Thursday, April 27, 2006

Nepal On The Mend?

Via Stratfor:

What India will likely do is employ a two-pronged approach in dealing with the Maoists. Existing fissures among the Maoist cadres over the future of the movement are waiting to be exploited by New Delhi and Kathmandu. The personal hatred between Prachanda and Baburam Bhattarai, another leading figure in the party, is widely known, and their differences will only deepen once the group faces the critical issue of disarming and merging with the Nepalese army in exchange for political representation. By reopening these fissures, India can work with the Nepalese government to divide the Maoist movement and undercut its ability to deadlock the entire country through blockades and attacks.

And the Maoists may not be the only ones suffering from internal divisions. It is questionable whether the unprecedented unity of Nepal's political parties will succeed in holding out for much longer without the king as a common enemy. Moreover, the political parties want guarantees from India that they will not come under attack from the Maoists down the road. As the parties proceed with their own political agenda, their alliance with the Maoists is likely to come under serious duress when the Maoists begin to feel like they are being sidelined out of the political process. With King Gyanendra slowly retreating into the background, the difficulties in maintaining the alliance among the seven parties and weakening the Maoist movement will only add to New Delhi's task list for maintaining order in its own backyard.

1 comment:

Apollo said...

stratfor is assuming too much. they think that india will act like a typical nation-state which will defend its national interests. but newsinsight has hit the bullseye in its article here .

it foresees more muddling and incoherence from our useless political establishment.

At bottom, we need to realistically assess our position, and if it allows an interventionist role, then we should make suitable adjustments, the obvious one being in the military realm, concentrating on power projection. But do we have the juice for intervention, do we want our bodies and perhaps souls bloodied, because there is no antiseptic way of going about these things. We cannot play shy of being big brother, of being shameful about our economic and military strength, and still speak of an interventionist role. Plus, do we have big ideas, the grand vision, for South Asia, that others will accept and join in? No, we neither have the individuals nor the institutions for them, and our closest strategic competitor, China, has both, and a huge big stick it is willing to wield. Before we dream of uniting South Asia behind us, we are failing at a more fundamental and pressing task, of uniting our polity to a single great vision of India.

That is our biggest shame.


Blog Archive