Kathmandu: India’s foreign secretary, Kanwal Sibbal, has hinted that his country would wish a sort of “mediatory role” in the Government-Maoists talks should the Nepali side approached his country for such a role.
Mr. Sibbal also candidly said that if the talks were to yield positive results, both the King and the political forces must work together and that if there exist any differences in between these two established forces, the conflict will not come to an end.
Mr. Sibbal made these plain but very significant observations while addressing a seminar recently held in New Delhi which was participated in by a host of Nepali politicians and media men.
There are reasons to believe now that why India exhibited its displeasure on the sudden announcement of a ceasefire in between the government and the Maoists rebels. That the Indian establishment was displeased with the sudden Nepal happenings came to the fore when it managed some write ups to get printed in newspapers that are considered to be very close to the establishment there and that too after the ceasefire was announced in Kathmandu.
That India wished a role in the whole Nepali affair becomes evident from the fact that a personality of the stature of Mr. Sibbal says so.
To quote Mr. Sibbal: “Will the Nepali problems will be solved if India’s effective participation?; “Is Nepal prepared to offer such a role to India?
Moreover, Mr. Sibbal instructed Nepal to spell out its positions in these regards.
What is more than surprising and intriguing as well is the “convergence” of the ideas being floated here by the disgruntled political parties who wish their excessive say in the impending talks with the Maoists with those of the Indian establishment.
Mr. Sibbal, plainly speaking, is speaking the views being expressed by Nepal’s political parties who consider that the Nepali establishment totally neglected their political role at time of the announcement of the ceasefire some three weeks back.
The dangerous of it all is Mr. Sibbals’ expression wherein he opines that Nepal lacked transparency in its dealing with the other camp in order to bring about an end to the conflict.
And this is what the Nepali politicians have been reiterating since long. Is it a sheer coincidence or some thing else?
A careful analysis of Mr. Sibbal’s utterances brings few things to the fore: firstly, Indi is not happy with the ceasefire announcement; she would be more than willing to participate in the government-Maoists proposed talks if approached by Nepal; India would wish the issue being sorted out with the active cooperation of the political parties who feel they were sidelined at time of the ceasefire announcement; India would wish to signal the King as well not to proceed alone in this regard; and above all, the message from India is that unless the issue brings in an “effective” Indian mediation, the outcome of the talks even if it were positive, would be considered null and void.
To recall, it was India that declared Maoists as terrorists much ahead of Nepal declaring the same; it was India again which half-heartedly greeted the ceasefire announcement but concurrently instructed Nepal to provide the political parties their due role in the talks that would follow at a later stage; and now it is India that is seeking a role in the talks with the Maoists.
Informed sources opine that the convergence of Nepali politicians’ views with those of Indian establishment is not only meaningful but loaded with “meaning” as well.
It is time that Nepal’s foreign ministry, if it existed at all, came out with its own views regarding the possibility of any such Indian participation or not.
Intellectuals hasten to add on how India would react if Nepal’s foreign secretary too demanded an effective role in the Indian government-Beerapan talks? Stretching it further, how India would take Nepal’s desire to mediate in the Ram Janmabhoomi- Babri-mosque issue that has been continuing in India since decades and decades?