long time to come. "
Well, all the Chinese (Han and ethnic minorities such as ya, Bao, Naxi, Mongols, Tibetans etc) are our natural friends.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 22-May-03 11:26 AM
Well, all the Chinese (Han and ethnic minorities such as ya, Bao, Naxi, Mongols, Tibetans etc) are our natural friends. = all the chinese peopel ....
|
| mirador |
Posted
on 22-May-03 12:34 PM
Why would someone refuse to accept that Human rights Abuses go on in Tibet and the Mainland China inspite of plety of evidence?
It is one thing to acknoledge China's importance to Nepal (trade, trourism etc.) , it is quite another to claim that it commits no crime against its people and the Tibetans. The former shows shows common sense, the latter a comlete lack of touch with reality, i.e. if the claim is honest.
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 22-May-03 12:57 PM
IFji,
You overawe me with seven-eight postings in one reply, it is like preparing for .303 rifle shots, and get hit by machine guns. Well, kunda kunda paani.. :-)
Like Mirador says, why should we refuse to accept human right abuses in Tibet? We can serve Nepal's political interest , and still be brutally honest about our experience. Now here is one more portion I just remembered.
--
In the third week of August 1995, I was going from Lhasa to Golmud, a city more than a thousand miles northeast from Lhasa, on my way to Shanghai. The land I was passing was a huge, big barren land, intermittently interloped by green pastures where I could see beautiful landscapes, and shepherds grazing their sheeps/goats.Geologists call the land ,with affinity and precision, the roof of the world, and that was it, a flat land in so high an altitude that a lot of times we could rarely breathe easily.
Then the driver abruptly stopped the bus, as he saw Hell's Angel-like motorbike riders coming towards him from the opposite direction. They were the participants of annual Beijing-Lhasa motorbike race. Then a police officer, with a gun which was so big that I thought it was a machine gun, came to our bus, pulled the driver from his seat, pointed the gun at him, and kicked him several times, while appalled passengers like me watched that manhandling fearfully. Later, they left the bruised driver, and confiscated his license.
Later I asked the driver why was he beaten so badly. He said because he didn't know that he was supposed to stop the vehicle minutes before, not after seeing them. Probably the police had told everybody, but him, driving towards that direction.
Now, even if the driver were wrong, was the police officer justified in his brutish treatment of that driver? They told me such harsh treatment by police is routine in that part of the world.
[For the sake of fairness, the counsel of Nepal to Lhasa told me his experience in my Lhasa tour. He said that whenever people of Han origin and Tibetan origin fight in Lhasa, even if Tibetans are wrong, the police punishes Hans, and encourages them not to pick up a fight with the natives. In my stay in Lhasa, I found no reason to cast doubt on that claim.]
Now, what Yuva Raj ji saw in his Lhasa tour is his business. Of course Tibetans are better now than ever before, no one deny that. May be he was also completely right in describing what he saw because it is not unusual for a person to see what his generous hosts want to see. But when I was in Nepal, in the early nineties, a group of parliamentarians, including NC and RPP guys, went to Pyongyang, North Korea. When they came back, they rhapsodized about their tour, they told the journalists how developed and prosperous North Korea was, and how much they were impressed. The rest, as they say, is a history.
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 22-May-03 03:50 PM
>ya, Bao, Naxi, Mongols
If I know correctly, the minorities living in Yunnan, where I assume you went after finishing study in USA, are called Va, not ya [Are there ya nationality people in China?, I believe not.] I also apologize for my ignorance if I am proven wrong, but Bao's are not minority, but Bao'an are. Bao is sirname for Han community.
Again, I am open to counterproof. I just want you to be factual.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 22-May-03 06:40 PM
biswo,
its Ya, Dai, Bao, Naxi etc. etc. etc. mostly concentrated in Lizhang area.. and Yunan.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 22-May-03 06:57 PM
Biswo,
I don't doubt what you saw. I was in CHina in 1998, and I didn't find China to be different than any other place in the wolrd.
Also, if you talk baout the HR abuses, I just remembered something: Go or write to the Chinese Embassy in DC or their consulates in any of the US city, and ask them to proviode you with copies of US HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH. I know the Chinese govt. ha spublished one upto 1999, that highlights the oHR abuses in the US, by the US.
Getting back to TIbet: What human rights have been violated in Tibet?
We hear torture stories, but everything coming out of Tibet is second-hand information. Stories get fabricated and falsified and twisted here, added there and subtrated in the middle (THE CRIME) by the time it reaches ours. So, i wouldn't be too quick to believe in the stories. The situation is much better now than in 1995 or 1998.
when Deng came to power in 1976, one of hius major agendas besides the reforms were to start a dialogue with Tibetan leaders. The Tibetans themselves ran away fom teh talk and later in the 90s demanded that the future talks be held in Geneva.
anwyays, if you believe in AI's report, you are free to. AI report is very partial and you know, only 141 countries let AI operate in their territory.Demonization of China is a tool for some people/organizations to achieve their own goals.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 22-May-03 08:15 PM
reaches ours= rechers our ears
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 22-May-03 08:45 PM
its yao , not ya.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 22-May-03 08:48 PM
aND thanks for teh correction Biswo, you are right; Its yao (i forgot the o) and Va in yunnan.
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 23-May-03 10:53 AM
>Its yao (i forgot the o) and Va in yunnan.
IF, I think you again got me confused, and probably you are again not correct.
It should be 'wa' in Chinese, zhenwa de wa [brick ko wa]. I remember reading about them during that famous multibillion-dollar Kunming flower festival.
|
| jira |
Posted
on 23-May-03 11:26 AM
ma ni aja pooltice garney
ho ho dinu parcha danadun
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 23-May-03 12:11 PM
IFji,
Please note that I didn't quote second hand sources, or experiences of others. It was my own experience. I am fully aware that you don't rely on books, Amnesty International Reports, or Babu Ram Acharya's research conclusions:-)
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 02-Jun-03 11:43 PM
Biswo,
IF, I think you again got me confused, and probably you are again not correct
Biswo,
Sorry to say dude, you are not correct here this time. Its Va with atotal population of 352,000 in Yunnan. Maybe, you read it wrong in the Kunming Flower Festival.
Other minorities of the region include: Zang (Tibetan), Miao, Yi, Zhuang, Yao, Bai, Hani, Dai, Lisu, Lahu, Jingpo, Blang, Achang, Pumi, Nu etc. all concentrated in Yunnan and surrounding areas.
I can clearly udnerstand your confusion. Probably you read the WB romanization, which is different than the pinyin.
|
