|
| A woman cries after her son was shot dead
by security forces during clashes in Kalanki, Nepal. (AFP) |
Kathmandu, April 22: The constituents of the
seven-party alliance have described Indias quick support for King Gyanendras
offer as completely off-tack and want it to make a course-correction .
Although claiming that India seemed ignorant of the
peoples sentiment in Nepal, they have left the door open for New Delhi to
reassess the situation and take corrective action.
They want India to come out in favour of the democratic
aspirations of the people and not be seen to be supporting the king. India must
recalibrate and reassess its response, most political leaders here felt. Just
as the peoples heightened sentiments have forced them to reject the kings
offer, they are hoping that Delhi would also not remain oblivious to the sentiment
on the streets of Kathmandu.
How much ground India can retrieve at this stage is
not very clear. There are people here, however, who claim that with its hasty
reaction Delhi seems to have lost the chance to stem anti-India sentiments in
Nepal for years to come.
Much as Delhi might argue that there was an element
of sincerity in what it did ? posing the issue as compromise with the king
vs. chaos? this does not was with the Nepalese. The Nepali Congress had
criticised the Indian reaction last night itself. Today, the other constituents
of the seven-party alliance joined them.
Our friends, without talking to us decided to
welcome the kings move. This is not good. India must correct this. India
has no monarchy and, therefore, has no experience of this kind of deception. When
the people of Nepal are rejecting the kings offer, how can India go against
their democratic wishes? asked K.P. Oli, senior leader of the Nepal Communist
Party (United Marxist Leninist).
Rajendra Mahto of the Nepal Sadbhavna Party (Anandi
Devi), which largely represents Nepalese of Indian origin, shared his sentiments.
India must rethink its position. The kings
statement is meant to confuse the international community. Not only India but
the international community must examine its pros and cons again and support our
democratic movement, Mahto argued.
Instead of going on the front foot to attack India,
the political parties are hoping that India will eventually come out on their
side.
Some of them recognise that India might have wanted
a marginal role for the king. But they themselves are unable to ignore the sentiment
against the institution of monarchy on the street.
C.P. Mainali, leader of the United Left Front, found
Indias reaction inexplicable. They knew what the agenda of the seven-party
alliance for restoration of democracy was. Why did they think we would accept
the kings offer when he did not address our key issues?
And even if we did, why did they think the people
of Nepal would accept it?
|