THE OLD SETTLERS OF SIKKIM

Bhandari's frankness

by DR RAMESH KHATRY

Dashain swallowed the rage over Defence Minister Sarat Singh Bhandari’s statement on September 26—no law could stop 22 Tarai districts from seceding if they didn’t get their due. The Baidya faction of UCPN (Maoist) held torch rallies and effigy-burning functions to demand Bhandari’s resignation. Mohan Baidya complained that Bhandari’s outburst could lead to “sikkimization” of the Tarai. In other words, India can annex these 22 Tarai districts as it did Sikkim, making the former kingdom its 22nd state in 1975. Upendra Yadav, who can never explain the logic behind his Mechi to Mahakali “One Madesh, One Pradesh” slogan hypocritically joined in the condemnation.

CLOSE CALLS TOWARD ANNEXATION WITH INDIA

Nepal almost became part of India at least four times. In 1801, the mad king Rana Bahadur Shah went on pilgrimage to Benares. Historian Stiller (The Rise of the House of Gorkha, pp 260-1) tells us that Rana Bahadur could’ve sold our country to the British East India Company had he received a monthly salary of Rs 30,000. In 1951, King Tribhuvan asked Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru three times to annex Nepal (Sanu Bhai Dangol, The Palace in Nepalese Politics, pp 66-7). Quoting the late Nepali Congress leader Bal Bahadur Rai, Author Surya Bahadur Sen wrote in his Nepali publication (Brain Bomb, pp 126, 218) that Tribhuvan offered our country to Nehru for Rs 30,000,000. During Panchayat years, we grew up guessing which country would ultimately annex Nepal, the mama (maternal-uncle China) or the kaka (uncle India). Sarat Singh Bhandari merely articulated openly what others whisper.

NEPAL’S “SIKKIM” BACKGROUND

When India gained independence from Britain in 1947, political parties began their activities in the kingdom of Sikkim. They wanted the abolition of feudalism and a popularly elected government. Chogyal (god-king) Palden Thondup Namgyal with his American wife resisted such liberalities. In 1950, Sikkim and India signed a treaty that made the former an Indian protectorate. India handled Sikkim’s external relations, defence, and strategic communications.

History after the removal of the Rana yoke in 1951 tells us that India wanted to maintain a similar relationship with Nepal. King Tribhuvan, grateful to Jawaharlal Nehru for his throne, and PM Matrika Prasad Koirala, whom Nehru favored over the brash B P Koirala, mostly danced to Indian tunes. On January 31, 1952, Matrika sent a letter to Nehru, and asked for an Indian military mission to help Nepal streamline its own army (A Role in Revolution, pp 205-6). India wanted to handle Nepal’s foreign relations as well. On April 25 of the same year, Nehru wrote to Tribhuvan to suggest that Nepal should coordinate its foreign policy in consultation with India and also seek her advice before hiring foreign personnel.

His letter to Matrika on that very date suggests that direct link with the US can cause confusion! On June 21, Nehru complains to Matrika that foreigners have poured into Nepal without India’s knowledge. After discussions between foreign ministers of both countries on May 8, 1954, India says that its missions overseas can represent Nepal if the latter so desires. That very year, Nehru declared, “What Tibet is to China, Nepal is to India.” India almost managed to make Nepal another protectorate like Sikkim. Nepali prime ministers and kings, mainly Mahendra, very carefully maintained our country’s independence.
What shall we do with our Defence Minister Sarat Singh Bhandari? Ask him to resign? Burn more of his effigies? No, rather felicitate him for his frankness.
Sikkim didn’t show such resistance. Kaji Lendup Dorji, the chief minister, led the 1973 anti-Chogyal demonstrations. In the April 1974 elections, Dorji’s Sikkim Congress Party won 31 out of 32 assembly seats; and engineered the 1975 referendum’s 97 percent vote to accede to India. Perhaps, Sikkim would’ve remained an independent state had the Chogyal been more democratic.

WARNING TO UCPN (MAOIST)

Sarat Singh Bhandari’s frank confession should serve as a warning to the biggest party in our country. If the UCPN (Maoist) doesn’t deliver soon enough, it may find that all 75 districts of Nepal want to become India’s latest state rather than remain under the proposed autocratic, dictatorial Maoist rule. No other than Mohan Baidya Kiran should take this caution very seriously.

So far, Baidya has resisted whatever “democratic” moves PM Bhattarai has made. (Bhattarai still appears a wolf in sheep’s clothing, but let’s give him the benefit of doubt.) Baidya doesn’t want to return Maoist-looted properties. He resents handing over the key of the Maoist armaments to the government. Critics say that this symbolic action has no meaning because the Maoist army still remains under the former rebels’ control. Baidya’s crony C P Gajurel asks for a “third people’s revolt”, as if the impoverished Nepali population has nothing better to do. In 2008, Baidya opined that our country had too much press freedom; and his party would act to curtail it. It did try in vain that very year.

We needn’t even consider Pushpa Kamal Dahal who bungled his nine month rule so badly that he remains forever licking his wounds. In that vein, we can take his latest remark that he had to make Baburam Bhattarai the PM. However, Nepal’s first PhD PM Baburam Bhattarai seems no different than other Maoist leaders. His recent US visit inspired him to lie on his return that he hadn’t promised to conclude the peace process in 45 days. On September 2, he pledged to end impunity. Instead, his latest action seems to award Maoist crimes immunity. Just before Dashain, his cabinet almost requested the president to pardon Maoist murderer-”lawmaker” Balkrishna Dhungel.

Frankly speaking, the average Nepali doesn’t care who rules over the country provided the government grants the basic needs and fundamental rights. On that regard, one prefers Sikkim to Tibet. Writers and artists languish in Chinese prisons merely for expressing themselves. Modelling itself on Mao’s China, the UCPN (Maoist) has shared long enough rosy dreams—making Nepal into Switzerland within 10 years, performing miracles, and delivering leap-frogging economic growth.

Now face the hard reality—after three years we don’t even have a democratic constitution because at heart the UCPN (Maoist) wants a North Korean model, the peace process hasn’t concluded because the Maoists still dream of “capturing the state”, and our economy limps below 3 percent mainly because of Maoist trade unionism. Being the largest party, the UCPN (Maoist) didn’t allow a Nepali Congress- or a UML-led government to succeed because it wanted all the credit. Now, you’re leading the government; walk the talk.

If the UCPN (Maoist) dilly-dallies, November 30, the last legal deadline for a draft constitution, may blankly stare at the nation as it did on August 31. In the inevitable confusion, many Kaji Lendup Dorjis may arise. Meanwhile, what shall we do with our Defence Minister Sarat Singh Bhandari? Ask him to resign? Burn more of his effigies? No, rather felicitate him for his frankness.
source:myrepublica.com