Kathmandu: It has been months since the major political parties in the country have taken to the streets. They demanded firstly, the appointment of Madhav Kumar Nepal as Prime Minister. Secondly, they have been asking for the restoration of the dissolved parliament. The Congress-Deuba demanded Deuba’s appointment as Prime Minister. These demands, it is said by the agitators, are to prevent “regression”. Regression is being defined in whichever way as the assertion of the Monarchy.

It is this definition of regression that seems to be contradictory. The partisan media hides the fact that the agitating parties are asking that the Monarchy assert on their behalf. The constitution, it is untold, leaves no room for the monarchy to assert. In other words, what the parties are saying is for the monarchy to take another “unconstitutional” measures that benefit the parties.

At the public level, this contradiction is exposed. Moreover, what is in no case hidden is that the agitating parties retained the monopoly of politics under the constitution and it is these principal actors and not the monarchy that contributed to the current constitutional crunch. Moreover, the anarchy of the past some years has made obvious that the King must seek a solution that will in no case add to the problems the agitating parties have created and the parties are seeking merely to perpetuate their monopoly in politics which is the “problem”. At another level, the fact that the Maoists entered the ceasefire so soon after the King’s sole became predominant is not lost upon the people who are aware that the agitators contribute more to disrupting the talks than in helping a solution.

It is this that keeps the people away from the agitation. Despite threats of disciplinary action against absentee cadre, both the Congress and the UML are finding it difficult to perpetuate their agitation. This makes it a compulsion for the agitating leadership to raise the pitch against the monarchy and woo radical commitments. This radicalism is likely to scare liberals further away from participation. The parties clearly have boxed themselves into an uncomfortable corner where any compromise would ridicule the leadership. This, of course, the leadership doesn’t want.

Prime Minister Surya Bahadur Thapa is aware of this. He has thus decided to let the agitation take its own course. His offer of participation remains. Since the leadership of the agitators will not take the bet,. Thapa finds the moment opportune to strengthen his own politically disturbed organization within the RPP from the position of government. In other words, the problem he is supposed to address may be conveniently left dangling on the excuse of unresponsiveness on part of the agitators. The problems will however, mount. Left to its own course, the unresponsiveness of the agitators and the political use of Thapa’s office in government will reflect on the Monarchy. The people are expectant and demand a decisive and directional resolution of the mounting national problems.

One major problem if left to take its own course, the Maoists problem, is likely to be explosive. It’s impact on the affected population at this juncture is likely to be negative. And, so, again, it is the people and the State that will be affected.

Clearly thus, what is being seen is that response to the people’s expectations is overly due much as the people may keep away from the agitation that will not be allowed to do so if the effort is merely to maintain a status quo that can ultimately mean merely a return to the chaos experienced a year ago. For this, Prime Minister Thapa will have to do more than merely use the King’s authority to serve his politics. In so many ways the people are already asking the meaning to themselves of HM King Gyanendra’s October initiatives. So far the establishment has been taking comfort in the lack of popular participation in the agitation. The fact is that there is little step yet at arousing public participation in support of the Royal initiative as well. It is this participation that must be mobilized in order to prevent the agitation from growing. Until then the question “Where are the People?” will remain.