After seven unsuccessful rounds of voting to elect a new prime minister, Nepal’s Maoists appear to be veering towards a compromise. Last Friday, the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (UCPN) withdrew from the prime ministerial elections, citing the futility of the process. Simultaneously, it struck an agreement with the CPN-UML to work towards the formation of a consensus government. This is indeed welcome. The Maoist candidate, UCPN chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal, was a polarising figure and clearly did not command the support that is needed to head a majority government.

With the Maoists and the CPN-UML resolving to abstain from the eighth round of voting, it would be best for the Nepali Congress and the remaining candidate, Ram Chandra Paudel, to withdraw from the election process. It is clear there can be no winner in this race. The inconclusive elections have meant that Kathmandu has been without an effective government for over two months. Nepal is a fledgling republic and it needs all its political forces to give the country a solid foundation. This can only be achieved through expediting the writing of a new Constitution, which has long been overdue. Besides, it is only consensus that can help provide a permanent solution to contentious issues such as the integration of former Maoist guerrillas with the Nepali army, the return of properties seized during the civil war and the dismantling of the Young Communist League, which the Maoists have been known to use to intimidate their political rivals.

The focus should now shift towards the evolution of a common minimum programme that is acceptable to all political parties. It is on the basis of this minimum agenda that a unity government must be formed. A stable Nepal is desirable for the security and growth of the region at large. The surfacing of audio tapes that indicate Chinese money was being used by the Maoists to buy MPs in the prime ministerial vote is truly unsavoury. Such heavy-handed interference in Nepal’s political process could lead to a nationalist backlash.

The bigger question is whether the Nepal army would accept maoists in their cadres and the madhesis accept a CPN dominated coalition? The way out of the logjam without external meddling is to encourage a Common Minimum Programme as in India – the country with richest experience in coalition governments. Can we do it without offending Nepalese sensibilities, is what needs to be challenged.

China-Nepal rail link approved and coming up.

Road links already exist from Nepal to Lhasa (Tribhuvan Highway). China is also doing world class infrastructure development in China and without time overruns.

China has caused serious schisms in Nepalese society and polity and has undermined Indian stakes and credibility.

Nepal is actively interfering with Bhutanese happiness wrt Nepalese refugees ex Bhutan.

Nepal is the centre of fake Indian money enterprises.

The Pakistani ISI has a near free run in Nepal, as has terrorism that is focused on India and is sponsored by Pakistan, China and ( now to a small extent) BD.

These things happen in ones pursuit of national interest. Cuba did all this and more to the USA, using pal Russia’s broad shoulders.

The USA kept matters under check. They called Russia’s bluff in 1962 during the Cuban missile crisis. We need to do the same. Thats all – and without getting into a lather, which is our usual, inane, unsustainable and ridiculous reaction.

The Chinese are, finally, Chinese. They aren’t the smartest beings in the world. We can Chanakya them (subtly torpedo them and their world power pretensions) if we get out of our obsessive pontification and work honestly for a change. Dude Krishna (wot a name!) may be coming of age. What he needs is a meeting of heads; of bright Indians who think of national interest above all other considerations. And time bound action instead of excuses; apathy and academic disdain.

Would China, for instance, want us to get friendlier with Taiwan; with Myanmar, Cambodia, South Korea, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, Maldives, with Vietnam? Would they want us to up the ante in Africa? Should we get Human Rights NGO’s and our great media to discuss Uighur Human Rights and Han invasions of Tibet? Should we accord posthumous sainthood to Johnson? To Ardagh? (They legislated that Aksai Chin was Brit). Should we ridicule the Panchen Lama; a Chinese proxy who is resident in Beijing?

I wonder…I really do.

In a projected nuclear war, there are no winners. We don’t need to worry too much about that part of Chinese posturing.

Who will wake this ivory teethed monster?

No cost is little when managing the periphery as the negatives far outway the investments in time and money – else the economics of the nation will be overrun by security implications emerging out of a disturbed periphery.