Response on former King Gyanendra's New Year message
The former Nepal King Gyanendra wan ts 11 years' account from Republican System. First of all he must give Monarchy's account since Dec.1960.
Deepak Gyawali’s reply to Muni Dear Muni
It has been quite a while since we “discoursed” (but I still have fond memories of our doing so at Queen Elizabeth House in Oxford in the Spring of 1993). Since I have stayed away from the twitter-o-sphere due to its intrinsic shallow nature and illconsidered instantaneousness, I guess there was really no proper platform where we could do so. A tweet of yours, however, found its way into my email inbox through mutual friends with the request to respond and hence I am doing so: You know I am an un-reconstituted monarchist who has good reasons to hold – with a growing number of Nepalis from across the political spectrum – that the Nepali monarchy was side-lined not by the Nepali people but by the erstwhile Mughlani rulers of Delhi violating due process, ignoring the Nepali voters and in the process giving more than a heavy a tinge of illegitimacy to Mughlani diplomacy that haunts it more and more as the years go by and ‘anti-Indianism' grows in epidemic proportions across these lands as it never happened under the monarchy (and by corollary, fondness for things ‘up North' grows as fast). You very much say practically the same thing in your celebrated chapter in David Malone et al's infamous Nepal in Transition between pages 317 and 329 (and which I reviewed in Delhi's book review magazine Biblio, as you are well aware). Our current pack of political jokers, the Cash Maoists and the Seven Dwarfs (CM+SD, in short and no pun intended in that part of it resembles your initials) that were given the imperial ukase by the Sonia/Manmohan combo together with the Mughlani ‘Deep State' of Raisina Hill to load themselves onto the 12Point Delhi Deal bandwagon in November 2005, were but mere third rate pawns in the game. I don't think you have been to Nepal recently, or perhaps have not ‘discoursed' with normal Nepalis other than your students and acolytes not exactly bold enough to contradict you, as you do not seem to be aware of the way the winds are blowing: as King Gyanendra's new year message which you are referring to in your tweet clearly indicates, there has been a crass “bishwas-ghaat” not only by the CM+SD of the agreements and understanding reached in April/May 2006 but also by the Mughlani ‘Deep State' against its own envoy, the urbane Dr Karan Singh, a realization that is dawning on many new Indian commentators now who are not in thrall over the Macaulayite, Nehruvian political ethos of yore. This recent article in The Pioneer is one indicator of it: http://www.dailypioneer.com/ columnists/ guest- column/ nostalgia- f or- monarchy- i nnepals-turbulent- times. html. Another is the Facebook wall of probably the more intelligent and politico/culturally sensitive of Madhesi leaders, SaritaGiri, arguing for Madhesh to stand for constitutional monarchy:
Sarita Giri April 9 at 11:27 pm
To directly answer to your tweet, King Gyanendra has long ago, more specifically in the speech at the November 2005 SAARC summit in Dhaka as well as when he left the Royal Palace in 2008, already given a convincing account not just of his time on the throne, not just since 1960 but also for all the 240 years of Shah Dynasty rule. Today, after eleven years of him and the Nepal Army being the only institutions that honoured the “peace compromise” of 2006, a growing number of Nepali people are saluting him and the Nepal Army for their graceful and peaceful submission to the then “popular will”, and an even greater number are now realizing that King Gyanendra was right then, and are demanding that those who murdered 17000 Nepalis during the ten-year Mughlani proxy war as well as an incredibly large number since the start of the “peace compromise” with the 12point Delhi Deal (to say nothing of the neo-feudal nepotism and massive loot of the country over these last eleven years along the ‘Mukti Tower' ethos by CM+SD), be brought to justice and damn the Delhi Deal!! This group also includes your new, dynamic and “non-crook” Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, whose views on what the Mughlani ‘Deep State' did to Nepal as well as Nepal-India age-old relations can be read in pages 112-116 in PrashantaJha's well-known book. ChhoteyMiyan imitating the Bade Miyan (a la Iraq, Libya etc) and trying “regime change” in the neighbourhood has been a disaster obviously for the Nepali people but also for both the Chhotey and Bade Miyans (the EuroAmericans, except the Japanese who have distanced themselves from it), and has benefited no one other than the very long-term thinking mandarins to the North. Time has come for the new rulers of Mughlan to jettison that bit of infantile adventurism, grow out of its security paranoia, and embrace stability and development. I am sure we will continue to disagree on many things political and I would be delighted to debate these issues with you in any public forum, here in Kathmandu or in Mughlan, (except in the twitter-o-sphere which I have stayed away from, and which I guess I will leave in Donald Trump's safe, small hands!). Warm regards and Jai Hos! Deepak Gyawali
Do you have to be an American citizen to discuss President Trump's accountability or a Russian to ask for Putin's accountability? Nepali journalists/press do discuss India and Indian leader's policies and that's very good too. Akhilesh
Ratna Sansar’s remarks: Dear Akhiles jee,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. Definitely everybody has the right to discuss the accountability of any leader. But equally important thing is that on what issue who can discuss about the behavior of a leader. With regard to Nepal, almost every Nepali except a few who have been running the country like their fiefdom since 2063 BS has been raising the question on growing serious governance problem - our beloved is facing now. As a citizen of the country former King Gynendra has the right to raise the questions to the present situation of the country. And those Nepalese who are not satisfied with his questioning can chalkange him. But how can we agree to Prof. Muni raising the question to King Gynendra, since he is a person known for his baisness against certain sections in Nepal and her effort to assert its sovereignty. Furthermore he always considers Nepal as a protectorate of India. In this context I think how can Prof Muni ask question to former King Gynendra to give Monarchy's account since 1960? Rather we Nepalese should ask him - why India played double game during the Maoist insurgency that has caused so much misery to our beloved country - Nepal. Warm regards.