On/off the Record
By P.R. Pradhan
RK Yadav, ex-officer of the Indian intelligence, Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), who is the author of the book “Mission Nepal” has claimed that our incumbent Prime Minister Pushpakamal Dahal was the guest of RAW and stayed in Jawalpur in Madhya Pradesh and was “treated” very nicely by his agency. The “treatment” was to work in the interests of India, Yadav claimed in a recent interview.
“If anybody asks him (Dahal) why he was in Jabalpur, he cannot deny. It is in my knowledge, and I cannot disclose that.”
“We have fixed him with all the things,” Yadav claimed.
It is speculated that RAW knows some weaknesses of Pushpakamal Dahal and thus he cannot go against India.
“He was our guest, and you can interpret the meaning of the guest,” Yadav said.
During the conversation with a Nepali interviewer, Yadav said, “Prachanda is our friend.”
Responding to a question about UML chairman K.P. Sharma Oli, he said that when Oli was excessively inclined toward China, the RAW chief (Samant Goel) went to Kathmandu and convinced him about the situation. Since then, Oli has been on track (i.e. Oli is not against India now).
Yadav also claimed that the present coalition government has formed in the interest of India. He said, there is no influence from China in Nepal, although, it is making efforts.
Serious to note, Yadav said that the Nepali communists do not abide by the communist principle, rather, they are opportunists.
Moreover, in the interview, Yadav claimed that India had prepared to occupy Nepal’s tarai districts after the peaceful annexation of the independent Himalayan kingdom of Sikkim. Also, he has claimed that RAW will kill those who are against India.
We know, India is actively involved in micromanagement in Nepal. Since the 1990 political change, Indian activities have intensified, and now the political leaders are working in Indian interests rather than the interests of Nepal and the Nepali people.
We know, just recently, the Indian Army’s ex-general Ashok Mehta gave the title of “Indian horse” to Dahal and “a horse in the stable” to Sher Bahadur Deuba. Oli is also in the Indian line since he met with RAW chief Goel. They are enjoying power turn by turn with the Indian blessings, and every time they become the PM, they offer one another precious gift to India.
We don’t say India is doing wrong in Nepal. The Indians are serving their country’s interests, unfortunately, we, the Nepalis, are not committed to serving the nation’s interests. What Mehta said or what Yadav said, we, the Nepalis, are not taking them seriously. If we had objected, we could have rejected those leaders who surrendered to India.
Going back to the pages of history, Indian foreign secretary, SK Singh visited Kathmandu in 1989 carrying the agenda of keeping Nepal under the Indian umbrella.
The then-Indian foreign secretary SK Singh visited Kathmandu carrying a long list of Indian concerns. The major Indian proposal was to keep Nepal under the Indian security umbrella—with the responsibility of looking after foreign affairs and security by India. In other words, it was a plan to keep Nepal to Bhutan’s status. The Indian team led by Singh met with then prime minister Marichman Singh with the offer that he could remain as the prime minister of Nepal as long as he wished. Moreover, the partyless Panchayat system could be retained for a minimum of three decades, the Indian side had offered. King Birendra, who was on a tour to Western Nepal, prolonged his stay outside the capital for hunting, to avoid meeting with the Indian team in town. King Birendra didn’t compromise against the greater national interests, rather, he chose to compromise with the leaders in agitation and handed over the executive power to the leaders in agitation.
King Gyanendra should not have been dethroned if he had accepted the Indian proposal for Bhutanization of Nepal. These historical facts confirm that the kings of Nepal never compromised with foreign powers at the cost of the greater interests of the nation.
We can evaluate the difference between the Nepali monarchs and the political leaders. Since the absence of the institution of monarchy, the nation is passing through a vulnerable state in all sectors. We cannot hope for secured sovereignty, independence, and indivisibility of our motherland in the absence of the institution of monarchy as everywhere, there are foreign-paid people whether they are academicians or political leaders.
Please find the link to the video. Courtesy: Social Network:
https://x.com/pakanajole/status/1766399812662956514?s=20
Login to add a comment