Nepal: Is India behind the Nepalese Royal Family massacre?

could it be any less obviuos. King Birendra was a true Nepali patriot. From the moment he ascended the throne, it was clear that he was not going to let Nepal suffer the fate that, the then neighboring nations of Nepal were suffering. Kashmir vanished in 1950's. Southern Tibet 1951. Tibet 1951. (by China) Bhutan made an Indian protectorate. Nagaland 1963. Manipur 1972. Sikkim in 1975. Mizoram 1987. The rate at which countries were disappearing around Nepal at the time of King Birendra, its a wonder how he managed to save Nepal. Most Nepalese don't realize this now, but history will surely judge King Birendra as the greatest Nepali king, that ever lived. Who benefitted the most by killing King Birendra? The answers are but obvious:- 1) Gyanendra 2) India Well now that even Gyanendra is gone, we can safely say India played him as a toy and threw him away when his usefulness was over. Same thing with the Maiost. India created Nepali maoist to plunder Nepal into complete chaos and made the country ungovernable for anyone. India also successfully used the Maoists to grant millions of illegals aliens with Nepali citizenship. And once their usefulness was over India threw them away as well. Now, just wait and see till India uses Madheshis to split Nepal into two nations. King Birendra knew all along that India cannot be and should not be trusted. That's the reason why he was eliminated.

While none of the answers here provide any evidence of Indian (or anyone else's) involvement, it is noteworthy that the assassinations took place in 2001 and within a mere five years of these, the Maoists came to power. The Maoists on attaining power steered Nepalese foreign policy, which had until this point maintained a fine balance between India and China in a decidedly pro China direction. It should also be noted that while the Chinese government did not officially support the Maobadi's they shared an undeniable kinship in terms of their Maoist ideology. Prachanda himself, has gone on the record to say that Nepal is "morally and emotionally attached to the Chinese dream". http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2013-05/28/c_132415023.htm With China's post cold war foreign policy being almost exclusively economy driven and given her preference for client states as is demonstrated by her various involvements in Africa- http://www.wikistrat.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Wikistrat-China-as-Africas-de-facto-World-Bank.pdf and the Maoist dominated governments own eagerness to do business almost exclusively with the Chinese, it seems (atleast to me) that the  Maobadis and the Chinese stood to gain the most out of the massacre. Add to this the incidental benefit of having friendly relations with a government (UCPN's) hostile to their only plausible regional economic/military rival's (India's), right on their doorstep points to a reasonable motive for Chinese involvement in the killings.  In the Maobadis they may have found willing partners and Gyanendra might just have been a pawn, which would explain his (possibly deliberate) bungling up of the anti-Maoist operations between 2001 and 2006 and his unilateral suspension of democracy and other autocratic dictats during his last days as king, despite which he was not prosecuted by the subsequent UCPN government. Looking at events from this perspective would lead one to believe that it was Prachanda's Maobadis with Chinese support who were behind the Nepalese royal family's massacre. OR It just could be that Dipendra got pissed drunk and in a fit of rage at being admonished by his dad, killed whoever he could find in the range of his (rather impressive) weaponry, whilst being mentally incapacitated on account of the booze. I tend to believe the drunken Dipu version more than any conspiracy theories, but that's just me! The fact is that, in the absence of conclusive proof any hypothesis (including mine) is just that - a conspiracy theory.

Well after having read a lot of content from different sources, I believe that there is no point in having thought of India as "not behind the Nepalese Royal Family massacre". Im not that good at history so if you find any wrong information in my post do let me know. After India gained Independence (I doubt it. Its not on papers though), The Government Of India wanted democracy in as much countries as possible. On priority were its neighbouring countries namely Sri Lanka, Nepal,Bhutan,Burma,Sikkim. The task was given to RAW to make sure that these countries are forced to follow democracy and to establish a friendly government there. RAW took this seriously and as a mission with two objectives. (1. Democracy 2.Friendly Government).  1)RAW supported LTTE in order to force the Sri Lankan Government to establish friendly relations with India. 2)RAW made sure that the monarchy in Sikkim is demolished and Sikkim became a part of India. 3)RAW under Operation Leech earlier supported the KIA (Kachin Independence Army) in Burma (Myanmar) but later withdrew its support after successfully conducting elections in Burma. Nepal, on the other hand was in favour of total monarchy. In Nepal the King held the absolute power. King Birendra favoured China way more than India and after the Indo-Chinese war of 1962 it was a major concern for the security services. What I feel here is that may be after trying all the other options, killing the entire race of the ruling royal family was the only option left with RAW. King Gyanendra was a mere pawn in the whole plan. I don't believe the crown prince would kill his own father. A prince is named the crown prince after making sure that he has all the capabilities of being a King. Now a prince who is drinking heavily and is on drugs will never be a crowned prince. Not to mention having "not good" relations with his father. The reason we don't know what actually happened with the royal family is that it is a strict culture in Nepalese Royal Family that what's inside family remains inside the family. Also, the Nepalese history doesn't supports any earlier incidence of a crown prince killing the King and if you notice, the relations of India and Nepal  weren't very friendly during the reign of King Birendra, as mentioned he imposed work permits on Indians. I would not criticise RAW for the covert operations since it works for the national security. Country comes first. Every country tries to either dominate the neighbouring country or have a friendly relations with it and RAW might have felt the Royal Family as a threat to the countries security. Its not a big deal. Now coming to the point why is there no evidence of any such activity is that RAW works very very intelligently,not to forget it handles the country's external security. Supporting a rebel group in some country is OK but killing the entire royal family can never be justified in any court by any law. We being the common citizens might never know what really happened but all we can do is imagine what could possibly have happened. Looking at the intensions and other operations carries out by  RAW in various countries I don't doubt that RAW might have played  a major or minor role in the entire massacre.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.  At this point there is no evidence for India's involvement in the murder of King Birendra. The charge you've levelled on India means they've violated international law- it's a big claim. Most of the probable motivations you've provided stems from when the King was in power, to murder him when he was just a ceremonial head, and of no real political significance in Nepali legislative process again takes away a bulk of the reasons you've provided. If  there was a real need to remove King Birendra from the conversation, 1980's would've been the perfect time, why 2001? Lastly, this is what we do know, all of the witnesses who were present, or suffered physical harm during the murder of the king point to Dipendra being the culprit. BBC panorama covered this story, and it seemed pretty clear that it was indeed the crown Prince who had committed Patricide, Matricide, Regicide, sororicide, all in one terrible summer night. Apologize for typos, I don't bother correcting grammatical errors.

The Anonymous who have written above and his followers, upvoters needs some real enlightenment. They really really need to read about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mizoram https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manipur https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagaland Kashmir and Southern tibet or Arunachal And also about Sikkim that who actually attacked on whom how many times. And was any of the states annexed etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_integration_of_India Learn how the British left no single stone unturned to leave India completely broken, torn apart in to internal communal conflicts and war between the 222 princely constituency and how Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel helped in the making of United India as we see today. If Abraham Lincohn didnt have untited America then the population would have still be fighting to there own personal gain and the United States would never have been achieved. But even then Nepal was never in the picture of annexation. It was given the full recognition by the British as an Independent Country but a vassal state of the British but it was a completely independent nation to independent India. In short, India have never ever claimed on Nepal and it will never claim on Nepal. We are proud of your nation. More then the population of Nepalese in Nepal there are Nepalese in India and half of the Nepalese population from Nepal comes here for employment and livelihood. If we would have been that judgemental and ill in our gestures than I do not have to clarify what India is capable of. Secondly, every neiboring nations around the world have skirmishes, have political and social clashes but that does not determines the sentiment of the entire country. Nepalese are revered and loved in India and same we have received there. Stop this hate jabbering. Change your attitudes and relish that is good and beautiful and mutual between us. If you correctly read the history of this Hindu Mahadweep (subcontinent) then you will be proud of this such a bad neighbor of yours. You didnt had to take even a single communal violence, muslim invasions that we have to face, had faced and seen division so be bit grateful for this neighbor of yours. Be grateful that we still is safeguarding our culture somehow and see Nepal as an Ideal hindu nation. I salute to the Diplomacy of Birendra who understood this.