TVR Shenoy has an article criticizing the suspension of military aid to Nepal

Scenario One: The Maoists intensify their attacks, controlling larger swatches of that unfortunate country. They already rule 39 of Nepal’s 75 districts. If India chooses to starve the Royal Nepal Army of supplies, in the name of restoring democracy, there is an excellent chance that the king and his forces will simply throw in the towel and give in to the Maoists. The Maoists will then join hands with their murderous Naxalite brethren in India.
Scenario Two: What happens if King Gyanendra becomes desperate at the Indian decision to stop military supplies? Let us remember that it is open to him to seek aid from Pakistan or China. This gives him a fighting chance of beating the Maoists. The victorious monarch shall then be an enemy of India as long as he lives (and probably his successors too).
Scenario Three: The Government of India decides to reverse its stance and resume the flow of arms to the Royal Nepal Army. The politicians in Nepal will protest vehemently. Irrespective of whether King Gyanendra carries the field against the Maoists, a section of the Nepali people will hate India. [India’s short-sightedness]

While India tolerates a King in Bhutan, dictators in Myanmar and a General who exiled a Prime Minister, suddenly we have come intolerant of a King. The Maoists are gaining in Nepal and that is not good for India as well as Nepal. Most Communist/Maoist coming of power is followed by genocide and getting them off the chair is almost impossible. India has its own Naxalite problems and thanks to the lenient handling of the borders by the present Indian administration, both these guys are able to exchange notes.
Now that India and Britain has suspended aid, King Gyanendra has asked for international aid which means that some other countries could get involved in India’s neighborhood. India’s best bet would be to help Gyanendra in his fight against the Maoists while exerting sufficient pressure to bring back democracy.

Last year, Amartya Sen had an article in New York Review of Books on the 2000 year old relation between China and India. Now on the occasion of Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao’s upcoming visit to New Delhi in March, China Daily has an article on the same topic, acknowledging the cultural imports from India.

China was thus linked culturally to India, via its adoption and transformation of Mahayana Buddhism (of the “Large Vehicle,” as opposed to Hinayana Buddhism of the “Small Vehicle,” which spread from Sri Lanka to Myanmar, Thailand, Laos and Cambodia). Both were already pursuing their “wider Asian interests” then, as they dominated the philosophical and cultural psyche of Asia. This “civilization dialogue” between China and India (and through China to the rest of Confucianist Asia) could be seen in three aspects of Chinese civilization: architecture and temple-building, sculpture (in China’s famous “temple caves”), and paintings and creative arts.
The teachings of Gautama Buddha indeed added flavour to Chinese civilization. Buddhism “with Chinese characteristics” had in fact helped galvanize Chinese civilization, as was built up to an apogee (of Chinese culture and civilization) during the Tang Dynasty. The Tang was also at the zenith of Chinese art and culture in its millennium-old history, and India and Buddhism have undoubtedly contributed to China’s cultural apogee.
Although Buddhism was first introduced to the Chinese courts during the Han Dynasty, the religion only pervaded Chinese society and culture progressively, as Buddhist concepts and philosophy were infused into a fast-developing and affluent Chinese society, with its own inherent characteristics and personality. [Cultural factors bind China and India]

Guess the country where anti-American feelings are the highest ?

Notwithstanding its cooperation with the US in the war against terrorism, Pakistan is probably the “most anti-American country” in the world right now, according to the Congressional Research Service.
While Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf vowed in August 2003 to “finish off extremism,” Kronstadt notes, Pakistan’s Islamists routinely denounce Pakistani military operations in western tribal areas, resist government attempts to reform religious schools that teach militancy, and harshly criticise Islamabad’s cooperation with the US government.
“Reports indicate,” says Kronstadt, “that profits from drug sales are financing the activities of Islamic extremists in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Kashmir. Pakistan’s counter-narcotics efforts are hampered by lack of full government commitment, scarcity of funds poor infrastructure, government wariness of provoking unrest in tribal areas, and acute corruption.” [Pak ‘most anti-US country’: CRS]

So long as Musharraf is alive and is on our payroll, how does it matter what normal people or Islamists think ?

Even though Nepal as a state was established by King Prithvi Narayan Shah, later the monarchs became prisoners of their Prime Ministers and even had to get the Prime Minister’s permission to get out of the palace.
One of the first Prime Ministers in Nepal had decreed that the position would be hereditary and thus parallel to the Royal dynasty there was the Prime Minister and his family. They occupied positions of importance and also they prevented the Kings from exercising their power.
One person who got fed up with this arrangement decided to take the matter into his own hands and that was King Tribhuvan who got the throne when he was five years old. He and his sons established contact with Indian embassy officials and made a plan for an escape from Nepal. India had got freedom in 1947 and the Prime Minister of Nepal Mohan Shamsher did not want Nepal to go the democracy way of India.
In November 1950, the King got permission from the Prime Minister to go on a picnic with his family. The King himself drove his car, his children drove other vehicles and they set out with their families. The Indian embassy was on the way and Chacha Nehru had asked the embassy to help the King.
So as the King’s convoy approached the embassy, the gates were opened and in a scene not seen in any Hindi movie, the King and his children drove their cars into the embassy, shocking their security escorts. The doors were closed. Thus to protest the way their country was run, the King of Nepal took assylum in India. Some Ranas wanted to storm the Indian embassy but fearing a military a response they backed away and allowed the Royal family to leave for India.
The Ranas had installed the King’s grandson Gyanendra as the king, but Chacha Nehru worked with the Governments of United States and Britain to deny them any legitimacy. Pro-democracy Nepalis attacked the troops of the Ranas from their base in India and soon there was a fear of civil war. Since a destablizied Nepal is not good for India, Nehru proposed that the King return to Nepal under what is known was the Delhi compromise.
The King returned to Nepal and assumed real power after a long time, thanks to J. Nehru. Mohan Shamsher was appointed the Prime Minister(!) and was later dismissed and exiled to India.
[Adapted from Massacre at the Palace: The Doomed Royal Dynasty of Nepal]

When it comes to Pakistan, all the rules regarding proliferation and democracy have a new angle for the Western World. Sometimes silence, sometimes a harsh word immediately followed by generous finacial assistance has now become a standard Pakistani handshake protocol. Now that the General has refused to step down, the Commonwealth in a big bold move actually, as WaPo says scolded Pakistan. We don’t know if the General wet his pants laughing.
Colin Powell, the buddy of Musharraf was always reluctant to criticize him, and it seems the new Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice too has the same DNA. Recently speaking in Luxemborg, she said that Iran’s support of terrorism, nuclear ambitions and lack of democracy are out of step with trends in neighbouring nations notably Pakistan.
Daniel Larison writes

We should remember that Musharraf seized power because of his frustration with the insufficiently militant stance of the Sharif government over Kashmir, which Pakistan was infiltrating in force in the Kargil region in 1999. There has been relatively little improvement in Indo-Pak relations since the near-war in 2002, and it would not be all together too biased to say that, were it not for Indian forebearance and goodwill, even these improvements would have been impossible.
It has been Pakistan’s basic foreign policy for at least the last 15 years to support Islamic fundamentalists along its borders, using them as cat’s paws against their main rivals, thus avoiding any further humiliating defeats at the hands of India’s military or direct confrontations with the Iranians. Within the last three and a half years, during which Pakistan has supposedly been doing so much to curb extremism, terrorists based in Pakistan organised and carried out the stunning attack on India’s parliament in Dec. 2001, and this was hardly the last attack in northern India by Pakistani terrorists. To ignore this sponsorship of terrorism by a principal ally is a blunder in terms of legitimate American interests and the egregious double standard our government has for Pakistan-based terrorism has not gone unnoticed in India. [Rice Foolishly Praises Pakistan]

I heard on her first trip abroad, the Secretary of State gifted some atlases to the correspondents traveling with her so that they would know the countries they were traveling to. A proper gift for Dr. Rice would be a good history book on Pakistan.

When it comes to the Iranian influence on the events in Balochistan, you get confusing signals from Pakistan. While officials in Islamabad think  there is no influence, officials in Balochistan think otherwise. Officially Iran has also stated that they are not playing in Balochistan.
Now in an intriguing event, an Iranian dissident has been shot dead in Balochistan. Ahmed Mashoof along with two others had illegally
entered Balochistan and rented a house in Quetta. They were members of the
Iranian dissident group Balochistan National Front and opponents of the Iranian
Govt. According to Pakistani police, it was Iranian gunmen who shot the three.

Assailants wearing masks attacked Iranian dissidents sheltering in Quetta on Monday night, killing one of them, police said.
The gunmen opened fire with AK-47 rifles inside a house in Killi Kabir, where three Iranians were staying, said Sher Nawaz Marwat, a Quetta police official.
Ahmed Mashoof, 29, was hit by four bullets and died instantly, Marwat said. The other two Iranians were unhurt. Marwat said police were investigating to determine the motive and trace the attackers.

To promote peace and stability in the broader Middle East, the United States will work with our friends in the region to fight the common threat of terror, while we encourage a higher standard of freedom. Hopeful reform is already taking hold in an arc from Morocco to Jordan to Bahrain. The government of Saudi Arabia can demonstrate its leadership in the region by expanding the role of its people in determining their future. And the great and proud nation of Egypt, which showed the way toward peace in the Middle East, can now show the way toward democracy in the Middle East.
To promote peace in the broader Middle East, we must confront regimes that continue to harbor terrorists and pursue weapons of mass murder. Syria still allows its territory, and parts of Lebanon, to be used by terrorists who seek to destroy every chance of peace in the region. You have passed, and we are applying, the Syrian Accountability Act — and we expect the Syrian government to end all support for terror and open the door to freedom. [Transcript of State of the Union]

While the President asked Saudi Arabia opt for democracy, a very bold statement considering the relations between the President and the monarchy, he left our the major ally Pakistan. Since he was speaking in the context of the Middle East, he may have left out the major non-NATO ally. But still that is no excuse for letting one of the biggest proliferators and violators of democracy off the hook.
While on the subject of terrorism, most jihadists claim to be fighting for the rights of Muslims in various countries. In Iraq, Kashmir and Palestine, the voters choose their leaders, while the terrorist sponsors live in dictatorship or monarchy.

The Pakistan Army has decided to go ahead with its plan to build a cantonment in Balochistan, not withstanding the grievances of the Balochis. A Jirga in Sindh has decided to murder the lady doctor who was raped in Balochistan by members of the Pakistani Army. But then you still need a foreign hand to justify all the violence in this exploited province.
GOP Bloggers think that, if there is foreign involvement, it has to be Iran, rather than India.

We know that Syria is supporting the terrorists in Iraq – we also know that the Iranians at least were doing the same; there doesn’t seem to be much evidence of recent Iranian involvement directly in the terrorism in Iraq. Syria has long been an ally of Iran and it stands to reason that a division of labor could have been created between them – the Syrians to keep us tied down in Iraq, while the Iranians seek to upset our applecart elsewhere. Causing an explosion of violence and/or a civil war in Pakistan would serve Iranian interests – it appears that the people of Balochistan have long-standing grievances with the Pakistani government and now that there is trouble brewing there, we can look to Iran as the potential instigator of the problem. [Iranian Mullahs Causing Trouble?]

Both Iran and Afghanistan have their own share of Balochis and any movement for Independence arising here will cause unrest in those two countries. Also with the proposed gas pipeline through the province benefitting both India and Iran, it would not make sense for those two countries to support the insurgency.

Mir Jam Muhammad Yousaf, the Balochistan chief minister:

Mir Jam Muhammad Yousaf, the Balochistan chief minister, has said he could not rule out involvement of Iran, al-Qaeda or some foreign hand in the recent disturbances in the province. Talking to a private television, the chief minister said he suspected either Iran, al-Qaeda or foreign power or hardline religio-political groups opposed to the government’s policies could have been involved in the recent terrorist activities in Balochistan especially in Sui. [Balochistan CM suspects Iran may be behind disturbance]

Masood Khan, Foreign Office Spokesman:

Foreign Office Spokesman Masood Khan has ruled out Iran’s involvement in the current Balochistan mayhem, saying Pakistan’s nuclear assets are in safe hands and the country does not need foreign assistance in this regard.[Pak rules out Iran’s involvement in Balochistan mayhem]

Related Links: What’s Happening in Balochistan ?

When something goes wrong in Balochistan, the trend in Pakistan is to blame it on external forces. Nitin notes that all the usual suspects have alibis. More suspicion is on India due to the great relations between the two nations and the RAW has been blamed for formenting trouble. So who are these people fighting against the Pakistanis ?

‘The Baloch Liberation Army is an amorphous, underground organisation which was born in the Balochistan university many years ago during the cold war era. Extremists, left-leaning students of the Baloch Students Organization were its most important component.’
‘To establish the BLA as a countervailing force in a region perceived to be the weakest link in the US chain, that is, Pakistan, the former USSR funded BLA with money and arms and logistics. After the Soviets were removed from power in Russia, nothing was heard about the BLA.’
‘However, after the collapse of the Taliban in Afghanistan but with their presence near the Pak-Afghan border areas, sources said the US thought it prudent to establish its own spy network to counter-check the information made available to them by the ISI. The anti-Taliban nationalist elements, whether they are Pakhtuns or Balochs, were thought to be the best available resource that could be used to keep track of Taliban activities. In these circumstances, when Sardar Attaullah Khan Mengal returned from London to Pakistan after a long exile, it was not surprising for many suspicious people.’
‘Sources in the Pakistan army went on to say that soon after the Sardar returned, the youth were reorganised under the banner of the Baloch Liberation Army. Kohlu was the place where a recruitment and training camp was established.’
‘Sources in the Pakistan army maintained that about 200 people were armed and trained in Kohlu in which the Afghan and Indian government officials came deep into Pakistan and played a major role. These same sources said that apart from the 200 people, the main propelling force are tribal chiefs like Nawab Akbar Bugti, Sardar Attaullah Khan Mengal and Nawab Khair Bux Marri who are instigating their tribes to revolt against the Pakistan army. It is their perceptions, whether real or imaginary, which have created grounds in the military minds for an operation in Balochistan.’ [Is Balochistan burning?]

Related Links: The Baluchistan Issue, An exploited province, Between sardar and sarkar, Background on Balochistan