There is no fear in preaching that Ram is born in Nepal: Prime Minister Oli
Speaking at a programme organised by his party, CPN-UML's Tourism and Civil Aviation Department, Oli said his claims are based on the original 'Ramayana' written by sage Balmiki (Valmiki).
'We talk about tourism. But how can someone just make a story about Ram being born somewhere else, specifying the place? Ram was born in Nepal. It is in Nepalese territory; that place now lies in Nepal. I won't say it was Nepal even then. Where was it, where wasn't it? Was it a Tharu village? But now that territory is in Nepal. Ram is God; it is up to you to believe it or not. Those who believe Ram is God, Ram's birthplace is sacred. We are not able to preach it much. We don't preach more about it. We don't dare to do so. It feels awkward. I think it's annoying,' the Prime Minister said.
The Prime Minister also claimed that other figures from Hindu mythology are also from Nepal. 'Shiva is from here, Vishwamitra is from here. I am not saying this; it's written in Ramayana, in Balmiki's Ramayana. Vishwamitra says that Ram crossed the Koshi River and went west, and taught Lakshmana.' Oli added.
He suggested that the places mentioned in the epic now lie in Nepal's Sunsari district, stating, 'I didn't write that. It is clear that Vishwamitra is from Chatara.'
This is not the first time Oli has made such statements.
In July 2020, he claimed that the ancient Ayodhya lies in Thori, Chitwan, Nepal, and ordered the construction of a Ram temple there. At the time, he had argued that Ram Janmabhoomi rightfully belongs to Nepal and cannot be reassigned by 'creating a story.'
'Balmiki Ashram is in Nepal, and the holy place where King Dasharath had executed the rites to get his son is in Ridi. Dasharath's son Ram was not an Indian, and Ayodhya is also in Nepal,' Oli had said.
In defending his position, he had questioned how Ram could have travelled from present-day Ayodhya in India to Janakpur to marry Sita without any communication infrastructure.
'Janakpur lies here and Ayodhya there, and there is talk of marriage. There was no telephone or mobile -- how could the place be known? It was impossible at that time. It could have been nearer, so he came -- but that history is beyond discussion,' Oli had said.
Oli also stated that there are differences over claims of Ayodhya that exist in India, which at that time had drawn flak within the party.
Members of the ruling Nepal Communist Party had criticised Oli for making remarks that have a direct link with the religious sentiments and thoughts of people.
Nepal's Foreign Ministry also had to issue a release clarifying the issue, which has been brought to the limelight repeatedly by Oli. Weeks before the September 2020 claim, Nepali Prime Minister Oli had also sent idols of Ram and Sita to be installed in the temple planned in Thori, Nepal. (ANI)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
23 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Top Trump adviser to visit India for IMEC meeting
The Trump White House's top official on South Asia, Ricky Gill, is expected to visit India for a summit focused on the India Middle East Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) next week, according to persons aware of the matter. Gill's visit is expected even as bilateral tensions between New Delhi and Washington have risen in the last week over tariffs and India's energy purchases from Russia. US President Donald Trump announced a 25 per cent, plus a penalty, on Indian goods on Wednesday. (File/AP) Gill, who is currently Senior Director for South and Central Asian Affairs at the powerful National Security Council, is expected to hold meetings with top Indian officials as well as representatives from a number of European nations. The NSC, which is based out of the White House, typically functions as a powerful body that coordinates military, economic and diplomatic policies across a range of government departments and agencies. Gill is a veteran of the first Trump administration, when he also served in the National Security Council handling Russia and European energy issues. Gill has also served in America's State Department. The IMEC Summit, which will be hosted in New Delhi on August 5 and 6, will be attended by officials from European and Middle Eastern nations that are prominent backers of the ambitious connectivity scheme. Launched on the sidelines of the G20 Summit in India in September 2023, IMEC was a planned economic and trade corridor that would link India's economy to markets in Europe through the Middle East. India, America, the European Union, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, France, Germany and Italy were the key signatories to the 2023 Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) that established IMEC. Talks on operationalising IMEC's connectivity corridors have faced headwinds due to the outbreak of conflict in West Asia after the October 7 attacks in Israel. 'It has definitely been a source of concern for us and the kind of expectation we had when the agreement was signed in September, we have had to adjust it a bit,' said India's External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar in 2024, some months after the outbreak of the conflict between Israel and Hamas. The IMEC summit in New Delhi is expected to push discussions on the trade and connectivity corridor forward. However, the meeting will also take place in the backdrop of increasingly tense relations between India and America. On Wednesday, US President Donald Trump announced a 25% tariff on India, plus an unspecified penalty for purchasing Russian energy products. The two countries have been unable to clinch a trade agreement despite the fact that talks were launched in February 2025. On the same day, Washington concluded a trade agreement with Pakistan and pledged to help develop the country's 'massive oil reserves'. Later, in a post on his social media platform Truth Social, Trump lambasted India and Russia as 'dead economies'. It is as yet unclear if present bilateral tensions will impact Gill's plans to travel to India. As Trump's top South Asia policy hand in the National Security Council, Gill has a crucial role in shaping the White House's approach to India. However, in April, the size of the NSC was halved after a number of staffers were either let go or retired to their parent government departments. This has affected the NSC's traditional influential role in shaping American foreign policy. However, Gill is still considered one of the few India hands in a position of authority in the Trump administration. Paul Kapur, Trump's nominee to lead South Asia affairs at the State Department, has not yet been confirmed by the United States Senate. There have also been no announcements about the administration's plans to nominate an Ambassador to India. This matters particularly at a time when the bilateral relationship has faced some strain. The IMEEC will comprise of two separate corridors, the east corridor connecting India to the Gulf and the northern corridor connecting the Gulf to Europe. The corridor intends to enhance connectivity, increase efficiency, reduce costs, secure regional supply chains, increase trade accessibility and generate jobs, resulting in a transformative integration of Asia, Europe and Middle East. (b) to (e) An Intergovernmental Framework Agreement (IGFA) between India and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) concerning cooperation for operation of the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEEC) was signed on 13 February 2024. The main elements of the Framework include development and management of a logistics platform, including a digital ecosystem, and provision of supply chain services to handle all types of general cargo, bulk, containers and liquid bulk in order to enable IMEEC.
Hindustan Times
23 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Are Rohingya illegal migrants or refugees? Supreme Court to decide
The Supreme Court on Thursday began examining whether Rohingya entrants staying in the country are refugees or illegal migrants, as it heard a batch of petitions filed on their behalf challenging their deportation and seeking remedial steps to give them basic amenities during their stay in refugee camps. Advocate Kanu Agarwal appearing for Centre submitted a list of cases pertaining to Rohingyas and urged the court to decide this batch of cases first.(File/ANI) A bench headed by justice Surya Kant said, 'The first major issue is whether they are refugees or illegal migrants. The rest is consequential.' 'If they are refugees, they are entitled to certain protections under law. If not, they are illegal migrants and should be deported back to their country,' said the bench, also comprising justices Dipankar Datta and N Kotiswar Singh. The court took up a batch of 22 cases involving the deportation of foreigners who are either in detention camps or are claiming refugee status. The bench directed that the cases related to Rohingya migrants be segregated into a single batch. It directed that cases concerning other foreigners be clubbed into a separate batch to be taken up separately. The four questions the court framed in the Rohingya batch of cases included, 'whether Rohingya entrants are entitled to be declared as refugees and if so, what protection emanates from the rights they are entitled to; whether Rohingyas are illegal entrants and if government of India and states are obligated to deport them in accordance with law.' There were two consequential issues also that were framed by the court: 'Even if Rohingya entrants are held to be illegal entrants, can they be detained indefinitely or they are entitled to be released on bail subject to conditions.' Lastly, it said, 'Whether Rohingya entrants who are not detained but living in refugee camps have been provided with basic amenities like drinking water, sanitation, education, etc.' As the batch of cases got listed together, the bench expressed a practical difficulty in proceeding with the hearing of the matter as some petitions talked of deportation of foreigners in general, while others specifically related to the condition of foreigners in detention camps. Advocate Kanu Agarwal appearing for Centre submitted a list of cases pertaining to Rohingyas and urged the court to decide this batch of cases first. The non-Rohingya matters, he added, seek interpretation of the Foreigners Act. The bench said, 'The issues that arise in the other batch of cases will be determined separately on another date.' Advocate Prashant Bhushan appearing in multiple petitions said that the genesis of these cases began with cases filed by Rohingyas in 2013. He said 15 out of the batch of 22 cases pertained to Rohingya refugees and the need for providing them facilities in their camps at par with refugees recognised under the UN Convention on Refugees. India is not a signatory to this convention and has not considered grant of refugee status for them. Senior advocates Ashwani Kumar and Colin Gonsalves, appearing in other matters, pointed out that Rohingyas who hail from Myanmar have fled to India seeking asylum as they are being persecuted in their country. Gonsalves further referred to a case filed by the wife of a foreigner facing detention in Assam which concern Rohingya and non-Rohingya foreigners. In that case, Gonsalves showed orders passed by the court to expedite the deportation process despite the fact that Myanmar is unwilling to take these persons back. In May this year, while hearing an application filed by Delhi-based Rohingya migrants, the top court had refused to adopt a piecemeal approach in deciding individual cases and called for all cases pending on the issue to be listed together. The Centre has been opposing the maintainability of these petitions citing an order of the top court of April 2021 passed in a petition seeking protection for Rohingya refugees. This order permits the Centre to take deportation measures as required under law. This order held that while the right to life and liberty is available to even non-citizens, the right not to be deported is ancillary but concomitant to the right to reside or settle in any part of India, which is guaranteed under Article 19(1)(e) only to citizens.
Hindustan Times
23 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Will defend national interest, says Centre after tariff shock
India will take 'all necessary steps' to secure its national interest, commerce minister Piyush Goyal told parliament on Thursday, a day after US President Donald Trump announced punitive tariffs on Indian goods. While acknowledging Donald Trump's Wednesday post as reason for making a suo moto statement in Parliament, Piyush Goyal on Thursday reiterated the Trump administration's April 2 executive order.(File/ANI) 'The implications of the recent development are being examined by the government,' Goyal said in a suo motu statement, making a tacit reference to Trump's Truth Social post on Wednesday that India will face a 25% reciprocal tariff plus an unspecified additional penalty for purchasing Russian crude oil from August 1. The minister said the commerce ministry is engaged with all stakeholders, including exporters and industry for taking feedback on their assessment of the situation. Trump's reaction was an outcome of India refusing to budge on retaining protections for its agriculture, dairy and micro, small and medium enterprises from unfettered American imports. On Thursday, the American president continued his targeting of India. 'I don't care what India does with Russia,' Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on Thursday. 'They can take their dead economies down together, for all I care.' In Washington, a US appeals court sharply questioned whether Trump's tariffs were justified by the president's emergency powers, after a lower court said he exceeded his authority with sweeping levies on imported goods from a wide variety of countries. The US emergency powers law 'doesn't even say tariffs, doesn't even mention them,' one of the judges said. 'The government attaches the utmost importance to protecting and promoting the welfare of our farmers, workers, entrepreneurs, exporters, MSMEs and all sections of Industry. We will take all necessary steps to secure and advance our national interest,' Goyal told both houses of Parliament. People close to the development said the Trump administration is yet to send any formal communication over the tariffs or the quantum of the penalty. 'Situation will be clear in the next two days, which will help to assess the impact for considered action,' one of them said. 'The government is in touch with stakeholders and the industry is willing to cooperate with the government,' a second person said. Both people requested anonymity. They said negotiations for the proposed first tranche of the India-US bilateral trade agreement (BTA) are continuing, and so far, the New Delhi visit of the American negotiating team is unchanged on August 24 for the sixth round of talks. Federation of Indian Export Organisations (Fieo) director general Ajay Sahai said: 'The current development seems temporary as both sides are negotiating a BTA, which will resolve issues of punitive tariffs. Meanwhile, during this temporary phase, both exporters and importers may absorb the impact of the US tariff action.' Industry experts said not all Indian goods would be subjected to reciprocal or punitive tariff as about 45-50% goods by value fall in the exempt category. India exported goods worth about $86 billion to the US in 2024-25. Sectors such as electronics, energy, pharmaceutical ingredients, and precious metals remain exempt from additional duties under existing US trade regulations, potentially protecting billions in Indian exports. However, key export sectors such as textiles, engineering goods, and processed foods face the full tariff burden. According to the people mentioned above, since Trump's message came informally through a social media handle, the minister ostensibly chose not to mention specific details of the President's Wednesday post in Parliament. Instead, he recounted the last official position of the White House in the executive order. While acknowledging Trump's Wednesday post as reason for making a suo moto statement in Parliament, Goyal on Thursday reiterated the Trump administration's April 2 executive order. 'I would like to apprise the House about the statement by the President of the United States of America (US) on 30th July 2025 regarding the applicable tariff on bilateral trade from 1st August 2025. On 2nd April 2025, the US President had issued an executive order on reciprocal tariffs imposing additional duties ranging from 10% to 50% on imports from its trading partners. A baseline duty of 10% has been effective from 5th April 2025,' he said. 'The additional duty on India was announced at 26% including baseline tariff of 10%. Originally, the full country specific additional duty was to be effective from 9th April 2025 but was postponed initially for 90 days on 10th April 2025 and further extended up to 1st August 2025,' his statement in Parliament said. India and the US entered into negotiations for a fair, balanced and mutually beneficial bilateral trade agreement (BTA) in March 2025 with a target to complete the first tranche of the agreement by fall of 2025, the minister said. 'The two sides finalised the detailed Terms of Reference (ToR) to enter into negotiations of the BTA on 29th March 2025 during the first physical round of discussions held at New Delhi. Thereafter, four physical rounds of negotiations have taken place between both sides, in New Delhi and Washington D.C., to work towards finalisation of the BTA in accordance with the agreed ToR. In addition, there have been many virtual meetings between the two sides,' he added. On Wednesday, Trump indicated that the two countries were still negotiating. US secretary of state Marco Rubio on Thursday offered a more nuanced view of the relationship in a Fox News podcast, describing India as a strategic partner while acknowledging the energy purchases as a 'point of irritation.' 'Like anything in foreign policy, you're not going to align a hundred percent of the time on everything,' Rubio said. 'India has huge energy needs and that includes the ability to buy oil and coal and gas that it needs to power its economy like every country does, and it buys it from Russia, because Russian oil is sanctioned and cheap.' However, Rubio emphasised the administration's frustration with the arrangement. 'Unfortunately that is helping to sustain the Russian war effort. So it is most certainly a point of irritation in our relationship with India—not the only point of irritation. We also have many other points of cooperation with them.' 'What you're seeing the President express is the very clear frustration that with so many other oil vendors available, India continues to buy so much from Russia, which in essence is helping to fund the war effort and allowing this war to continue in Ukraine,' he added.
