Politicians, analysts reject Indian intervention theory | world | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Apr 24, 2017-Monday
New Delhi
  • Humidity
  • Wind

Politicians, analysts reject Indian intervention theory

world Updated: May 05, 2009 19:33 IST

Opposition politicians and independent analysts in Nepal have rejected the Maoist government's charge of Indian intervention in the country's internal affairs, terming it as "lack of political wisdom".

According to political analysts, the blame game by the Maoists displays a long prevalent tendency in the country to blame foreign countries, including India, for troubles in Nepal.

"This shows lack of political wisdom on the part of the Maoist leadership," said senior lawyer Dinesh Tripathi, adding, "there has been a tendency of blaming the neighbouring country for every rise and fall of governments in the past".

During his address to the nation while quitting government, Prime Minister Prachanda blamed foreign powers for the trouble in the country, pointing indirectly towards India.

I will better quit power than to bow to foreign powers to remain in the office, he said.

The Maoists' number two leader Baburam Bhattarai said that "India did a blunder" by supporting the army and the president in their unconstitutional acts.

Nepali Congress' chief whip in the Constituent Assembly, Laxman Ghimire, said the Maoists had themselves sought foreign support for their move to sack the Army chief.

Prachanda had recently summoned ambassadors of eight countries to seek support for his move to sack the army chief. "But when they did not endorse his idea, he made a hue and cry over foreign intervention in the affairs of the country," Ghimire said.

Civil society leader and Constituent Assembly member Nilamber Acharya said the Maoists have themselves chosen the path of confrontation by sacking the army chief unilaterally, and the Prime Minister was falsely accusing foreign and internal forces for toppling his government.

"Prachanda himself met Indian Ambassador Rakesh Sood for half a dozen times in connection with the issue of Army chief and when he did not get a favourable response he is talking about foreign intervention, which is ridiculous," he said.