By Shashi P.B. Malla
There is no doubt that a lot of things bring Nepalese and Indians together.
At the same time, the paradox is that the very things that bring us together, also bring us apart.
Nepali and Hindi are both the major languages [Hindi, at least in North India], and both are derived from ancient Pali and Sanskrit, but both have gone their different ways.
Most educated Nepalese can understand Hindi fluently, but Indians have their difficulties with Nepali. It is something like the Dutch and Germans.
Nepalese and Indians also celebrate Hindu religious festivals differently and with separate intensities.
The most differentiating factor is the role of Hinduism or Sanatan Dharma in society and the state.
Nepal was long a Hindu State, before Narendra Modi and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) aspired to convert India into one.
In Nepal, the historical origin of the modern state was inextricably bound to the role of the Shah monarchs as the symbol of unity of the entire nation. The Hindu State and the Shah monarch were thus inseparably joined together.
India was ruled for many centuries by Muslim emperors, and later as a colony by British imperialists. Hinduism was one of many religions (although of the majority). In addition, there were innumerable ethnic groups and tribals. Hinduism could not develop naturally as in independent and sovereign Nepal, where religious syncretism evolved exclusively.
India did not have this luxury. Given the vast country with many complications, the founding leaders of modern India rightly made the best of the situation at hand and created a functioning federal, democratic republic. Modi and the BJP want to turn the clock back, and create a new Hindu Rajya.
In Nepal, the scheming Maoists and the other Communists together with the Nepali Congress succeeded in abolishing the unique institution of the Hindu State conjoined with Constitutional Monarchy.
Various factors contributed to this extremely unfortunate development:
- The political elite of the country was divided.
- The Nepalese political parties were scheming with the Indian establishment.
- The Royal Palace secretariat was weak and ineffective, the King’s advisers were hopeless, and the ministers feeble, inept and outdated. Thus, the threefold rings of defence that should have shielded the king collapsed.
- The Army’s top brass turned out to be traitorous and untrustworthy.
- Above all, the Indian government fully supported the anti-monarchists. Abolishing the monarchy would weaken Nepal’s independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity and deepen India’s role in interfering in its internal affairs.
The path to the “Sikkimization” would then be fully open.
Rajendra Lingden and his colleagues from the Rashtriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) have now undertaken the difficult task of restoring Nepal’s independent path of social, economic and political development. Reinstating Constitutional Monarchy and the Hindu State is, therefore, the necessary means to a very desirable end.
The current self-centred Dons [leaders of the political parties] and their looting Mafia families [the whole nexus of parties and affiliated groups and organizations] are standing in the way, and must be booted out – sooner than later!
The writer can be reached at: shashipbmalla@hotmail.com
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect People’s Review’s editorial stance.
Login to add a comment