Contemporary Political History of Nepal: Conspiracy Theory

Abstract

The contemporary political history of Nepal is the story of flawed Indian micromanagement in Nepal. The starting point of such history is considered as the treaty of peace and friendship of 31 July 1950 between Nepal and India and continues to date. The involvement of India in the internal affairs of Nepal including affairs of Nepal China relationships is related to India’s myopic neighborhood policy which is counterproductive to India; it raises anti-Indian feelings among the Nepalese communities of the hills and the Tarai except for the ones who are directly benefitted from such mal-policies. Indian occupation of Jammu and Kashmir right after Indian independence, Indian interference of east Pakistan resulting in the formation of a new state of Bangladesh in 1971, annexation of Sikkim by India in 1974, Indian intervention in Srilanka, Indian support to Moist insurgency in Nepal and repeated Indian blockade of Nepal are some of the highlights of the Indian neighborhood policies based on Nehru doctrine and closely followed by the Indian Ministry of External Affairs, MEA popularly known as the “south block” as well as carried out by RAW in Nepal are some of the Indian activities assumed to be carried out in the Indian interest of territorial expansion in the neighborhood including Nepal or at least extraction of natural resources of Nepal including water resources free of cost through unequal treaties made under Indian influence and pressure as in the past. As a consequence, most urgent flood water regulation projects in Nepal from the point of view of risk to human life and property as well as food reserve in India are at a limbo which together have caused the loss of over 25, 000 Indian lives due to floods and a cumulative loss of over 100 trillion US Dollar mostly in terms of food reserve and other benefits from the project since the Indian independence.

Part 1: Modern Historical Background 1947-51:

The contemporary history of Nepal starts with Indian independence in 1947 when large areas ruled by over 565 princely states (10) of Rajas and Maharajas in the Indian sub-continent were merged into modern India at the same time dividing it between Hindu dominated India and Muslim dominated Pakistan, which itself was divided into east and west Pakistan located over 1500 kilometers apart with independent India in the middle (17). But, four independent kingdoms namely Jammu and Kashmir, Nepal, Sikkim and Bhutan, all of them sharing boundary with Tibet who were not readily agreeing to join the Indian federation. There was hot debate for different reasons among the ruling elites of India on how to treat these four (15). In the meantime, Jammu and Kashmir, a country with majority Muslim population ruled by a Hindu king Hari Singh was annexed to India in October 1947 through the Instrument of Accession (10, 36) has been shared between India and Pakistan through bullets; the war still continues along the line of control, LOC. Sikkim was annexed by India about 20 years later in the seventies (12); Bangladesh got independence from Pakistan in 1971 thanks to direct military intervention of India (11, 12). Nepal and Bhutan are both independent countries; both are members of the United Nations’ Organisation, UNO.

As far as Nepal is concerned, there were three independent lines of thought in India regarding its existence (15): Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel of Gujarat strongly favored the merger while Dr. Rajendra Prasad of Bihar, the first president of India favored an independent Nepal and in-between the two stood Pundit Jabahar Lal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India who favored an independent (?) Nepal totally under Indian control. This line of thought is often termed as Nehru doctrine which is a blend of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and President Rajendra Prasad’s philosophy about India’s northern neighbors followed to date by the Indira congress and the south block cadres trained and educated by Nehru and his descendants in congress I.

Part 2: End of Rana Rule

The Ranas, called Shree 3, ruled Nepal on behalf of the Shree 5, the Shahas with all the power with the Ranas (22, 23) for over a century. Civil movements to obliterate Rana rule started in the early thirties from Kathmandu but it continued more in Indian cities of Banaras, Patna and Calcutta than in Nepal. Inspired by the Indian movement for independence, mostly the Nepalese students formed Nepali Kangres, Communist party of Nepal and some other political parties whose ultimate goal was to abolish the Rana rule in Nepal but their ways of achieving the goal was very different and therefore splits and mergers were common phenomenon until the late forties in which Nepali Kangres, supported in India by Socialism oriented parties, emerged as the largest of all. These Samajbadi parties were rivals of Indian Congress to which Pundit Nehru, the Indian PM belonged and therefore the ruling congress party in India provided only superficial support to Nepali Kangres just in the name of democracy and a democratic party. All these political parties, big or small, were actively engaged in various political activities in Nepal and in India, which scared the Rana rulers. Therefore, the Ranas felt that they needed an external support, which means support from the Indian government. But as the Ranas were closer to the British in India, the ruling congress party had no sympathy towards them. Under such circumstances, the 1950 treaty of peace and friendship was signed in Kathmandu between Nepalese Prime Minister Mohun Shamsher Jang Bahadur Rana and the Indian Ambassador Chandreshwar Prasad Narain Singh on July 31, 1950 (36). Actually, it meant nothing much for India but Shri 3 Maharaja could sleep effortlessly with the treaty under his pillow. Shambhu Prasad Gyawali, a noted lawyer and former minister of Nepal considers this treaty as the milestone event that could establish Nepal as an independent country (28).

India had a different plan for Nepal (6). It strongly favored dethroning the Ranas as Shri 3 of Nepal and reinstating the Shah rule so that the Shahs would be obliged to regain power after a lapse of over 100 years, which they could not have thought as something possible under the given circumstances without the Indian support and plan. This Indian support to reestablish them in the position of real maharajas could either help the Indians assimilate Nepal into India (6, 22) in line with sardar Patel’s doctrine or at least have independent Nepal ruled from Delhi with a remote control switch in their hand (6). The added benefits for such action would be multisided which apart from a puppet king in Nepal include abortion of Nepali Kangres led armed revolution favored and supported by Nehru rivals in the socialist parties and entry into India of millions of US Dollar worth of moveable wealth in the hands of the Ranas from Nepal, which actually belonged to the people of Nepal.

As per the Indian Plans, the king Tribhuvan of Nepal took shelter at the Indian embassy with all of Tribhuvan’s family excluding prince Gyanendra, who happened to be away from the palace on that date of November 6, 1950 (16). It is evident that king Tribhuvan who had wives from the Rana families did not go to the Indian embassy with all in his family including the women and children without any plan and preset arrangements as well as assurances including arrangements for his safety on the way from the palace to the Indian embassy in Lainchaur (6). As the Indians were aware of the benefits from the changeover in Nepal including political benefit in Delhi, it must have been planned meticulously by the Indians themselves and accordingly briefed to the Nepalese royalty, who followed the Indian plan to regain the lost power by surrendering himself with his family at the India embassy on the preplanned date. As expected, the Ranas put prince Gyanendra to the throne of Nepal (8).

There is no written evidence of any Indian involvement in the above plans but it is logical to guess that they must have been planning for at least 6 months in advance and that plans to take shelter at the Indian embassy could have been postponed a few times due to one or the other reasons that could have included privacy, security and secrecy required to carry out the plan flawlessly at least until the royal surrender at the Indian embassy. This is based on the fact that India is the only country to benefit from such a change in Nepal; India is still suspected to be reaping the benefits of this investment. This means, the Indians were already in the Nepalese palace since May or June 1950 which means that the Indians must have been working on both the agenda in parallel for at least a few months until conclusion of the 1950 treaty of peace and friendship in July 1950 (36).

King Tribhuvan and his family stayed over 3 months in Hyderabad house in Delhi from November 10, 1950 to February 18, 1951 (23). During this period, the India led negotiation between the king and the representatives of the Ranas and the Kangres concluded an agreement according to which new council of ministers led by Mohun Sumsher (without Shri 3 signifying the end of Rana rule and the beginning of the Shaha rule) was formed in which B. P. Koirala was appointed as the minister for home affairs (3, 38). This was the beginning of modern active kingship in Nepal. During the period of this council of ministers, most of the Rana families were allowed to transfer their moveable assets from Nepal to India. In addition, the secretary to the council of ministers of Nepal was an Indian national (15) appointed probably either by India itself or upon advice from Indian authorities starting the era of Indian direct micromanagement in Nepalese governance and politics. The council of ministers led by Mohun Sumshere continued till November 1951 and a new council of ministers led by Matrika Prasad Koirala, chairman of Nepal Kangres, was formed by the king on November 21, 1951 (38). This nine month long rule of Mohun Sumshere must have been agreed to facilitate the transfer of properties belonging to the Rana rulers and their accomplishes from Nepal to India and probably for their settlement in India. It is estimated that billions of Dollar worth of properties in gold, silver, valuable gems and diamonds as well as cash was taken away by the Ranas from Nepal to India. The news of such transfer in the form of gossip (because there was no press except for the government controlled Gorkhapatra) of such wealth was spread all over Nepal and therefore a song “Bhayeko Dhana Badera Khane Desh Ko Paisa Bideshma Nalane” which means “share the property rather than taking it away to another country” became a Nepali Kangres slogan of pre-general election era.

In addition, Indian military mission was established in Kathmandu which included establishment and operation of Indian military posts in about seventeen locations along the frontiers of Nepal that included Indian military posts in Nepal-China border as well as in Kalapani area lying near the Nepal-India border during this period (25). All such military posts were removed after about 17 years except the one near Nepal-India border at Kalapani Limpiyadhura area in 1969; the area was later termed as disputed area by India and finally annexed by India cartographically in 2 November 2019 which has become disputed in the real sense after Nepal decided to include it into its territory cartographically and got the formal endorsement in Nepal (14). Similarly new Citizenship Act 1952 was passed by the king Tribhuvan to facilitate Indian immigration to Nepal (6); this Act was duly amended (corrected) by king Mahendra through a similar Act in 1964.

Part 3: From November 1951 until 27 May 1959 (Baishakh 2016 BS)

The third period of modern history of Nepal starts with the appointment of Matrika Prasad Koirala, chairman of Nepali Kangres as the new Prime Minister of Nepal by king Tribhuvan (38). However, PM Koirala’s nine month long rule was terminated by the king for his reappointment in June 15, 1953 (38). The king directly ruled Nepal for 10 months between the two Koirala premierships. The first appointment of MP Koirala as the Prime Minister shows king Tribhuvan’s trust in Nepali Kangres which must have been unsatisfying to the king and his second appointment maybe the result of political bargain between the Kangres and the king who must have been worried about Kangres’s threat of armed revolt against him (obviously with Indian support) in addition to Indian pressure for his reappointment for concluding the Kosi agreement signed on April 25, 1954 (32) as a gift from king Tribhuvan to India for making him the king of Nepal with full authority. In the meantime, king Tribhuvan died on March 13, 1955 rather unexpectedly (37).

King Mahendra’s becomes the king on 13 March 1955, coronation was held on 2 May 1956 and continues till his death on 31 Jan 1972 (16). Mahendra’s era starts with a strong distrust to Kangres and India, both participants of the negotiation with the Ranas. The distrust to India must have been due to the Indian training to the Nepali royals prior to their surrender at the Indian embassy as well as during the royal refuge in Delhi. Some of the contents of the Indian preaching during the royal refuge prior to their return to Nepal to proclaim democracy in February 1951 and the deployment of Indian army at a number places along the Nepal China border as well as near Kalapani must have been offending to king Mahendra who had a sharp leadership qualities and political vision regarding how to lead his country. King Mahendra, therefore, started his rule by sacking the then Kangres Prime Minister Matrika Prasad Koirala within the first month of his ascent to the throne of Nepal (38) and continued a direct rule for the next ten months. One of the main achievements of this direct rule is that Nepal filed for the UN membership which was first vetoed by Russia probably upon Indian advice however the UN granted its membership to Nepal on 14 December 1955 (21). King Mahendra must have taken his own time to decide on the course he wanted to take politically during his rule as the king of Nepal.

Tanka Prasad Acharya, Chairman of Praja Parishad was appointed as Prime Minister by king Mahendra in Jan 27 1956 who continued in this capacity until 26 July 1957 when he was replaced by Dr. Kunwar Inderjit Singh (38). Diplomatic relations with the northern neighbor China was the milestone event of Tanka Prasad Acharya’s tenure as the Prime Minister of Nepal. These moves of Nepal are considered as king Mahendra’s attempts to move out of the Indian (security) umbrella and the timing of such move indicates king Mahendra’s irritation towards Indian interference in the internal politics of Nepal, the Kosi agreement of April 25, 1954 as well as their (undue?) demands including pressure for annexation of Nepal into India which must have started during the royal refuge in New Delhi (19) and the Indian brokerage of the Nepali politics starting 1950-51.

Nepali Kangres had been constantly applying pressure upon the king for a national referendum for constitutional assembly promised by king Tribhuvan in 1951 which must have increased when the king sacked the Kangres Prime Minister MP Koirala to appoint Acharya from the political rival party Praja Parishad. There must have been increasing pressure on the king from India in line with the pressure from the Kangres, which must have resulted in Mahendra finally agreeing to a general election instead of an election for constituent assembly. But neither the Indians nor the Nepali Kangres agreed to have the general election held with anyone from any party other than the Kangres at the helm of power, but Mahendra distrusted most of the Kangres leaders. As a conclusion of the negotiation, Subarna Sumshere JBR, a senior leader (not the chairman of the party) of Nepali Kangres of Rana background was entrusted by king Mahendra to be the next Prime Minister on 15 May 1958 until the general elections and the takeover by the elected government bypassing the then president of the Nepali Kangres party (38).

The general elections were held from 18 February to 3 April 1959 and the results of the same were announced after a few days but the king delayed the oath of office to the newly elected Kangres government headed by B. P. Koirala, the then president of the Nepali Kongres party until May 27, 2059 though Nepali Kangres had secured absolute majority (74 out of 109 seats) in the election (3). This signifies that the results of the general election were against the king’s expectations, that the king was not quite satisfied with the results and that he was not prepared to hand over the premiership of the country to anyone from the Nepali Kangres party because of his distrust to Nepali Kangres.

Part 4: Parallel rule of king Mahendra and Prime Minister Bisheshwar Prasad Koirala from 27 May 1959 to 15 December 1960

Both the king and the popularly elected Prime Minister were considering themselves as the rightful ruler of the country and hence, there was a situation of poly-archy in Nepal. Despite the repeated royal commitments of the past eight years, the sovereignty in practice did not lie with the people, which means, there was no actual democracy in Nepal.

The treaty of Gandak which is not in favor of Nepal was signed with India during the Kangres rule on 4 December 1959. Law maker Prem Singh Dhami relates the first camping of the Indian army at Kalapani to this period (Prem Singh Dhami, Maile dekheko Kalapani (The Kalapani as I saw), 25); the Indian military camp has grown to a full-fledged barrack with India presently claiming this area as the rightful Indian Territory (26). It seems to me that both the king and the Prime Minister were trying to obtain favor from India in which the then finance minister signed the agreement on Gandak water sharing with India whereas the king could reportedly get a go ahead from Pundit Nehru to dissolve the popularly elected government of B. P Koirala using his emergency powers. Hence, the circumstances thus created helped India gain more from Nepal despite king Mahendra’s unwillingness to give more.

Prime Minister B. P. Koirala made a state visit to China in 1960. But, Koirala remained as the PM until his dismissal and arrest by king Mahendra using his emergency powers on December 26, 1960 (3, 38); this was the end to the first phase of the so called “Democracy” in Nepal. All political parties were banned in Nepal on the same date. This coup by king Mahendra shows the political shrudeness of the king and the lack of political foresight and alertness in B. P. Koirala; it also shows that he was a popular leader but not a political visionary.

Part 5: Panchayat “Democracy” under Kings Mahendra and Birendra

The “democracy” brought in by king Tribhuvan as a result of Indian brokerage in 1951 continued till December 1960. After the coup, Mahendra continued his “democratic” rule until his death in January 1972 (16) with a new party-less form of “democracy” called Panchayat “democracy”. Most of the influential leaders of Nepali Kangres and leaders of many other parties resigned from their respective parties to join the government of “Mahendrocracy” while many political leaders continued their political activities from India as all political parties were banned and the political leaders jailed in Nepal. One interesting aspect of Nepal India relationship in the early sixties is the fact that the relations between these two neighbors improved after the Indo-China war of 1962 (6) despite numerous odds in their relationships described herein and despite the fact that the India backed democratic government was sacked by the king in 1960. This temporary improvement in relationship between Nepal and India maybe better understood in conjunction with Indian military camping in Kalapani Limpiyadhura area starting approximately this time period.  

Lot of developmental works in diverse nature were carried out during the 11 year long tenure of king Mahendra who, in fact, started the industrialization of Nepal, conceived and executed major connectivity projects of national interest as the east-west highway, Kodari highway which not only provided motorable access to China but helped connect Nepal together by ending the compulsion of using Indian soil for accessing Nepalese destinations from Kathmandu. King Mahendra established the Tribhuvan University and promoted the use of Nepali language in school curriculum while the political leaders mostly based themselves in India and fought for their political rights in Nepal as such activities were denied by king Mahendra who was very active diplomatically as well as politically within and outside Nepal.

Nepal received international recognition and fame during the Mahendra rule but it also lacked the sincere delivery mechanism to deliver to the Nepalese People. All the periodic plans failed one after the other as if the periodic plans were the reminders of development activities that could be considered during and after the planned periods for developing Nepal. The failures were attributable to the facts that most of the plans were prepared from offices in Kathmandu lacking any linkage between the reality in the field and the contents of the periodic plans. One of the other main reasons of failure can be attributed to the events linked with king Mahendra’s attempts to withdraw Nepal from the Indian umbrella to the extreme dissatisfaction of the Indians; trade embargo as well as economic blockade imposed upon Nepal by India which are contrary to some of the important international treaties signed by both the countries, are signs of Indian dissatisfaction towards Nepal’s internal as well as foreign policy closely linked to India’s diplomatic failure in its closest neighborhood. Indian dissatisfaction of that time is linked first with the discontinuation in Nepal of using Indian currency for local transactions and its replacement by the Nepalese currency. Similarly, it is linked with king Mahendra’s efforts to have one single common language that could bind all the Nepalese together; the Indians wanted that language to be Hindi which is widely spoken in north Ganga basin in Bihar and UP as well as serves as a common language of Nepal’s Tarai whereas king Mahendra preferred Nepal’s own language called Nepali or “Khas bhasa” which uses the same “Devanagari” script as Hindi and belongs to the same family of languages. Indian frustration got skyrocketed when the Indian military posts located within Nepal along the Nepal China border were removed by king Mahendra in the late sixties. Some of the historians try to link this act of Nepal to the death of king Mahendra in January 2, 1971.

King Birendra’s rule continued in the similar way as the last period of king Mahnedra but with his least possible involvement in politics while his wife, queen Aishwarya, started to appear more and more in the political as well as in social arena of Nepal. It was felt that the presence of king Birendra was limited mostly to his annual month long tour to various development regions where he got briefing from the central as well as the regional leaders and other respectable people of the society who advised him about how the country should be developed; political leaders also briefed the king about the political situation of the region mostly blaming the Nepali Kangres activists who were branded as anti-national elements or “Arashtriya Tatwa” and their activities banned as anti-national as well as anti-social. It was an era of development slogans together with various scandals “Kandas” like carpet kanda, passport kanda, gai kanda, gadha kanda and so on and so forth. Immunity provided to the main actors involved in above mentioned scandals indicated a direct connection between the main actors and the palace.

But poverty grew so grew the public dissatisfaction and probably nothing related to national development followed despite colorful banners and attractive and popular slogans. Indian pressure as well as pressure from Nepali Kangress and sometimes the communists to disban the political parties seen through the activities of their student wings, still legally organized in Nepal continued. Rumors of corruption, smuggling including smuggling of drugs as well as theft of valuable idols of the deities’ involving the royal palace were frequently heard as dissatisfaction among the common people mounted leading to national referendum 1980 which again was rigged in favor of the palace resulting in more dissatisfaction of the common folks. Nepali politics was dominated by Aishwarya sponsored Gunda Raj called Gau Farka national campaign. Indian politicians and the Indian media were openly advocating in favor of the multiparty democracy while the banned political parties were actively engaged in various political agitations that led to the formation of a common political front in favor of multiparty democracy forcing the king to make the necessary royal announcements in favor of the political parties and multiparty democracy in 1990 thanks to direct Indian involvement in the process. The 16 months long Indian economic blockade of Nepal starting in March 1989 (21) helped the movement for democracy. This must have relieved the king of his daily political routine while the others in the palace were reportedly extremely dissatisfied about the political change. Krishna Prasad Bhattarai was appointed as the new premier (38) upon advice to the king from Ganesh Man Singh, who was reportedly preferred by the king for the post of Prime Minister.

Part 6: Multiparty Democracy and Peoples’ Republic post 1990

The multiparty democracy thus established with a new constitution in 1990 saw more Indian involvement in the day to day affairs of Nepal due mainly to insincerity of the political leaders of all the parties with the exception of a very few that include Krishna Prasad Bhattarai of Kangres, Man Mohan Adhikari of the communist party, UML and probably Sushil Koirala of Nepali Kangres. The political leaders supported the Indians as long as they received the Indian blessings first to get appointed but in most of the cases they failed both to their masters in India who pushed them to power as well as to the people of Nepal who voted them to power. All the industries within the government umbrella mostly constructed under financial assistance to Nepal from China and Russia were sold as scrap; some of such facilities have been in operation to date on the other side of the border. This move of the Nepali Kangres government brought the chances of industrial employment of the Nepalese people to a minimum bringing the industrial contribution of the GDP to all time low at the same time increasing Indian dependency of Nepal on the one hand and practically forcing Nepalese to be sold at the international labor market in India, Gulf countries and Malaysia on the other. This could also put an end to “dictatorship of the proletariat” in Nepal by a party with a philosophical base of socialism (18). Import of electricity in the name of solving the problem of load shedding in Nepal, particularly, in Kathmandu has increased the Indian dependence many fold.

Part 7: Main events post democratic era starting from 1990 until Gorkha earthquake, April 2015

The Indians mainly the Indian congress must have been frustrated with Nepali politicians whom they not only supported politically but also paid in cash though most of them did not deliver as per the investments on them nor did they deliver in favor of the people of Nepal. This is evidenced by their support to the breakaway communist fraction, Nepal Communist Party ‘Maoist’ who with financial as well as firepower support from India took to the jungles while their leaders received military training at a military training camp near Dehradun. All the children of the CPNM leaders got free education in India while they were terrorizing innocent Nepalese people collecting extortion and looting them while the school going children of the common people were compelled to join their rebellion army while their children enjoyed freedom in India free of cost. Apart from putting the leaders to power, this movement divided Nepal along various social discontinuities as casts and races against the existing age old social fiber despite the fact that such seams have already proven to be unsuccessful in many poor developing countries of Asia and Africa.

The other most important event is the signing of Mahakali treaty in 1996 against Nepal’s interest preceded by Tanakpur agreement. These two events clearly show India’s interest on free water from Nepal by bribing the Nepali politicians of all political parties. Nepalese politicians seem to be on sale!

It is very interesting to note that the Indians have been successful in bagging Nepal’s water resources in 1954 as a gift from king Tribhuvan, in 1996 as gift from the political parties for pulling them to power and the Gandak treaty of 1960 from both the king and the Kangres probably utilizing the murky political climate created by the short lived poly-archy.

The third important event is step by step illegitimate blocking of flood waters naturally flowing into India during the monsoon floods and export of the flood back to Nepal in one or the other pretext to the extent that some of the so called highway bridges have been designed with gates against the internationally accepted principles and norms of highway bridge design. This also includes the construction of Laxmanpur barrage in north UP, which is an example of bad engineering but maybe a good example of neighborhood policy prophesied by Congress I in India and lamely followed by other political parties at the helm of power. This is the example of seamless brotherly relationship between the two neighbors based on “bread and bride” on paper whereas the reality seems to be just its opposite.

The other important factor of this era includes step by step encroachment of Nepalese territory with the involvement of the corrupt Nepali officials deputed for the purpose of border delineation probably involving their seniors in power. To this date, Nepal has border disputes with India at over seventy locations despite being unduly favored by the surveyors probably under undue influence from the authorities from across the border while the local communities living along the Nepal side of the border are left complaining about loss of their land due to such encroachments.

But the most important events of the democratic era of Nepal starting 1990 is the de facto nomination of Nepalese Prime Ministers by midlevel Indian bureaucracy in south block and RAW duly supported by the Indian politicians in power. This continues to date.

Therefore, the annexation of Kalapani Limpiyadhura area cartographically by India in 2 November 2019 looks like a systematically planned event that must have been started with the blockade of 2015 when Nepal was struggling to find solution to problems caused by great Gorkha earthquake that killed almost 10,000 people and damaged over half a million houses around the central part of Nepal. The first step could even be the Indian support to the victims of the Gorkha earthquake which reached Kathmandu even before the first cabinet meeting of the council of ministers in Kathmandu took place showing extreme concern which is against the international practice of providing such assistance upon request from the respective government. As the cause of the economic sanctions (blockade) as reported in the local as well as international media has practically nothing to do to India except their political interest or any other undisclosed interest, it is assumed that the move was directed towards this annexation. This hypothesis gets strength upon appointment of the retired foreign secretary, who imposed the sanctions in 2015 to the post of foreign minister of India probably for the first time ever by an Indian Prime Minister who has tremendous respect for the first home minister of India, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, aspirant of Indian annexation of Nepal post Indian independence, both of whom happen to be from the Indian state of Gujarat. Other events that support this hypothesis are: unprecedented historical unification of two rival communist parties of Nepal before the general election, joining of Upendra Yadav led party to the communist government despite the communist government’s comfortable majority and their departure from the cabinet right after the Indian annexation of Kalapani Limpiyadhura in November 2019, appointment of a very senior ambassador by India to Nepal about to retire within a month or so after annexation and unprecedented weak condition of the Nepali Kangres, the main opposition party, almost without any political agenda despite securing a comfortable number of total votes in the last general election in 2017. The delay from November to May in taking actions similar to the one taken in May by the government of Nepal against the Indian annexation of the Kalapani Limpiyadhura area may also indicate some kind of a political connection to this annexation.

The rumors of Indian political activities in Kathmandu to remove Prime Minister K. P. Oli from the premiership together with the Chinese activities can be read as the main headlines of some of the online news media in Kathmandu as I am finalizing this write-up.

References:

1. Aditya Man Shrestha, 1999, Bleeding Mountains of Nepal, Ekta Books, Kathmandu

2. Babu Ram Acharya, 2058, “Aba Yesto Kaile Nahos”, History of Nepal in Nepali language

3. B. P. Koirala, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._P._Koirala

4. Birendra of Nepal, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birendra_of_Nepal, June 24, 2020

5. Chitra K. Tiwari, Dr., The People's War: Maoist Insurgency in Nepal, from Himal Magazine, Nepal news archives, https://thirdworldtraveler.com/Nepal/PeoplesWar_MaoistInsurg.html, June 25, 2020

6. Dhamala T., 2074BS (2018), Raja Tribhuvan Ra Dilli Samjhauta in Nepali (king Tribhuvan and the Delhi agreement), Koseli attachment of Kantipur daily, 5 Falgun 2074, page ‘kha’

7. Dwarika Nath Dhungel, Dr. and Madan Kumar Dahal, Prof. (edited by) 2018, Nepal A Country in Transition, Rupa Publications India, P. Ltd, New Delhi, India

8. Gyanendra of Nepal, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyanendra_of_Nepal

9. Gyawali D., 2016, From Lose-Lose to Win-Win: What will it take to undo the damage in Nepal-India relations?, JNU, New Delhi, February 01 2016 published by editors M. Shrestha and A. Shakya, Nepal-India Relations: New Dimensions and Responsibilities (Kathmandu: International Concern Center, 2016. ISBN 978-9937-0-1236-8), based on the talk delivered at the School of International Studies, JNU.

10. Hemant Singh, Aug 06, 2019, History and date of formation of Indian states since 1947, https://www.jagranjosh.com/general-knowledge/history-and-date-of-formation-of-indian-states-since-1947-1565097028-1

10. History of East Pakistan, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_East_Pakistan, June 26, 2020

11. India – Nepal, https://countrystudies.us/nepal/65.htm

12. Kul Chandra Gautam, 2016, Lost in Transition, Rebuilding Nepal from the Maoist Mayhem and Mega Earthquake, Nepa-laya, Kathmandu

13. India's updated political map stirs controversy in Nepal, News/Asia, 8 November 2019, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/11/india-updated-political-map-stirs-controversy-nepal-191108130802391.html

14. Maharajakrishna Rasgotra, 2016, A Life in Diplomacy, Viking by Penguin Books India, Gurgaon, Haryana, India

15. Mahendra of Nepal, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahendra_of_Nepal, June 24, 2020

16. Partition of India, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_of_India

17. Nepal & UNO – Things to Know about Nepal in United Nations Organization, https://www.imnepal.com/role-of-nepal-un-united-nations/

18. Nepali Kangres ko Bidhan 2017 BS (Constitution of Nepali Kangres 2017) revised and updated 2075 BS

19. Political Activities between 2017 BS and 2046 BS, https://kullabs.com/classes/subjects/units/lessons/notes/note-detail/968

20. Political History of Nepal, https://www.weallnepali.com/blogs/Bijaya-Ghimire/nepalipoliticalhistory

21. Purushottam Shamshere JBR, 2002 (2059 BS), Shri 3 Haruko Tathya Britaanta Bhag 1 (True Story about the Shree 3s, part 1), Bidhyarthi Pustak Bhandar, Bhotahiti, Kathmandu 

22. Purushottam Shamshere JBR, 2070 BS, Mera Jivan ka Smritiharu, (from my memoriy in Nepali) Bidhyarthi Pustak Bhandar, Bhotahiti, Kathmandu 

23. Rama Devi Pant, Feb 29, 1959, First General Elections in Nepal—I , Recent Political Trends, https://www.epw.in/system/files/pdf/1959_11/8/first_general_elections_in_nepalirecent_political_trends.pdf, pp 285-290 with a note on the first page which reads as quote “See my article 'A Turn in Nepal Polities' in 'The Economic Weekly', October 10, 1953 (pp 1117-1118) in which I held that the formation of the Nepali Democratic League (on September 21, 1953) might have a good effect on the country's future politics. However, its premature death after only a month dashed this hope.” Unquote which could not be consulted, unfortunately.

24. Ratan Bhandari, 2073, Atikraman ko Chapetama Limpiyadhura-Lipulek (Under the pressure of Encroachment), Collection of Historical Documents in Nepali

25. Sangeeta Nair, November 7, 2019, Kalapani Territorial Dispute: Origin, history, significance, territory map, Nepal's objection, https://www.jagranjosh.com/current-affairs/kalapani-territory-all-you-need-to-know-why-nepal-objects-its-inclusion-in-new-indian-map-1573112411-1

26. Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel’s letter to Jawaharlal Nehru on 7 November 1950

27. Shambhu Prasad Gyawali, Baishakh 2057 BS, Bharat Sanga ko Shanti ra Maitri Sandhilai Farkera Herda in Nepali “Looking back at the Treaty of Peace and Friendship 1950 with India” , Kanun Patrika (Journal of Law No 20 dated 2057 Baisakh) pp 3 and 4

28. S. P. Asa, 2065, Lok Tantra Agi Ko Mhabharat (Mahabharat Prior to the Peoples’ Republic) in Nepali, Self Published 

29. Subarna Shamsher Rana, Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subarna_Shamsher_Rana, June 24, 2020

30. Sudhir Sharma, 2070, Prayogshala (Laboratory), in Nepali, Fine Print, Kathmandu

31. Surya Nath Upadhyaya, 2011, International Water Course Law and a Perspective on Nepal-India Cooperation, Ekta Books, Kathmandu, Nepal

32. Tanka Prasad Acharya, 78, Ex-Nepal Chief, The New York Times, April 25, 1992

33. Tek Nayaran Bhattarai, Remembering the 1989 Blockade, Nagarik Magazine 2-8 March 2018, https://archive.nepalitimes.com/article/from-nepali-press/Remembering-the-1989-blockade,2651

34. The Secret to History of Indian Blockade of Nepal [1989-2015], https://www.bing.com/search?q=The+Secret+To+History+Of+India+Blockade+Nepal+%5B1989-2015%5D&form=ANNTH1&refig=1485821cb4d34fd2995d8fc78bc47327

35. Treaty of Peace and Friendship Between the Government of India and the Government of Nepal, Signed at Kathmandu, on 31 July 1950.

36. Tribhuvan of Nepal, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribhuvan_of_Nepal, June 24, 2020

37. We all Nepali: First to Current Prime Ministers of Nepal, https://www.weallnepali.com/about-nepal/prime-ministers-of-nepal

38. William Kirk and Rais Akhtar, Jammu and Kashmir, Union Territory, India, https://www.britannica.com/place/Jammu-and-Kashmir/People