![]() Friday, Feb 11, 2005 |
| Opinion | ||||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Opinion
-
Letters to the Editor
Sir, Why is it being argued that by imposing Emergency and assuming all powers, King Gyanendra has plunged Nepal into a crisis? Nepal was undergoing a crisis under the so-called democratic government. A crisis existed when the Maoists' writ ran across most of the districts and nothing was done about it. It was not as if the people of Nepal enjoyed civil liberties when the insurgents struck terror at will. King Gyanendra has made it legally possible to crack down on the insurgents. Whether his move will yield the desired result, one cannot say. But it was certainly called for.
Harshvardhan Saraogi,
* * * Sir, Many argue that democracy is not so important when a country is in the grip of insurgency. What they fail to appreciate is the fact that the Maoist problem in Nepal is a by-product of oppression, exploitation and marginalisation of the people of rural Nepal. By curtailing civil liberties of the people, this problem cannot be solved. A better and long-lasting solution can come out only from participatory democracy and not from a military adventure.
Rajib Dahal,
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | The Hindu Images | Home |
Copyright © 2005, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|