Prachanda, the caretaker PM of Nepal (TOI)

Kathmandu that he wants to put relations with China on the same footing as that with India.

KATHMANDU: Confident of his party regaining power, Nepal's caretaker prime minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal, a.k.a. Prachanda, said on Friday that he would not stand ``foreign pressure' and that he would like to bring relations with China at the same level as those with India. He added that some in Nepal believed that New Delhi had an unfair advantage built into the treaty that governs India-Nepal ties.

Prachanda's erstwhile revolutionary party, now rechristened United Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) after a recent merger with another extreme Left faction, holds a dominating position both within and outside the interim Parliament.

This has put the former guerrilla, who stepped down as PM on Sunday, within striking range of power again. The Maoists have 238 representatives in the 601-member Parliament, while its frontal wing, Young Communists League, of former militias, calls the shots in most districts.

``We want to have a pact with China on the lines of the 1950 India-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship. I had planned to prepare ground for this during my trip (now cancelled) to Beijing,' Prachanda said. ``We want the same kind of friendship with India and China.'

The 55-year-old leader clarified he would never play China against India and India against China. ``India should not suffer from such imaginary fears,' he said. At the same time, he added, ``We want to replace the 1950 treaty with India with a new one.'
Prachanda claimed that the 1950 treaty, regarded as the basis of Nepal's unique relationship with India, does not represent aspirations of the Nepalese people. ``Instead, our people feel cheated by this treaty. They say it is loaded in India's favour.'

But he chose to remain non-committal on the Maoists' long-standing demand for an end to the practice of recruiting Nepalese Gorkhas for the Indian and British armies.

In an oblique reference to reports of India and other countries expressing displeasure at his decision to sack the chief of army staff, Gen Rukmangad Katuwal, the outgoing PM said, ``We're determined not to bow before any kind of external pressure. We took action against the general to establish civilian supremacy over the military.'

He added, ``Many Nepalese feel that India should not put at stake its contribution to Nepal's peace process.'

A little before he spoke to TOI, Indian ambassador to Nepal Rakesh Sood had called on Prachanda at his official residence. This was the fifth meeting between them since early this month.

The Maoist chief rejected claims by his detractors from within and outside Nepal that integration of the Peoples Liberation Army into the Nepal Army would be dangerous for the landlocked nation. ``Such integration can make the Nepal Army a truly national army. Why should our countrymen keep on fighting against each other,' he asked. ``PLA fighters can also be absorbed in the armed police or the industrial security forces.'

Prachanda blamed the Nepali Congress, the second largest party with 114 seats, feudal elements and royalists for the fall of his government. ``These forces never wanted us to be in power. Moreover, some big powers backing these elements were also against us,' he said.

Nepali Congress, regarded by observers in Nepal as a pro-India party, is now backing the move of the moderate Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist Leninist) to form a new government. The latter, which was in the Prachanda government, has 109 seats. The fate of the Maoists and moderate Communists depends on the support of the three parties of the people of Indian origin Madhesh Janaadhikar Forum, Nepal Sadbhavana Party and Terai Madhes Loktantrik Morcha which together have 83 seats. The first two were in the Maoist-led government.

              You resigned as PM at a critical time. Nepal is in the middle of a peace process. It’s preparing to write a new constitution...

I didn’t step down suddenly over an individual (chief of army staff). There’s a background to this. Right from the beginning, internal forces linked to privileged and feudal elements were against us. They never wanted us in power. Again, there were external elements who did not want us at the helm.

Could you identify these forces?

First, Nepali Congress could never bear to see us in power. People loyal to the palace were trying to create instability in the country. There are big foreign powers that back elements inimical to us.

You cancelled your China visit after your allies pulled out of the government over your move to sack Gen Katawal. That led to your exit. How do you look at these developments?

It could be a planned strategy or a coincidence. It’s also true that there are forces that did not want the (Beijing) visit to take place. A lot of things were being said about the trip.

Was it the right time to go to China?

This was my first official visit to China. I’ve already made a similar trip to India. I had gone to China during the 2008 Beijing Olympics.

Is it true that you planned to sign a special treaty with Beijing?

Yes. We want a pact with China on the lines of the 1950 India-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship. We could have prepared the ground for this. We had planned to formalize it only after taking other political parties into confidence. This treaty would’ve had no negative impact on our friendship with India. We just want to strengthen our ties with China according to the changed situation in Nepal. We are now a republic.

But you want to overhaul the 1950 treaty with India.

It’s because this treaty doesn’t represent the aspirations of the Nepalese people anymore. Many leaders in New Delhi also in principle support our demand for a fresh treaty.

Have you pinpointed the changes you want in the treaty with India?

At heart, the Nepalese people feel cheated by this treaty. They say it’s loaded in India’s favour. Why should Nepal seek India’s consent on its security? The treaty doesn’t deal with economic issues according to the size of the two countries.

Does your party still stick to its headline demand for an end to Gorkha recruitment?
(smiles) We can talk about it later.

In India, many feel you try to play the China card...

As PM, I’ve never played China against India and India against China. There’s certainly a kind of imaginary fear in Indian political circles that Maoists play the China card against India. Such things can complicate matters for both sides. Our relationship with India has its own special characteristics because of the open border and cultural affinity. Similarly, our ties with China have their own specialties because of the Himalayas. We want equal friendship with both and gain from their rapidly-growing economies.

Hasn’t China shown extra interest in Nepal in recent months?

It’s true that Nepal has received a number of delegations from China. Maybe, after last year’s trouble in Tibet, China has become more sensitive towards Nepal.

There’s a feeling within and outside Nepal that you faced opposition from India while dealing with the army chief. Why?

Many Nepalese suspect India’s hand in the row. They feel India shouldn’t put at stake its contribution to Nepal’s peace process for the sake of one particular individual. The dispute over the army chief arose because he was trying to undermine civilian supremacy over the military. People of India and Nepal have an emotional bond. I’ve no negative feeling towards India and its people. But as a sovereign nation, we’ll never bow before any external pressure.

How do you put yourself vis-a-vis India?

I haven’t worked against India’s interests. Instead, I’ve followed the joint statement that we signed during my visit to India. We’re trying to take concrete steps to address India’s security concern.

Many complain that you are pursuing the Maoist agenda by attacking the media, religious institutions, the judiciary and the army.

These are allegations by a particular class that’s yet to come to terms with our rise as Nepal’s biggest power. This class doesn’t have anything to do with the peasants, workers, Dalits, Madhesis and other groups that have been deprived of their rights for ages.

Didn’t Nepali Congress and Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist Leninist) go against court decisions in the past? As a mainstream leader, how will you maintain a balance between the three magical powers of Maoist revolutionaries — party organization, People’s Liberation Army and united front of support groups?

--http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/South-Asia/Well-not-bow-to-foreign-pressure-Prachanda/articleshow/msid-4501448,curpg-2.cms