Search This Blog

Monday, 20 May 2013

Hindu-Buddhist Civilisation

This is my response to a piece in The Hindu, "Nepal is not Sikkim":

An independent, stable and friendly Nepal is in India's national interest. But India should not terminate the special relationship with Nepal w.r.t. cultural and military ties. There are certain sections within Nepal who seek to maintain parity between India and China, which is absurd as Nepal is an integral part of the Hindu civilisation and has no relationship with the Han civilisation. Only possible cultural link between Nepal and China is Tibetan Buddhism, which is also quite distinct from Chinese Buddhism and was imported from Eastern India. It was a mistake on part of Jawaharlal Nehru to lose all of India's interests in Tibet to China, because Tibet is also culturally much closer to India than to China. Fortunately, India did not lose Ladakh or Arunachal Pradesh, has maintained its special role in Bhutan and also gave shelter to Dalai Lama and other Tibetan refugees. It goes to the credit of Indira Gandhi that she was able to integrate Sikkim to India. Nepal has nothing to fear.

This is my response to:

I don't understand why Nehru allowed China to occupy Tibet without any opposition. If Tibet was a part of China because it had been under Qing sovereignty for two centuries, then why did Nehru liberate Goa, which had been under Portuguese sovereignty for 450 years? It is time India revives its ties with Buddhism all over the world. Only a strong Hindu-Buddhist civilisation can defend itself against the American hegemony on the one hand and China-Pakistan axis on the other.   

No comments:

Post a Comment