|
HOME |
NEWS |
SPECIALS
|
|
Part 2 'It is a lie that Indians were the targets!'Josy Joseph in Kathmandu
Who are the culprits behind the violence that claimed seven lives? Was it an attempt to cripple India's relations with Kathmandu? Or a tactic to discredit the Nepal government? Or did anti-India sentiments go out of hand? The Nepal government has set up a high-level inquiry to look into the chain of incidents that began sometime on December 13, 14 in Chitwan, a small township some 160 kilometres from Kathmandu. It was only around Christmas that the violence reached Kathmandu. Then for a couple of days the streets of Nepal's capital were held to ransom by mobs. Government investigations began with the questioning of Jamin Shah. He is the owner of the Spacetime Group that controls most of Nepal's cable television network and runs a Nepali daily, Spacetime Dainik. On January 1, he was questioned for five hours. Indian intelligence agencies allege that the 34-year-old businessman is fugitive gangster Dawood Ibrahim's man in Nepal, and that Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence directorate is using him against India. A charge Shah angrily denies. "It is absurdity, a pack of lies," he said during an interview. The Indian intelligence agencies, he said, "have a bad network to believe these rumours." Nepali journalists and their associations condemned Shah's questioning.
He says there were reports a few days before the violence that the Indian foreign ministry had "summoned deputy chief of mission of the Nepal embassy in Delhi and had unofficially objected to the role of a media house in Nepal." Hence, the speculation ran that Shah's questioning was at India's behest. Nepal's Information Minister Jaiprakash Gupta and Shah are adversaries. Gupta banned Indian television channels after protests erupted in Kathmandu. He also stopped the screening of Hrithik Roshan's movies. Shah's Spacetime Network, which controls most of Kathmandu's cable television business, immediately took Indian channels of the air. With that, he blocked Hrithik Roshan's denials. It was only on the second day of the violence that Bollywood actress Manisha Koirala managed to get Hrithik Roshan's views on a Nepali television channel. It had an instant impact. "We were threatened by mobs, and the minister issued orders to shut down Indian channels," Shah says. "But we resumed [televising] Indian channels on our own. We were the first to begin after the minister's office said there was no order." The minister "indirectly gave an impression that the government is convinced that Hrithik indeed made that statement," comments Ghimre.
"I think Spacetime was quite circumspect in its coverage," he says. "There were other political dailies in this country that were totally chauvinistic and used inflammatory headlines and captions. Spacetime actually was mild." Indian intelligence officials, however, do not agree. "Spacetime did not bother to carry Hrithik Roshan's clarifications for over 48 hours," points out an officer. "When they did carry it, they put it on the back page with a dubious headline." Many hold the Nepali media responsible for the violence. "The media definitely did not double-check. It broke the great rule, the first rule of journalism: When in doubt, cut it out," Dixit says. Once the media whipped up passions, political groups and vested interests took advantage of the situation. Bamdev Gautam, leader of the nine-party Opposition coalition that led the protests, says it is not true that the ISI was behind the violence. Neither was the violence "organised". "It was mostly spontaneous," he claims. "People were taking out their anger at the failure of the Girija Prasad Koirala government." The violence, he continues, was not against India or Indians. It was against "an ineffective" government. "The ISI could be here. But the [Indian] RAW [Research and Analysis Wing) is more active," argues Gautam. "The attacks were on big Nepalis of Indian origin," says K D Vyas, till recently president of the Indian Citizens Association of Nepal. "Our face tells them that we are not Nepalis." The Marwaris, most of them Nepali citizens, according to Vyas, are "the single most influential business community in this country."
"And it was all pre-planned," he says. He sees it as the ISI's way of celebrating one year of the IC 814 hijack. That is the version being given out by Indian intelligence agencies, too. They believe if it was not planned, it would not have been possible for such violence to spread almost 11 whole days after the first protest erupted and ended in Chitwan. The areas worst hit in Kathmandu included the shopping malls of New Road, which is dominated by Indian businessmen. New Road houses hundreds of stalls mostly selling cheap electronic goods from China, Taiwan and Hong Kong. It is also a major centre for cosmetics and dresses. "My showcase was damaged, but there was no looting," says M D Mehta, a trader in the area. At the city's famous Everest Casino, a mob barged in looking for Indians. Luckily, the two Indians present escaped through a backdoor. Though the random violence is attributed to mob fury, observers are unanimous that the attacks on the Indian community was organised and planned. Indian intelligence officials say "mysterious people" were involved in the demonstrations that turned violent. Indian Ambassador to Nepal Deb Mukharji, too, believes there is more to the violence than meets the eye. "I find it rather curious the violence was so spontaneous and seemed so well-organised. And very, very sudden," he says. "Normally one would expect a build up of emotions before something of this nature would happen. That was not so." Pradeep Shreshta, president of the Nepal Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the apex body of Nepal's trade and industry, is not so cautious. "The people involved were not common people. They were not seen here often," he says. He feels the violence was committed by hired groups from outside the Kathmandu valley. Kashmiri leader Saraf claims that among the demonstrators was an "employee of the Pakistan embassy who got hurt in the firing." Parroting the Indian intelligence version, he says the man was treated "in private" by the embassy. Kunda Dixit says the people who carried out the attacks were part of some organised mob. "All of them were very young," he adds, "probably hired from outside." However, Dixit is not sure about the ISI involvement. In fact, he feels the Indian media routinely go overboard and "see" Pakistan's hand in everything that happens in Kathmandu. "[But] There is definitely some kind of political involvement in this," he avers. If the political entities had not played it up, he continues, it would have burnt out without violence. The indiscriminate attacks were "directed at the state machinery." As Dixit puts it, the violence was against "the disillusionment with the elected leaders who were not able to deliver basic services and the perception that corruption has got totally out of hand. The people are not just blaming the politicians, they are blaming the system." "There were no government for two days. There was no one coming out with any statement, or doing anything to stop it. When they did act, it was with unnecessary violence where they shot five young people," he adds. Opposition leader Bamdev Gautam repeats that the violence was not against India. "It is a lie that Indians were the targets," he says. "Some vehicles were damaged, some Marwari shops and houses were also attacked. But these Marwaris are not Indians, but Nepalis mostly."
"These problems have nothing to do with India. These are indigenous problems," he says. Among the groups that are said to have taken advantage of anti-India sentiments are Maoist guerrillas who have been staging a bloody battle against the government. They have tremendous support in the hill regions. Indian intelligence officials say ''they could have played a crucial role.'' One thing intellectuals and observers agree on is that India need to look beyond the ISI in Nepal. There could be, as many feel, other socio-economic factors whipping up anti-India sentiments.
Interview with former Nepal PM Krishna Prasad Bhattarai
The Kukri Factor | Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 More specials
Photographs: Josy Joseph
|
||
|
HOME |
NEWS |
CRICKET |
MONEY |
SPORTS |
MOVIES |
CHAT |
BROADBAND |
TRAVEL ASTROLOGY | NEWSLINKS | BOOK SHOP | MUSIC SHOP | GIFT SHOP | HOTEL BOOKINGS AIR/RAIL | WEDDING | ROMANCE | WEATHER | WOMEN | E-CARDS | EDUCATION HOMEPAGES | FREE MESSENGER | FREE EMAIL | CONTESTS | FEEDBACK |
||
The dust and smoke have settled down in Nepal. Now it is question hour.
Defends Yubaraj Ghimre, editor of Kantipur, Nepal's leading daily and a former correspondent for Outlook magazine: "Normally for anything written in a newspaper the editor or the reporter concerned is called. In this case, that did not happen."
Kunda Dixit, a Columbia School of Journalism graduate who edits the English weekly Nepali Times, too, like Ghimre, feels there is no case against Shah.
Veerji Saraf, president of the Asia-Pacific Kashmiri Pandits Forum and a Kathmandu-based businessman, says the Indian community was at the receiving end.
Mana Ranjan Josse, columnist and a former editor of the government-run Rising Nepal newspaper, shares this view. He says in the past too there have been protests against statements from Bollywood, including a remark from actress Madhuri Dixit that Nepal was part of India.