Posted by: Mr. Hyde June 17, 2010
Login in to Rate this Post:
0 
? 
?
To pick up where Guru2012 left off, the Rana regime proved to be a strong ally of the British hegemony culminating in Jung Bahadur's maiden voyage to England to affirm his allegiance to the British monarchy and helping crush the Indian Rebellion of 1857. That Sepoy uprising is considered the first campaign of Indian independence.
Why was/is there a modern Indian grudge against the Shah Dynasty?
With the Gurkhas under the clear order from the Ranas to put down the rebellions, the Independence of India was deferred until 1947. Meanwhile in Nepal, the DNA splicing between the Shah figureheads and Rana clans continued with so much vigor that it became difficult to tell a Shah from a Rana just from appearance or sensitivities. After 1947, I am certain the Ranas increasingly found themselves in uncomfortable seats with respects to the Indian Government. Did some wise Ranas foresee the British Raj coming to an end in the near future so as not to completely take over the Shah monarchy in Nepal so instead stuck to Shree 3?
The Indians will forget the Ranas' close association with the British Raj with the passing of time, so they thought. May be that's why the Shumsher PMs with such psyche continued attaching "Ja. Ba. Raa" at the end of their name. Not suprisingly, the end of the Rana regime traces it beginning back to Nepalese students "studying in India" which led to the dawning of the Panchayati rule. The Shah kings thought that the Panchayati rule was a free (and nice too) gift from those Nepali students in India at the latter's expense. The disagreement eventually led to imprisonment of BP Koirala and other prominent democratic leaders. The entire cabinet of Raja Mahendra consisted of his close Rana and Shah kins and "Yes" men and you know the rest is (recent) history as they always say. The power struggle continued, still continues and will perhaps continue.
To the ones who once stayed in power including Saddam Hussein, I hope you all enjoyed it while it lasted. At least, I am not one who holds a grudge against the Shahs or Ranas unlike the Indians who do.
Why was/is there a modern Indian grudge against the Shah Dynasty?
With the Gurkhas under the clear order from the Ranas to put down the rebellions, the Independence of India was deferred until 1947. Meanwhile in Nepal, the DNA splicing between the Shah figureheads and Rana clans continued with so much vigor that it became difficult to tell a Shah from a Rana just from appearance or sensitivities. After 1947, I am certain the Ranas increasingly found themselves in uncomfortable seats with respects to the Indian Government. Did some wise Ranas foresee the British Raj coming to an end in the near future so as not to completely take over the Shah monarchy in Nepal so instead stuck to Shree 3?
The Indians will forget the Ranas' close association with the British Raj with the passing of time, so they thought. May be that's why the Shumsher PMs with such psyche continued attaching "Ja. Ba. Raa" at the end of their name. Not suprisingly, the end of the Rana regime traces it beginning back to Nepalese students "studying in India" which led to the dawning of the Panchayati rule. The Shah kings thought that the Panchayati rule was a free (and nice too) gift from those Nepali students in India at the latter's expense. The disagreement eventually led to imprisonment of BP Koirala and other prominent democratic leaders. The entire cabinet of Raja Mahendra consisted of his close Rana and Shah kins and "Yes" men and you know the rest is (recent) history as they always say. The power struggle continued, still continues and will perhaps continue.
To the ones who once stayed in power including Saddam Hussein, I hope you all enjoyed it while it lasted. At least, I am not one who holds a grudge against the Shahs or Ranas unlike the Indians who do.
Last edited: 17-Jun-10 11:28 AM