Kathmandu: He visits Nepal every now and then.

Nepalese people listen to the announcements made by Nepali media that Sir Jaffrey James is visiting Nepal to talk to the Nepali political leaders, members of the civil society and a host of others in his bid to find a solution to the Maoists issue.

He comes and leaves. The process has been continuing for years. The issue remains intact.

This time again, the British dignitary came and made courtesy calls on different personalities and at the end of his visit, as usual, made some suggestions to do this and to do that.

Sir Jaffrey James might be honest in his dealings but the fact is that his efforts have so far have not yielded positive results. This he has to admit.

Nevertheless, Sir James made certain observations in front of the Nepali media men Monday that forces analysts to closely look into his suggestions.

Sir James suggested Nepal to go in for the restoration of the now dissolved parliament.

“The country can’t continue indefinitely without a functioning parliament” and that restoration of the parliament could be one of the options to end the impasse when the current situation is not favorable to hold free and fair elections to elect a new parliament”, is what Sir Jeffrey James said. Interestingly enough, this is what the Indian establishment wishes and in the process has been influencing a section of the Nepali media to pen stories that favor the restoration of the parliament. Is it a mere conjecture?

In addition to this striking similarity in perceptions, what is also apparently clear is that both the countries, read the former colonizer United Kingdom and a former colony India, have been deliberately or otherwise providing shelter to the insurgents in their respective territories.

The third point is that Sir James brushed aside the talk of the possibility of a United Nations mediation in government-Maoists talks by saying that “there were many ways the international community could help Nepal”.

Fortunately, Indian establishment too possesses the same line and has in the process hinted Nepal to refrain from inviting the UN at time of the talks.

“They seem to be having a view that if India isn’t involved, other political powers could enter Nepal (to help resolve the conflict),” said Dr. Ram Saran Mahat, a NC stalwart who attended a seminar on Nepal held last week in Delhi. This perhaps explains why India would not wish the UN coming to Nepal and offer its mediation.

Surprising coincidence indeed.

That there is a secret understanding in between the U.K and India vis-à-vis the Maoists becomes clear from the fact that, if one were to recall, Comrade Prachanda had some four years ago visited London to attend an International conference sponsored by RIM.

How could have Prachanda made a secret trip to London without the knowledge of India and United Kingdom. In the same vein what

Simple logic is that Prachanda possesses no Nepali passport. If this were so, how could Prachanda make a trip to London until and unless he was provided a passport by Indian establishment and duly stamped by the British High Commission in Delhi granting him the needed visa to land in London? Or else the Indian and the British authorities should spell out that they were duped and that they did not know of such possibilities! So far neither the British nor the Indians have shed light on these possibilities. Analysts appear not to digest the theory that C. P. Gajurel was apprehended in Madras by the Indian police for having used fake passport to enter into London for the first time? The British have yet to tell the people that the visa thus granted to Gajurel too were fake? The passport was fake or the visa? The answer is still awaited.

The leaders of the insurgency must be admired for their Himalayan courage. They did what appears next to impossible for the common men. Speaks of wider linkages here and there.

Last but not the least, should this mean that both India and Britain by reiterating that parliament should be restored in Nepal were knowingly or unknowingly supporting Nepali Congress President Girija Prasad Koirala’s one-point agenda and that being the restoration of the parliament!

Is this again a mere conjecture or some thing else?

What is interesting is that Sir Jeffrey James favored the restoration of the Parliament the day he met President Koirala at his private residence.

Should this mean that President Koirala amply convinced Sir James that the restoration of the parliament could be the best option for Nepal in the given scheme of things and the latter pleasingly made statements favoring Koirala’s contentions?

Who knows what is being cooked in Delhi or in London?

However, recent utterances of the leaders of the insurgency reveal that they were not in good terms with the Indian establishment and that they have been preparing themselves to face the possible Indian wrath in case Nepal sought the intervention contain the Maoists threat in the Himalayan Kingdom. The Bunkers and the tunnels are being dug to face any such eventuality, reports reveal.

However, what is for sure is that Koirala is still in the hearts of the Indian leaders.

Be that as it may, let’s wait for yet another three months for Sir James arrival in Nepal. That would be his eighth visit to this Himalayan Kingdom.