Despite few errors it is an interesting read.. - http://www.bangladesh-web.com/view.php?hidType=OPT&hidRecord=0000000000000000060866 Nepal and Bangaladesh do not need your advice Friday September 16 2005 19:37:28 PM BDT Ms. Jyoti Shrestha , Nepal 1.India gained Hydarabad, Junagad, Mandivar, etc via force of arms and Sikkim through quislings ( Lhendup Dories).See, books like Inside RAW, Smash and Grab, Sikkim Saga etc. Given such precedents what grounds is their for its neighbours to be complacent? As they say, a tiger that devours one cow will devour another once it becomes hungry again. 2.See opinions like those of S D Muni, on India?s role in Nepal. And most recently of Karat (CPI-M) and Shyam Sharan. 3.Nepali Maoists Declared as Terrorists by India even before Nepal did, have had meetings with Nepali over-ground communists in Siliguddi, Lucknow, and also with other political parties, most recently in Delhi. So India does give shelter to Terrorists. Wonder why.If the venue of meetings is known to Nepali political parties, and in the case of UML meeting in Lucknow, even by Nepali press before it happened....it would be naive to believe that Indian intelligence agencies to be so incompetent not to know about it. 5.The call of republican Nepal after Delhi pilgrimage by Nepali Indo-dependent political parties does have parallel with events of Sikkim in early 1970?s. One speech made by the wife of Lhendup Degris, was explicit in that she was sure that her husband would be the first president of the Republic of Sikkim. ( See Indian papers covering the events just before its annexation.) But the? protector? reneged on its duty to protect. Instead it swallowed Sikkim via quislings like Lhendup Dorgis. Sikkim was much much smaller than Nepal, and with much less resources than Nepal. If India had coveted and swallows a tiny kingdom, would not her greed extend to larger Hindu Kingdom with much more resources? How many in Nepal, may be receiving ?blood money? like the Lhendup Dorgis and his supporters projecting themselves as ?lovers of democracy? had in Sikkim from RAW in the early seventies? 4.The news that came from the Indian Ambassador?s dinner party, (where Surya B. Thapa had fainted), was explicit in that financing and instigation for 7 party agitation has its source in India. Recent event analysis show the attempt by the 7 agitating parties to work with the Maoists against the only Hindu King came only after 10 years and only after their meeting with the Brown Sahibs in Delhi. Why did the Inod-dependent political parties got such a inspiration only after the Delhi pilgrimage and not before? 5.In 1990, when the economic blockade failed to make Nepal compliant , arrival of Chandra Sheker, et al to openly instigating regime change did not emanate from ?love of democracy? as such ?Love? was deprived for Bhutan or Maldives, and even for Nepal 30 years prior to 1990. What was the geopolitical gain made for such delivery of democracy by India. Would not the Memorandum of Understanding of 10 June 1990, and printed in The Times of India, and in the Rising Nepal 4 days later, reveal the ?pound of flesh? extracted, by of course ?a most friendly country?. 6.Compare the Map of Nepal prior to birth of India (1947),That is, those during the British Raj and subsequent Maps after the establishment of the republic of India.. The shrinkage of the Nepali territory gives a picture as to the role of India in Nepal. 7.Ask why the border of Nepal and India is not finalised even after more than half a century, while those with modern China has been amicably settled and very quickly. What nefarious intent is behind such a delay,,, does not the comparative analysis of the maps of Nepal made by the British Raj with those of the Maps of Nepal made by India be indicative? 8.Ask why bilateral issues that did not exist for some 100 years with the British Raj, has come to exist after the birth of India. And why have the practice of honouring ?Gentleman?s agreements? by the White Sahibs been replaced by a frequent reinterpretations and pettyness of technicalities on prior agreements by the Brown Sahibs? 9.Ask why the Nepali political parties, especially established in India, need to go and ask for ?democracy? in Delhi instead of going to the people of Nepal. 10.Why do Indians and their Lhendup Dorjis in Nepal try to label Nepali nationalist as Anti-Indian. To seek and protect one?s home is not to be against one?s neighbour. But to the extent the other neighbour seeks to vilify such attempts, does indicate nefarious designs of that particular neighbour. Anti-Indians are those who seek to covet resources of India. Those who seek to dismember India, those who seek to harm India, Those who seek to establish their hegemony over India,.Those who seeks to encroach the territories of India and those who seek to annex India. And NOT those who want to protect Nepal?s interests. To the extent Indias think such attempts and actions to protect the well-being on Nepal is Anti-Indian, then what is the intent of India, if not nefarious ? 11.If one neighbour has problems with all other neighbours, while the other neighbours do not have such problems with each other, who do you think is the real problem in the region? And what may be the real intent of such a neighbour, especially when it is big and powerful? Why had Ahaub Khan said that ?India is a big country with a small heart?? And what does this concept of Akanda Bharat entail ? ************************************ Ms. Jyoti is an Anti Raw Student. *************************************