Kathmandu: The Maoists would wish to have the United Nations mediation in their would-be talks with the government.

The Thapa government rejects the Maoists preference for varied political reasons underneath.

Minister Kamal Thapa the other day talking to NTV indirectly hinted that Nepal couldn’t “afford” to irritate its neighbors by inviting the UN to mediate in its affairs. In saying so he amply indicated that Nepal’s hands were tied and that Nepal as a country can’t take decisions on its own on matters that could have direct bearing on her immediate neighbors. Analysts were quick enough to guess as to which country it could be which might have warned this country not to provide its nod to UN mediation. It is widely believed that if UN entered Nepal on this specific count, it might act as precedence for some countries in the region that remain plagued enough by such insurgencies and the leaders of the insurgency might push the Nepali stance to sort out their own cases through the UN mediation. The UN presence in Nepal will be considered by some as the Interpretations galore.

The Maoists, analysts conclude now, is a weakened force indeed. However, their weakness is not in its military strength. It remains, as is being talked, intact. In effect their weakness is in their loss of top-rung leaders who have of late fallen prey to Indian government’s wrath.

Prachanda and Dr. Bhattarai must have felt a terrible loss to their party and organization when they don’t find personalities like Matrika, Suresh Magar, C.P.Gajurel and very recently Mohan Baidhya-Pokhrel in their midst.

Undenyingly, insurgencies demand tactical and sharp brains which they were indeed. Mr. Mohan Vaidhya’s arrest in Siliguri last fortnight is supposed to have provided a severe blow to the mental strength of the party and more so it should have come as a bolt from the blue to the party’s supreme, Comrade Prachanda, as it is talked that Mr. Vaidhya is the real ideologue of the party who gave a credible shape to the PRACHANDA-PATH theory. How important Mohan Vaidhya was for the party and its leader becomes visibly clear from the first ever vitriolic remarks made by Comrade Prachanda against India, the place where they all supposedly have taken shelter.

Prachanda’s wrath against India could be seen when he says that his friend’s arrest in Siliguri is a design of the Indian establishment to seduce the other side and grab the important water resources for her perennial use.

Better late than never, Comrade Prachanda has got the point. In effect, he as a die-hard nationalist, should have understood the designs of the establishment from the very beginning.

However, analysts say whether Prachanda is correct in his analyses or not, time will tell. However, what is for sure is that Thapa government, considered to be more Indian than Atal Bihari Bajpayee, is gioving an impression that he could go to any extent in pleasing his Indian mentors and in the process he wouldn’t mind even if he handovers water resources at a dirt cheap price.

Informed sources claim that Thapa government has either already handed over or is all set to handover precious gifts to his friends in Delhi. In lieu what he gets? It is a question indeed.

What he receives is clear. For each and every river, he will be provided with one insurgent leader. If this is so, then Nepal must have provided India with four important assets to India in lieu of four top-hats of the Maoists insurgency.

Prime Minister Thapa is mistaken. It is unfortunate that a Nepali government is providing Nepali assets to an alien friend only to arrest Nepalese living in the alien soil? The bargain seems a terrible affair.

This is not all, the Maoists did retaliate against India by burning several Indian Trucks in the western region recently. However, this act of the Maoists would cost them heavily. The Indian establishment instantly sent chilling signals here and there which contained a sort of warning to the Nepali establishment that she must take proper care of the Indian national and of their properties as well. In the same vein, the Indian establishment has instructed the other side to come heavily down against the Maoists and the wrong-doers must be penalized.

The India displeasure against the Maoists does speak that henceforth India will not spare Maoists in its territory. If the fresh Indian statement is taken at its face value, it has got to be taken indeed, then what could be concluded is that for Prachanda and Dr. Bhattarai, Nepal would be the safest place on earth now.

Apparently, this hardened posture acquired by India against the Maoists might crystalise the protracted war in between the government and the insurgents which could force the Maoists to come to the table.

Prachanda must know, and he knows it perhaps more than any one else, that India is a country which can’t tolerate attack on its nationals, its properties and more so when its genuine national interests are attacked.

It is time that Comrade Prachanda and his colleagues think twice on how to proceed in the face of the India’s changed stance now and of their depleting strength at the very top rung of the party.

What is surprising in the whole affair is that as and when the King is out of Kathmandu for felicitations, India captures Maoists’ leaders. When King was in Nepalganj, India deported Matrika and Suresh Aley Magar and now when the King is in Pokhara, India arrests Mohan Vaidhya. Is it a mere coincidence or some thing entirely different, politically speaking? What is also interesting is that of late India has been arresting top-hats of the CPN(M) only and not deporting small fishes? Is India up to weaken the insurgency to an extent that is apparently desired by the Nepali side? What is not known is that what is the price or the cost involved for all these India gestures?

What is also true is that blaming India would not work as it has not worked in the past. Why should we blame others for our own follies and inferiority complexes? The fact is that India knows her national interests. We don’t or pose not to know.

Keep on debating.