Read Aloud the Text Content

This audio was created by Woord's Text to Speech service by content creators from all around the world.

Text Content or SSML code:

The assassination of King Birendra Shah was a massively influential change in Nepal from both social and political standpoints. In this presentation, I will be discussing the Nepalese royal massacre, which was the event wherein King Birendra was murdered, and go through the Nepalese perspective of the event. The assassination occured on the first of June, 2001. The death toll after the event at the Narayanhiti Palace was 10, and left 4 others wounded. All of the casualties were part of the royal family. Within the casualties was the alleged assassin, Crown Prince Dipendra, who passed away while comatose after reportedly shooting himself in the head. Other notable figures who were killed include King Birendra and Queen Aishwarya, the parents of Prince Dipendra. During this period there were no significant global events occurring which would prompt the murder. However, it is believed that the assassination was sparked due to a relationship between Prince Dipendra and Devyani Rana, a member of a formerly royal Indian family. It was theorised that marrying her would create ties between India and Nepal, due to Rana’s familial position. This would’ve supposedly allowed for India to have more control over Nepal, which was heavily opposed by King Birendra, and many theorise this is what caused the Prince to act out. Questions on who truly conducted the massacre have still been left unanswered. This is due to Nepalese officials in charge of the investigation denying police force Scotland Yard from allowing any forensic investigations, creating suspicion in regards to the case. Other theories include Prince Dipendra wanting the crown for himself (which he does in fact attain while comatose) or the theory of being manipulated by his uncle, the final king of Nepal, King Gyanendra. However, all-in-all, the Nepalese community were filled with disbelief at the thought that the “very friendly and likeable” Prince Dipendra could wipe out his family, causing doubts as to who truly caused the massacre. This assassination is considered important as it drastically changed the dynamics of Nepal and was the largest scale royal massacre to happen. The assassination is also important on a global scale as the assassination lead to the government system to be fully in the hands of the Maoist Party, also known as the Communist Party of Nepal. During 2001, the monarchs were in the transition between complete rule and constitutional monarchy. The assassinations pushed the monarchy onto the remaining family member, “the deeply unpopular and authoritarian King Gyananedra.” “Coupled with [his] messy reign”, the monarchy collapsed, and the Communist Party of Nepal gained complete control over Nepal. The Maoist group are the current government of Nepal, and since 2008, they have changed the system of government from a monarch-led society to a communist, democratic society. As quoted by Vivek Shah, military secretary of the former king, “If King Birendra was alive today, Nepal would still be a monarchy,”, indicating that the change in government regime was a consequence of the assassinations. Therefore, it can be seen that the assassinations have great importance on the country of Nepal. The assassination of King Birendra challenged society as it showed how easily Nepal could become unstable. The country became something like a headless chicken after the massacre, as the royals were a constant in the lives of Nepali citizens for 2500 years. The event sent Nepal’s political and social landscape into frenzy. Politically speaking, the crown was passed between 3 people within a week; from King Birendra, to coma-stricken Prince Dipendra, to King Gyanendra, creating confusion the public and other government parties. Socially, the murders created alarm and instilled fear into Nepalese citizens. Also, Nepalese citizens had held the royal family in high regard, especially King Birendra, who was regarded a “symbol for unity”. The source is an extract from the article “If Birendra Was Alive, Nepal Could Still Be a Monarchy” by Alisha Sijapati. The quote is from King Birendra’s military secretery, Vivek Shah, who worked with the king for over 27 years. Overall, the source is somewhat valuable when communicating the importance of the assassination. The source relays the differentiation between current government rule and what it would be like if it were under King Birendra’s rule. However, the quote is from the perspective of a trusted associate, whom may feel the need to protect King Birendra’s name, further backed up by the subjective tone. In turn, the source is reasonbly valuable in conveying the relevance of the assassination. The extract is quite limited in conveying the impact of the assassination. The context of the source is the 20th anniversary of the massacre, wherein Shah discusses with a NepaliTimes journalist on his memories of King Birendra. The main audience would be Nepali public or those fascinated by the Nepalese royals. Although Shah may have been close to the King, he couldn’t’ve predicted the King’s actions. Therefore, the quote is rather limited in expressing the significance of the assassination.