Kathmandu: India is in the news since August 17, 2001.

To recall, it is this particular date when Nepal’s prominent leaders went on a “working” trip to Siliguri, India to see comrade Prachanda.

India again was in the news when Nepal’s strongman, Girija Prasad Koirala, made a forcelanding in New Delhi straight from Hong Kong upon completion of his much-publicized China trip some two years ago.

India again was in the news when only last month, the UML leader made a secret trip to Lucknow, India, in his bid to make a rapprochement with comrade Prachanda so that peace could be restored in Nepal.

Later came Indian Ambassador’s fervent appeal in the name of the Nepali leaders not to use Indian soil for such meetings.

A few days later, Ambassador Saran bluntly told a select group of Nepali media men that if India is provided with the information of the whereabouts of Maoists rebels residing in his territory, his security officials would nab even Prachandji and Baburamji.

Still later, India’s foreign minister, His Excellency Yaswant Sinha, admitted that Madhav Nepal’s secret trip to Lucknow had “embarrassed” his country. In the process, minister Sinha reiterated that the Nepali rebels could be a security threat to his own country. All these made India to appear in the news.

This was not enough indeed. India got prominence when Rocca, the visiting US authority divulged to Nepali media men that she had exclusive meetings with the Indian Ambassador in Kathmandu. It was anybody’s guess as to why she should have met the Indian envoy in her Nepal trip. This brought India in the media headlines.

Ishwar Pokhrel, a leader of the UML who is supposedly close to Madhav Nepal brought India again in the news. The reason: Mr. Pokhrel was detained by the security men at Indira Gandhi International Airport for some unexplained reasons.

A furious Pokhrel later managed to give his detention a “national” issue which it was not. Pokhrel wished to exploit politically from a “non-issue-made-issue” to the extent that he managed to seduce his agitating friends to burn the effigy of Prime Minister Bajpayee which definitely was a political blunder judging by any angle.

This was a Himalayan blunder committed by the UML in general and Pokhrel in particular. A bad precedent indeed. How India would take up this issue will have to be watched. After all, Pokhrel’s political size is not that high and unchallenged as that of modest and internationally respected Indian Prime Minister Bajpayee. Question arises as to what prompted Pokhrel to blow the matter out of proportion? Is he all set to bring about a rift in UML-India friendly relations?

Should India wish, she could create problems for the UML leaders impending trips to India.

The UML leader perhaps forgot that what would happen to their fiery speeches being currently made against India if the Indian authorities disclose the names of the sons and the daughters of the party-leaders who are enjoying free-scholarships in Indian universities. Thanks that the embassy in Kathmandu digested the “insult” so easily.

All these sad events brought India in the news.

India was again in the news, obviously by default, because of Bajpayee’s open-hearted praise in Islamabad of Bhutan for the latter’s tangible support in driving out the Indian rebels from its territory. To quote Bajpayee, “In this context, I would like to draw attention to the courageous action taken by His Majesty the King of Bhutan and his government against insurgent groups, which were trying to use Bhutanese territory to launch terrorist activities in India. It is an outstanding example of sensitivity to the security concerns of a neighbor, which is at the same time in the direct long-term security interest of Bhutan itself”.

Intelligent observers in Kathmandu say that the Indian Prime Minister in saying so “prompted” Nepal to seek the same treatment from India.

Now that India is all praise for Bhutan, it is not surprising therefore that Punarjagran, an independent Nepali weekly too demands the same treatment from India vis-à-vis the Nepali rebels supposedly residing in India.

Should all these mean that India, knowingly or unknowingly, admitting that she should now act as per the wishes of Nepal?

The climax of it all came when Pokhrel at time of Delhi detention was “politically” interrogated by the Indian security men.

“Why you guys don’t give a nod to the idea of a constituent assembly”? is what Pokhrel was told by the interrogating officers at Delhi airport.

Pleasingly enough, the Indian security officers remain abreast with Nepali politics and know which political party in Nepal possess what demands.

By default or by design, the very simple question made to Pokhrel by the interrogators does speak so many things at one stretch.

Finally, one Indian Conflict Management specialist, P.G.Rajamohan writes in the Himalayan Times English daily dated 6 January, 2004, this piece for his own country’s consumption. He says: ” there is mounting evidence of substantial movement of the Maoist leadership in India, and their close links with proscribed Indian Left wing groups especially the PWG and MCC.