Response to Op-ed of Siddharth Varadarajan

In the Hindu, Siddharth Varadarajan writes: Linky
My response to his op-ed which I posted on the Hindu webpage:

The author seems to have whitewashed the atrocities committed by the YCL, the "student" wing of the PLA and the fact that the maoists have never come close to disbanding the YCL. He has also ignored the fact that the PLA has not stood by its commitments that led to the 2006 12-point agreement. Almost every one of the mainstream parties -- from the Nepali Congress to the United Marxist-Leninists to the Terai-based outfits -- have complained, often vociferously, at the violations of the 12-point agreement by the YCL and the CPN (maoist).

Further, it seems to be that as long as "mainstream" Nepalis believe a certain version of the story, the author assumes them to be a fact, independent of whether the Indian Embassy in Kathmandu has denied this or not. Under this rubric falls the accusations of i) newsprint for Kantipur -- when the Kantipur folks did not get the export/duty form completed properly for shipments from Calcutta, ii) threats to Ram Kumar Sharma -- it is a case of my word vs. your word unless there is proof, iii) "punishment" to the maoists -- again a rhetorical device devoid of proof on the ground, etc. All this begs the question: who is the author batting for? One could certainly assume that Shri Siddharth Varadarajan -- a US citizen -- would possibly bat for his home country's interests over the country of his origin. Following on Shri Varadarajan's logic, it is a case of my word vs. his word on this matter.

Other questions that seem to have been missed by Shri Varadarajan: Why is Pushpa Kamal Dahal still trying to bulldoze his way into a Government when four polls have repeatedly shown that he cannot lead a consensus government? Why is that the Nepali Congress, United Marxist-Leninists and a good fraction of the Madhes parties, cutting across party lines, are not keen on seeing Prachanda in power? Why is it that Baburam Bhattarai has to take a backseat when he could ably lead a consensus government? Why is it that India should not coax a consensus government in the first place in Nepal?