दादा लेखनुहुन्छ: >प्र म को सल्लाहकार हुनलाई नेपेको पररास्ट्र निति र >त्यस सम्बन्धी बिचार सुन्न पाइएकै छैन। त्यसैळे >नेपेजीले पनि अध्ययन गर्नुपर्ने थुप्रै छ, नि:सन्देह । यद्यपि मेरो रहर "परराष्ट्र मामला" मा सल्लाह दिने "सल्लाहकार" हुने चाँहि होईन (अनिल शाहीजीको विशेषज्ञता छँदै छ नि त्यसको निम्ति :-) ), कथंकदाचित कम्तिमा नेपाल-भारत सम्बन्धको मामलामा नेपेले सल्लाह दिने ठाउँ आयो भने कस्तो सल्लाह देला भन्ने जिज्ञासा हुने पाठकहरुको लागि प्रस्तुत छ, तीन वर्ष पुरानो मेरो साझा कुराकानीका केहि अंशहरु, Myth of Geopolitical reality, Indophobia and Competent Diplomacy को बारेमा: (Additional Note: नेपे माथि विद्यावारिधि गर्न कम्मर कसेर आएका नयाँ एकल पंक्तिकार शोधार्थीहरुलाई पनि यो पुरानो thread पुरै पढ्न आमन्त्रण गर्दछु । यहाँहरुको लागि एक आकर्षण: एकजना साथीले नेपेलाई माओवादी प्यारो छ कि क्या हो भनेर छेड हान्नु भएको छ, एक पर्संगमा ) 10-Jan-2002 - http://www.sajha.com/archives/openthread.cfm?threadid=2914&dsn=sajhaarchive [the idea that we are at the mercy of India and that we should not take on a powerful country ] is not a double standard. It is a lack of standards. It is [a] self-defeat, [a] demoralization and suicide. It is a clinical depression of a nation. It is an illness large section of our society, notably some intellectuals and all political leaders, (exclude Maoists) are ailing with. Note that Khum Bahadur Khadka (?) recently said the same words in public, "every government of Nepal has to be at the mercy of the cooperation of India" (accurate wording ?). Was he telling the reality ? Yes. Was he telling the eternal truth ? No. He was [actually]telling about the state of his mind and the mind of the state he runs. Indophobia is an illness of mind. It has two forms 1. hating India in everything, 2. fearing India in everything. In any form, it is harmful. It inhibits Nepal's progress. Intellectual Indophobia [cf. Emotional Indophobia] is armed with a deceptively undefined fear factor called "geopolitic reality". The later ignores dynamism of relationship, undermines the power of diplomacy and grows on the semi-myth of "soil". Therefore it is essentially an illness of mind. We need [a] therapy. Let me show you how it is a psychological illness. When people state that Nepal is at the mercy of India, they just state the statement as a generalized fear. They do not/ can not think of a specific case (existing or imagined) where Nepal would/ could have acted differently, were she not at the mercy [of India]. They do not go case by case. They just think, what's the point, in any case we are surrounded by large India, it MUST MEAN it has superiority or advantage in some thing, somewhere, some time. See ? a generalized fear. Is/should there be a therapy for this illness ? Yes. I hope more people will come to this thread and contribute their ideas for/against such matter of vital importance to our country's future. I leave [at] saying that India does not give us [a] free lunch. We pay this [way] or that way. India would not give us more just because our posture is of a demoralized nation. On the contrary, we shall get more if we stand as a nation with awareness, resolve and no intention to hurt anyone. *** *** *** . . .I totally agree that we have to deal with India diplomatically rather than with hysteria and emotion. Actually, that's my whole point ... No hysteria. Not only when hating India but also when fearing India, or loving India for that matter. Critical thinking, good diplomacy, wise play of cards (both available and that can be gotten), but no hysteria. We should keep in mind the geography or whatever dimension of our relationship just to get the best deal. But whatever we do we should do without panicking, without making ourselves obsessed with geopolitics. Geopolitics should be knowledge, not an obsession. We can not afford putting a billboard of geopolitics on the highway of our progress. *** *** *** [During the 1988 Blockade] I think we should have gained something by playing those cards [ US and China's vocal support to Nepal] with India. After all the blockade was lifted afterwards. Whatever is, my assertion is that the question should be how wisely we played the cards to maximize the deal we get. Obsession of geopolitics could have made us a poor player. [Unless it is absolutely necessary, our having truculent political posture with India is counter productive ]. Exactly, no truculent political posture unless it is absolutely necessary. But also no fallen flat posture unless it is absolutely necessary, for example, to play tricks (lets use our imagination here). Just a pleasant and amicable posture all the time. *** *** *** If some day the whole world becomes a single boarderless nation and I live till then to see it [happening], I will be the [happiest] person in the world even if I have to give up my Nepalitwa. But that is a far away dream. While there is a trend of disintegration of forcefully and artificially integrated nations in the world, there is also an encouraging unification of common interests, economy and currency (Euro in the case). I was harboring this dream of South Asia Economic Union. Thanks to the SAARC summit in Kathmandu, something is happening. If I am not robbed of freedom and democracy, I don't mind South Asian Federation either. *** *** *** What should be Nepal's role in India-Pakistan or India-China conflict ? Honest broker of peace. Because honesty is the best policy. I think honesty and neutrality should give us more edge in future. If we know anything about Indian and Pak mind by now, it won't be a bad idea to collect something useful for future too, but without harming our credibility. It seems a tough challenge. I am not sure how good we have sharpened our diplomatic skill. I heard somewhere that Bhutan's diplomacy was much superior than Nepal's as shown in the case of refugees. And it is no secret that 'source-force' but not qualification is the qualification of Nepal's diplomats. So I am not so sure about our performance, if that ever required. *** *** *** दादा, छाँटले मेरो सल्लाह 'कच्चा वैद्यको मात्रा, यमपुरीको जात्रा' त हुने होईन ? नेपे