The Maoists agreed to abandon violence and transform themselves into a civilian political party. India`s role was limited to facilitating the conclusion of the agreement. The responsibility for legitimizing the role of the Maoists lies with the monarchy, which threatened the survival of political parties and Maoists by assuming absolute and dictatorial powers. India cannot be blamed for this. Until the February coup, India`s constant effort was to reach an agreement between the monarchy and the political parties so that they could work together to overcome the Maoist threat. The king has consistently thwarted such efforts because of his penchant for authoritarian rule. Those who now view Maoist political integration as a mistake also conveniently ignore the endemic and debilitating violence suffered by ordinary people in Nepal for more than a decade, caught in the crossfire between a violent uprising and an equally violent military response. Thanks to the peace agreement, Nepal has generally been free of violence and intimidation over the past decade. It is argued that India has opened the door to bringing the Maoists into the political mainstream and that this is the main cause of the current political instability in Nepal. In fact, after the royal coup d`état of 5 February 2005, it was the main political parties, such as the Seven-Party Alliance, that negotiated a 12-point agreement with the Maoists on 21 November 2005 to establish a multi-party democracy. Bilateral, regional and global groupings and agreements to which India is a party and/or which affect India`s interests.
| IANS Kathmandu Last updated on December 16, 2013 16:27 IST The reinterpretation of historical events serves contemporary political goals and this is what we are experiencing in Nepal today. On 21 April 2006, King Gyanendra of Nepal announced the restoration of the elected parliament he had previously adjourned. He handed over executive power to a prime minister chosen by the political parties themselves. He did so when a popular revolt or Jan Andolan against the autocratic monarchy swept across the Kathmandu Valley and beyond. India`s role was limited to convincing the king to return to the two principles of constitutional monarchy and multiparty democracy – principles he had so blatantly ignored since his succession to the throne in 2001, particularly by assuming absolute power in a royalist coup in February 2005. 15.Â Which people in Nepal are we talking about? Surely not the 6-8 million Nepalese citizens who live in India and earn a living and feed their families at home? Are they coming back to Nepal because they have lost confidence in India? They have lost confidence in the self-proclaimed elite that governs Nepal and are unable to meet their minimum needs, let alone their aspirations. . Comparison of India`s constitutional system with that of other countries India decided to side with the Nepalese people by declaring that they would respect whatever the Nepalese people chose as their political future. It was a good decision, and for the first time in recent history, India was considered a benign and friendly power by all sections of the Nepalese people except those on the wrong side of history. There is an attempt by these rejected elements to revive their declining fortunes through their recent cry that April 21, 2006 marked the moment when India began to lose the trust of the Nepalese people. On the contrary, at that time, India enjoyed unprecedented trust among Nepalese. 10.Â Â Â Â Decentralization of power and finance to the local level and the associated challenges.
Governance, Constitution, Community, Social Justice and International Relations 16.La China has earned its trust as a true friend. This rough pan of the map of China is pathetic. The Chinese invaded Mustang and occupied much of Nepalese territory, but no protests are raised because of China`s “trust” between these political elements. Nepalese authorities routinely hand over unfortunate Tibetans fleeing Chinese persecution to their executioners across the border in another show of “trust” instead of fear. The Chinese are now directly interfering in Nepalese domestic politics using threats and insults, but this too must demonstrate a trust of a particular type, as no complaints are heard. . Since 1960, when then King Mahendra abolished multiparty democracy and concentrated political power in the monarchy, each dispensation from power in Kathmandu has used two political cards to force Indians to approve of their narrow interests. One of them is the map of China; the other is the Hindu map. The crude message is that if India does not support the ruling dispensation, Nepal could turn to China and India must be to blame. Second, since Nepal is the only other Hindu-majority country, India should do nothing to weaken the religious affinities that hold them together. . 2.Â Â Â Â Â Exceptional features of the Law on the Representation of the People Parliament and The Legislators of the State – structure, operation, management, powers and privileges and matters arising therefrom.
12.Â Â Â Â Â Â When Jan Andolan threatened to get out of control and become violent, India had to make a choice: either to join the aspirations of the people and democratic forces, or to be seen as a supporter of an unpopular monarch who had lost his credibility in the eyes of his people. Issues related to the development and management of the social sector / services related to health, education, human resources. the structure, organization and functioning of the government`s ministries and executive and judicial departments; Interest groups and formal/informal associations and their role in the community. .