Sunday, October 02, 2005

[PINR] 27 September 2005: Intelligence Brief: Nepal

oct 2

how the UPA lost nepal.

nice work, 'leaders'!

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: PINR Dispatch <>
Date: Sep 27, 2005 9:15 AM
Subject: [PINR] 27 September 2005: Intelligence Brief: Nepal

Power and Interest News Report (PINR)

27 September 2005

PINR strongly recommends you to read one of our past in-depth analyses that provides a forecast for international relations in the 21st century:

"The Coming World Realignment"


Intelligence Brief: Nepal
Drafted By: Dr. Michael A. Weinstein

Nepal, landlocked and bordered by the rising Asian powers of India and China, has become the object of competition among its neighbors as the country has descended into severe instability. The only Hindu kingdom in the world, with a generally impoverished population of 27.7 million people and few strategic resources, Nepal interests New Delhi and Beijing as a geostrategic prize in the new "great game" for spheres of influence in Central Asia. [See: "The 'Great Game' Heats Up in Central Asia"]

Except for a brief period of parliamentary government after World War II, Nepal was an absolute monarchy until 1989, when King Birendra, bowing to pressure from a coalition of political parties and social movements, instituted a constitutional monarchy. The new parliamentary system was riven by fractious partisanship, failure of leadership, corruption and the persistence of poverty. In 1996, the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) (C.P.N.(M.)) abandoned parliamentarism and initiated an armed "people's war" in the countryside aimed at overthrowing the constitutional monarchy and establishing a "socialist republic."

..... more


san said...

I don't particularly like Fareed Zakaria, because he looks like a Bush sycophant, particularly as post-9/11 Muslim in the US. But sometimes his sycophancy makes him dig up some useful observations:

I never knew Germany has recently become the world's largest exporter of goods. Impressive - but is this because of the EU, or in spite of it?

The Germans have used to EU to achieve regional hegemony by economic means.

indianpatriot said...

Hi Rajeev,
I have enclosed an article by Bharat Karnad (Vietnam as India's force Multiplier).

he tactfully left unsaid, but most Asian countries on China’s periphery believe, is that their security depends on the emergence of a militarily strong India as counterweight — because, notwithstanding its security commitments, in a crisis the United States can always choose to withdraw behind the moat of the Pacific Ocean.

The pillars of an obvious and enduring Indian security architecture, if only the Indian government had the wit to envision it, are Israel and a Trucial State, like Oman, in the west and, in the east, ASEAN and Vietnam in China’s ‘‘soft underbelly’’, and Taiwan and Japan on the Chinese flank.

Beijing may be apprehensive of a resurgent Japan but, of all the states on its border, it is most respectful of a militarily scrappy Vietnam, which prides itself on successfully fighting off the Chinese hegemon for ‘‘a thousand years’’. And most recently in 1979 gave the invading Chinese armies a bloody nose, which compelled Deng Xiaoping to do the prudent thing — speedily declare victory and get the hell out!

BY cultivating a resolute Vietnam as a close regional ally and security partner in the manner China has done Pakistan, India can pay Beijing back in the same coin.

China has strategically discomfited India and sought to ‘‘contain’’ it to south Asia by arming Pakistan with nuclear weapons and missiles. Militarily to focus on Pakistan — the Chinese cat’s paw — as India has done is unwise. The cat can be more effectively dealt with by enabling Vietnam — a smaller but spirited tomcat — to rise militarily as a consequential state in China’s immediate neighbourhood.

san said...

Vietnam can certainly be a useful ally, and of course our leftists have no qualms about ties with that formerly communist state which is curiously still ruled by their one communist party.

But of course China had actually given Vietnam the real drubbing following the 1979 clash, by supporting the vile genocidal Khmer Rouge in neighboring Cambodia, whose guerrillas fought a bloody attrition war with Vietnam.

Anyway, while some would claim George Bush to be the fount of Christian fundamentalism, I would still point you towards the EU fortress as the modern vestige of Christianity's Holy Roman Empire:

Despite all the progressive thinking that Europeans claim to have, they still have limits to their openness.

Ramki said...

I was surprised to find a comment that Farid Zakharia is a Bush sycophant.I have found his comments and thinking very articulate and balanced.

I wouldn't suppose that someone like Jon Stewart would invite Zakharia so often if he was a Bushie.

san said...

Ramki, if you check Zakaria's articles leading upto the US invasion of Iraq, where he was loudly clamoring for regime-change in Baghdad, then you'll see what I mean. He was one of the few Muslim voices frequently cited amongst neocon circles, and claimed that the ouster of Saddam would unleash some domino effect of liberating democracy across the Middle East. What naive sycophantic cheerleading hogwash. The fact that a post-invasion insurgency quagmire would engulf the ethnically tenuous Iraq was glaringly obvious to all objective observers much in advance.

Zakaria, like most US muslims, reviles the BJP and is on record as saying so.