Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy On Nepal
in the US Congress
on December 21, 2005

Some interesting points: (mostly verbatim)

� The army continues to see itself as the defender of an anachronistic, corrupt and autocratic monarchy.

� The political parties do not have a record of putting the interests of the nation above their own self interest. They urgently need to reform. Yet they are the real representatives of the Nepali people and there is no substitute for them.

� The international appeal to the King for reconciliation have failed. The Bush Administration should apply whatever pressure it can, including denying U.S. visas to Nepali officials and their families.

� The municipal elections announced by King Gyanendra for early next year, without any consultation with the political parties, are no solution. An attempt to apply a veneer of legitimacy to an otherwise undemocratic process will only prolong and exacerbate this crisis.

� There is a growing possibility that the King�s obstinacy and unpopularity will trigger massive civil unrest, shootings and arrests of many more civilians by soldiers and police, Nepal�s further isolation, and perhaps the end of the monarchy itself.

� 12 point understanding could be the basis for a national dialogue to restore democracy and end the conflict

� The United States should do everything possible including supporting a broadly inclusive political dialogue with or WITHOUT the participation of the palace.


Full speech:
- http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200512/122105f.html
- http://www.blog.com.np/?p=1052#more-1052

ashu dai it is out of topic but i think you might have read this it was in editor section in kantipur i think when gyane took controll. it goes like this
B.P koirala was released after eight years on 2025 b.s, he was jailed in a coup led my mahendra who didn't think 10 years of democracy did any good for the country. anyway after B.P was released he went around the city to see what did he missed to develop. so after touring the city he came to a conclusion in eight years period there was only one development done by the king that was cutting down the khari tree in the center of tudikhel and putting bars around it so nepal junta couldn' access it. anyway time paseed on and we got the democracy again and gyane came to the scean and led the coup again and the only development he has done so far is taken the old bars down and rebuilt it with high bars so now it will be impossible for nepali junta to reach him.
Any thoughts about this would like to hear from you.

I differ with Ashu.

I applaud Mr. Leahy for raising the issue of Nepal. It is sad that the US has done very little to nothing about the genocide in Sudan, as they did nothing to prevent the Rwandan genocide. But that is beside the point.

I just wish and hope that more and more US senators and congressman talk about Nepal, form and express their opinion, so that there can be a substantial debate in the international community on Nepalese issue.

Like it or not, the international community is a force to reckon with in Nepalese politics. So more they discuss about Nepal, better it is.

Why Leahy Matters?
A senator from Vermont what does he know?Perhaps senatorsandministers of this cyberdome namedसाझा.com know better or maybe few vigilantes exhibiting their blind worship towards a modern day incarnation of deity(a draconioan despot) and few sexless neutrals unconsciously taking sides with the monarch know better.Darfur was imminent how about genocide in Rwanda when a charismatic William Jefferson Clinton was seated with cigar on the west wing.Atleast,we have a down to earth knowledgable senator raising valid issues about whats wrong with ruthless monarch of ours validating "RNA's to kill their countrymen/women"while intoxicated.
Call me a renegade now!
But remember Leahys are products of Jeffersonian enlightenmentnot feudalist visionaries!
Now tell Cheneys to screw themselves!Before he drills your backyard(if you know what I mean)

Nepe wrote:

"यिनको रगतमा दरबारको नुन होईन कुनै अज्ञात दिमागी धुन बग्या छ । चार वर्ष भो यिनलाई भेटेको, यिनी एउटै मन्त्र जपेको जपेई छन् । "नेपालको राजतन्त्र नै यथार्थ हो, शास्वत सत्य हो, बाँकी सब अनित्य र मिथ्या । गणतन्त्रवाद त महामिथ्या, महापाप, महापातक हो।"


What I love about Nepe is that: if you disagree with him and with his cherished ideology of republicanism, he calls you all sorts of durbaria chamcha and what not. I am so used to his going ballistic that it means nothing to me and to my democratic friends in and out of Kathmandu.

He has accused me of everything under the sun: of abusing an economic theory (when I said something to the effect that parties need to change strategies to disorient the king), of being an अज्ञात दिमागी, and what not.

And all this carpet-bombing because I do NOT buy the wholesale notion of republicanism just now . . .

Meantime, I am MORE for:

1) strengthening the parties (for now),

2) putting pressure on them for long over-due internal and external reforms,

3) going for SMALLER, achievable victories that boost morale and add to the parties' capabilities,

4) adding those victories up, processing mistakes and learning lessons

5) and then, eventually, from a position of moral, legal and reputational and logistical strength, POSE a challenge to the palace to either reform itself or perish altogether.

In other words, to use a gym metaphor, let's first do a 20 Kg, 30 KG, 50 KG ko bench-press and be really good at all that and progress from there before trying to lift 100 KG ko weight. Is this an unreasonale proposition? This way, with or without the king later on, we are more likely to have strong democratic parties down the road.

Else, there's no point replacing the Shahs with the Koiralas -- that's because, given how feudal our parties are, we might just have a replay of what happened in Iraq, the monarchy there was replaced NOT by democratic forces but by Saddam's Baathist
Party which went, in the name of the people, to exercise absolute power.

As for Leahy, yes, he should be applauded BUT with a caveat that in the absence of
his able to move the White House to do something, his will remain only a proposal. After all, just as Nepe did not need Tom Schelling to conclude that Nepal is heading toward a republic, he also does NOT need Patrick Leahy to parrot the same chant.

oohi
"nobody's chamcha; but some people's "kata""
ashu

"यो आशू भन्ने क्याराक्टर पक्कै पनि दरवारिया चम्चा हुनुपर्छ । हरेक चोटि दरवारको विरोध स्वरुप केही कुरा आयो भने उसले संधै केही न केही हौवा निकाल्छ । यो मान्छेको रगतमा दरवारको नुन कतै न कतै बगेको हुनै पर्छ भन्ने म ठोकुवा गर्दछु ।"
Sardarji, there is no point naming names. The fact is MOST English-speaking children of Panchayat in Kathmandu are closet Darbariyas. But don't fear them. They will kill for the king but never ever die for him. If Prachand occupies Singhdarbar, Ashus of Nepal will become his Darbariyas within no time. Just ignore their rants and keep posting your observations for people with open minds.

"let's first do a 20 Kg, 30 KG, 50 KG ko bench-press and be really good at all that and progress from there before trying to lift 100 KG ko weight."

- i think we need a gym before we think about weight training...

"we need a gym before we think about weight training". You don't need a gym if all you want is preach about weight training.:-)

I haven't read most of the post up there but this is my 2 cents..

Patrick Leahey should mind his own business and worry about saving his and his partys ass, he needs to enjoy the time he is getting as the majority in the senate and in the house, more years and his party is gone... I think he misquoted by not saying ....

END OF THE REPUBLICANS.................!!!!!!


take that biatch

shaiva.... so you are saying Prachanda would be better?????

dude smell the brew yo!!!! even red china isn't red anymore, how do you think a landlocked country like ours with nothing to offer the world to trade for money will survive in these days of globalization and capitalisation.

Shaiva, your startegy of lumping "guilt by association" on others will simply not
work.

By the same token, what's next, buddy?

"You were born in 1985.
Your English is good.
You must have attended one of the most expensive private boarding schools.
How did your family pay for that education?
You parents must have been close to Girija and a part of his corruption machine.
Therefore, you are a Girija ko chamcha".

Is that the extent of your grand logic?
Give us a break.

******

Other than that, having worked professionally with Nepalis, Indians, Bangladesi, Pakistanis and Sri Lankans -- among others -- I have learnt one thing about Nepalis.

Whenever a Nepali says that he is going to do something big, always ask: To do that something big, have you been doing lots of small, small things right?

9.9 out of 10, the answer will be no.
When that happens, you can rest assured that the Nepali's Big Thing will never
come to pass.

I, for one, am tired and downright cynical of Nepalis who talk big but have no patience to pursue small, small victories to move on to that something big.

Republicanism is the same BIG thing.

It won't happen just because Nepe shouts the loudest about it from the top of New Jersey turnpike, with Shaiva right next to him.

Anyone who tallies Nepali media's photos with the realities on the street knows, a large crowd in Nepal is a deceptive picture: We have been seeing that since 2003; most come for ramita and tamasha (whether they are for the king or for the parties), and NOT to, give one example, fast unto death for democracy.

I, for one, have always been interested in working to reform the parties first, making them stronger and able and democratic and transparent rather than continue to advise them along the line of advising a hungry man to give sumo wrestling a try for he is sure to win the trophy.

oohi
ashu

Ashu,

You sound like GOD OF SMALL THINGS  Tell us what boat we carve now? Which divorced one we should be enamored with? Should we hide the boat by the river bed so no one sees out small things?

I, for one, have always been interested in working to reform the parties first.

Till the parties reform, what do we do? Watch KG perform the naked dance? This is the same rhetoric put forth by KG and GK. Absolute power to fight with the other to save the endangered democracy.

We don’t need parties to reform NOW to fight with the tyaranny of KG. It can be done as we go. There is an immediate need of taming KG, not GK. One that performs clandestinely will be side lined by people. This is why there are more people in UML’s mass gatherings than NC’s.

Very good news for Nepal and Nepali.

Houston,

Parties' reform will NOT happen in isolation.

Such reforms, even their visibly credible beginnings, will force the palace to react
and change its game-plan accordingly or risk being an irrelevant entity.

It's a dance, and the parties need to make the move, and not look at KG to lead
the way.

If we as janata can't change Girija and his party when he's out of power, what guarantee is there that we will be able to change him when he and his cronies
get to the power center?

And in England, if the crusty Tories can can elect a 39-year-old baby-faced politician to lead them to a victory against Tony Blair's party in the NEXT general elelection, why can't we, as janata in Nepal, force our parties to reform, especially when the parties claim that the janata is on their side? [Election of David Cameron to Tory leadership has already affected his opponents in the Labour Party.]

You might say: Well, that's not possible in Nepal -- to push for party reforms.

Fine.
Then, by the same token, winning against KG is not possible, either.

When you can't exorcise the ghosts of the last 12 years, it's a laughable and even an irresponsible proposition to think that that you can exorcise the ghosts of 250 years.

oohi
ashu

काग कराउदै जान्छ , पिना सुक्दै जान्छ ।

हाम्रो राजाले लातले त मानेन , अब बातले काहाबाट मान्ने होला?

Talk about Monday morning quarter back or something! Now Ashus of the world will improve the functioning of political parties rather than monarchy and I shall write a best-seller in Chinese.

Very interesting discussion indeed.


However, I think some of us are giving more importance to Mr. Senator's letter or whatever it is, than it is required. American senators, like their counterparts in any functioning democracy represent POPULISM or popular opinion and have to issue/post statements on their websites so that their voters know what their representatives are actually doing something for world peace, development and human rights and are upholding the values so dear to them.

There are senators who want to put a lot of pressure on China and have their web-campaigns against China. Seems like every senator has gone global. In addition to his/her constituency, he/she is also looking after peoples from Nepal, Kyrgyzstan, Ukraine, Sudan, Somalia, Pakistan, China and so on. Mr.Leahy seems interested in Nepal. Nothing unusual or important here. If this statement was coming from a State Departmen's official, then it might be worthy of debates/discussions and so on, because they make and implement the policy (yeah, even in democracies, there is a limit to senators' powers!!). Senators can request/ask or even pressure their govt. to do certain things, but its the govt. with its policy making apparatus (in this case, the State Department) that decides.

The actual foreign policy is not made by the senators, but by the best minds employed at the State Department who calculate everything in terms of American (strategic) interests. I am not saying the senators do not influence the policy, they do. In Nepal's case, if the pressure build up on the state department, then the American policy on Nepal might change because at this point Nepal is way off America's interests radar. But to have such a radical shift in the foreign policy anytime soon based on 1-2 senators occasisonal satements is very unlikely.

Of course, if Mr. Leahy was Mr. Fulbright, then maybe, note maybe, things would be different and the state department would have felt it necessary to take this statement into consideration (even Fulbright had his share of frustrations when it came to Vietnam and other policies). But he is not, and its one of those statements which the state department officials do not take into much consideration when actually making decisions on Nepal.

Feel free to disagree.

Here's an example: Recently another senator proposed that the US govt. should put a pressure on Koizumi (Japanese PM) to not to visit the Yasakuni shrine anymore. There are many examples of senators/congressmen asking their govt. to do things that the governmnet does not feel comfortable or wise in doing.

alright so much on this.

So a US senator says something against monarchy because of which some people here are saying that this perhaps means the end of monarchy. LOL! *One* senator doesn't make decisions. Simple fact.

ditto.

Senators are idealists. State Deparetment officials are realists.

I find it hard to believe that some of us here are criticizing Senator Leahy for taking his stance in a valuable time in congress to speak about our country and urging his government to respond in a bipartisan way to an appropriate foreign policy that is better for Nepal and Nepali people. Senator Leahy is a senior democract from Vermont who is a well-respected ranking member of the committe on Judiciary and has a say in congress that most other, well even the republican's don't. Being a moderate even the republicans take him as a serious matter. However being on a minority side, his government's partisan politics has played its toll intemittently undoing and not listening to anything that the democrats has put forth or has said. Leahy and other democrats in the congress had urged the aministration to respond quckly to a genocide in darfur. It was late in coming and the crimes were henious to say the least.

I commend Leahy for his action, perhaps its better to let him know, if in case he doesn't know, what the majority of the people in Nepal want.