Rakesh Sood

New Delhi, Dec 9: The foreign office responded tangentially to The Telegraph’s report on the impending replacement of Rakesh Sood as India’s envoy to Kathmandu tonight, saying Sood was a “distinguished officer of the Indian foreign bilateral dialogue that has progressed substantively”.

The statement — a para-long text ascribed to the official spokesperson currently in Brussels as part of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s delegation to the India-EU summit — did not, however, deny the factual essence of the report which said Sood is likely to be replaced as ambassador. His likely successor is Jayant Prasad, currently special secretary in the ministry of external affairs.

“We have seen a media article which appeared today regarding the alleged unpopularity of the Ambassador of India in Nepal Shri Rakesh Sood. Shri Rakesh Sood is a distinguished officer of the Indian Foreign Service who has served with dedication and commitment as India’s Ambassador to Nepal since April 2008.

“During his tenure, bilateral development co-operation and dialogue between the two countries has progressed substantively,” the spokesperson said in a written reaction. It said nothing about the specific issues raised by The Telegraph report, neither about the criticism he has faced from major political parties in Nepal, the Maoists and the Nepali Congress included.

Sood’s feeble defence by the ministry of external affairs (MEA) is being seen in diplomatic circles as New Delhi’s way of fence-keeping with its northern neighbour. As one top retired IFS official said: “India cannot, after all, remain silent on criticism of one of its ambassadors to a major neighbour. This is more a defence of the office of the Indian ambassador than a defence of ambassador Sood.”

It is significant that the MEA chose to remain silent on specific issues that have made Sood unprecedentedly unpopular in Nepal. He is the first Indian envoy to have had his effigies burnt and a shoe thrown at him.

Among the allegations against Sood — often openly in the Nepali and Indian media — are that he used strong-arm tactics with the Nepali establishment to “protect Indian interests” in Nepal. He is widely seen in Nepal as the single most important player behind the ouster of the Prachanda-led Maoists from power even though they had won the elections of 2008 hands down.

The MEA response came after daylong informal queries to The Telegraph from foreign office officials in New Delhi and Kathmandu on the possible sources and motives of the report. One senior official suggested that The Telegraph’s story was “off track” but declined to issue a clarification when told that the paper will be happy to publish an official response.

Asked what was “off track” about the report, the official said: “It must be understood that the Indian ambassador only acts in the Indian interest, he is here to promote Indian national interest and he had done what he did in pursuit of that end.” He did not, however, have any factual errors to point out.