An AP story on the Maoist insurgency in Nepal from Yahoo: Well, as an American who abhors warfare in the first place, as long as we're out kicking the crap out of people, why not lend a hand to Nepal, "which is ruled by an elected government under a constitutional monarch"? In other topics I have asserted that the American cause seeks economic or dominion opportunity when it sends its soldiers abroad. What does Nepal have that we want? Well, cheap labor for Eddie Bauer® (I cannot say for sure that's still true), but why not send our troops to assist in the fight against Communism? (And no, as a communitarian and a Marxist sympathizer, you will not hear me supporting this form of insurgency.) Given the American revulsion of Communism, do events in Nepal fall outside our current mission unto the world? A Socialist article for counterpoint perspective can be found here. It is worth noting that Secretary of State Powell's visit to Nepal is, indeed, unusual. Anyone? Anyone? What's the probability of direct US involvement in Nepal? Why? But as long as we're out knocking around the bad guys, why not get a couple of shots in at the Reds? I necessarily oppose all armed conflict, but that isn't going to change the course of future history much. Maybe someday when I'm rich & famous ... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! But ... what's Nepal worth? Why, so long as we're on a mission against evil, not Nepal? thanx much, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
The USA has been following a policy for decades which involves holding forward positions near any possible threats. For example the Alaskan coast, Japan, various places around the Middle East, Panama, et cetera. This is why Nepal is important to the USA. Same reason they give a damn about Taiwan. They sit right next door to China. Having seen how the USA dealt with Russia and the Middle East, I doubt China would sit back and let the USA build air strips right on their doorstep like that. FUll military involvement in Nepal would, I think, cause an invasion by China. China has ALL the power there. Far more power than the USA can muster at that position. And I can understand the Chinese wantin got maintain their integrity that way; I would too if I was them.
In a few years China is going to annex Nepal like they did with Tibet. India does not have the money or political will to help Nepal. At the same time Nepalese are too stupid to get closer to India. I was involved (at the highest govt level) in a project to generate 2400 MW of environmentally friendly hydro power to sell it to India so that there will be a reason to protect them - and improve their economic condition. But the Nepalese bungled that up with internal greed, corruption, and we-know-it-all stupidity. Survival of the fittest...it is a goner... BTW, my projects would have injected about an extra $10 Billion to GDP with 7% growth which is now at $34 Billion (CIA factbook) on a 3% growth rate.
I think in this one, if the United States cannot fix it diplomatically, it’ll stay broken. After the assassination of almost the entire royal family in June 2001, the government declared a cease-fire during which the Maoist CPN (Communist Party of Nepal) presented an agenda that included the abrogation of the 1990 Constitution, the formation of an interim government and the election of a Constituent Assembly that would draft a new Constitution that would bring about the end of the country’s constitutional monarchy and create a republic. This break in the violence and use of dialogue to resolve the country’s civil war was short-lived, and after only three rounds of talks over a four-month period, the country once again fell into armed conflict. Predictably, surrounded by the new global environment of fighting terrorism, the government also declared the CPN (Maoist), its sister organizations and any groups and individuals that support the party as “terrorists.” Nepal, like many countries in Asia, has only established a pseudo-democracy in which elections are held but the outcome is determined by intimidation and bribery with the goal of politicians being to serve their own interests once they are elected rather than those of the people. Corruption has become a part of the social fabric of Nepal, and the country’s poverty, unemployment, ethnic and caste discrimination and regional economic imbalances, have been neglected. Because of this, Maoists have found fertile ground for their struggle. The U.S. should step diplomatic efforts to assist in the resolution of this conflict. They need to convince the both parties that winning the "war" will probably not win the people’s hearts. It is not the form of government that is at stake but whether the government, in whatever structure it adopts, has the will to meet the genuine needs of the people. Peace.
USA does - atleast I know from the past ambassodor Julia Chang to the present one Ambassador Michael E. MALINOWSKI. Even the Indians are willing to help and a small but educated communities of Nepalis in USA are willing to help too. I also have known the oppostion groups too. Unfortunately, there is no real leadership that understands todays geo-political and geo-ecinomics - believe me, I tried , with one Nepali guy with the right connections, which I thought could have been a leader to pull together the mission - ran off with a blonde. Unless US assigns a person to pull together all these little scenarios and direct the events - it is going no where - except to the belly of the dragon. BTW: with my experience in the Nepalese economic development, I could right a nice book called "How poor countries stay poor and other stories" - by KMGuru OR "How the dragon eats the small fries"....
NEWS India to support Nepal telecom services Reuters Friday, April 12, 2002 KATHMANDU: India will give a Rs 1.34 billion (Nepali) grant to Nepal to help improve telecommunication facilities in the landlocked Himalayan kingdom, the Indian embassy said on Friday. The money will be used to set up an information super highway based on optical fibre cable (OFC) along Nepal's southern plains over the next two years, an embassy statement said. "The project will greatly strengthen the capabilities of Nepal Telecom Corporation as well as private cellular, basic and value added service provides for expanding their networks," the statement said. It will help provide cheaper and reliable telecom services to customers. State-owned Nepal Telecom Corporation enjoyed a monopoly over all telecommunication services in the mountainous kingdom until it opened selected services to the private sector as part of a liberalisation drive that was stepped up in 1992. The 1,000-km facility to be developed by India will pass through 81 cities and towns covering the hub of Nepal's industrial and agricultural centres along the southern plains bordering India. State-owned Telecommunications Consultants India Limited (TCIL) will implement the Nepal project, the latest Indian support for Nepal's telecom sector which started with the establishment of a radio telephone link between Kathmandu and New Delhi in 1950. Kathmandu says it wants to encourage private investment to develop its telecom sector, which has reached only one percent of its 23 million people. Nepal is one of the world's 10 poorest countries and gets more than 60 percent cost of its economic development projects in international aid. New Delhi is among the top aid givers.
Nepal Update Commentary: Is it that this is taking place in Nepal that makes it not as important to the US? After all, it's a traditional enemy (communism) and a constitutional, parliamentary monarchy at stake. But we in the US get queasy at any death tolls these days, unless we're the ones inflicting it on others. Heck, in the wake of American jets killing Canadian troops in a friendly-fire accident, Americans still saw fit to jeer Canadians over the incident. But 3,000 deaths in six years--it took 20+ years for the modern Irish troubles to reach that mark. It's just this ugly rhetorical spot Bush has put us in. What about the Nepalese situation doesn't call for American intervention? I suggest the answer is twofold: it's not profitable enough to rescue the elected parliament of Nepal, and neither side has hit Americans yet. Of course, when someone does, it will be the "world's fight", won't it? Besides, Maoists are godless, so maybe Bush would be better off to set his human rights example on Commies, so people won't have so much sympathy for the devil, so to speak. Nepal Troops Kill 90 Maoist Rebels: thanx, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
It is on planet earth for you Martians... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Masses greet Nepalese Maoists Lots has happened since this topic last saw the light of day, but interesting things are afoot: Thousands greet Nepal's Maoists (BBC) I've not been very good about keeping this topic up to date, but the article page has several links regarding recent developments in the situation. I wonder if the world would accept a communist republic ...? That might be a bit embarrassing for some people who considered Communism dead. Nonetheless, despite certain Marxist tendencies, I'm not particularly enthusiastic about the prospect of a Maoist republic. :m:, Tiassa Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
No, usa do not need to get involved there... Our ally in the war against terror: China is already houseclearing these buddhist fanatics
No No, it's the otherway around....China is the real enemy. There is no buddhist fanatics in Nepal, they're as peacefull as a rose....That's why they face extinction.
