Kathmandu: Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba claims to be serious in restoring peace in the nation and clearly hints that he would need a further extension to the state of emergency in the country.

President Koirala too forwards his claim that he was serious in safeguarding the system from seen and unseen quarters and for that he too needs all pervasive support to his almost abstract Broader Democratic Alliance plan.

The UML is also in the same race and maintains that its sole desire is to see a vibrant nation wherein all the people could live in peace and that the government of the day must heed to some of their tips in order to save the country from the approaching economic collapse. In the process the party also requires some tangible support from the rest of the political actors of the nation.

The RPP and the Sadbhavana apparently too give the impression that in order to save the country from going to the brink, a sort of national consensus has got to be instantly worked out and warns that failing to do so will bring only disasters in the country. In the process the RPP wishes to bag the “confidence” of the constitutional monarch as well.

If one were to analyze these three separate wishes of the three/four different political parties, what one could grasp is that all wish an economically prosperous nation and that all were more or less concerned with the present fluid state of the nation. Moreover, what is also evident from their separate desires is that all of these political forces conclude that a mechanism has got to be developed that enjoys the total and unconditional support and sympathies from all the sectors of the Nepali society which could revive the sinking health of the nation more so after the imposition of the state of emergency.

What also becomes clear from their wishes is that all would wish to see the state of emergency lifted at the earliest.

However, the political parties do not take responsibilities for the sorry state of the nation. For they must understand that it were these political parties who at different intervals of time had been in power and that the present day pathetic state of the nation were their combined contribution.

To shift blame onto others’ heads is very easy job indeed. However, to accept the responsibility for the mal-performance or bad governance during one’s own tenure in government is a very difficult task.

The majority of the Nepali population who were left into the cold after the restoration of the democratic order would wish that the political parties who ruled the nation after 1990 accept that they too had contributed for the present state of the nation.

The population which was not allowed to participate in the mainstream national politics would ask the leaders of the NC, UML, RPP and the likes as to who caused the sudden growth of the Maoists insurgents? What were the causes that forced the Nepali youths to join the bands of the insurgents?

Thanks that the visiting US dignitary Colin Powell could understand that the utter frustration and the lack of job opportunities for the illiterate youth of the remote parts of the country could also have caused this insurgency to grow in no time.

A personality who had never been in Nepal could conclude that it should be the mal-governance and practically no deliverance of goods to the “democratic” people of this country by the successive governments formed in Nepal after 1990 too could have amply contributed to the geometrical growth of the insurgents and hence the state of emergency.

Accepting the facts and the failures caused due to one’s own weaknesses will benefit politically in the long run. However, the fact is that none of the political parties wish to accept the blunders they committed while being in power.

Can Koirala escape from this accusation? By the same token can Madhav Nepal escape from the same? Can S.B.Thapa collect the courage that he did not commit mistakes during his tenure in government?

The fact is that all these political parties while in power concentrated their efforts either in amassing wealth and thereby contributed to the furtherance of corruption in the nation or remained busy in making the national politics a dirty one.

The grand reduction buy/sale of Nepali lawmakers; sending lawmakers to massage parlors in Bangkok; forcing the dubious lawmakers to go in on for hibernation and tempting one’s own lawmaker to cause the collapse of its own party government; making the international airport free for gold smugglers are some of the few notorious actions which Nepali democracy witnessed well within twelve years of democratic rule.

Who is to be blamed for all these ugly practices? Is it the lay men to be blamed? Or should the men who allowed such sad practices to prevail be penalized?

Issuing statements and weeping for the sorry state of the nation will not work now. The people know who is what now. Shedding crocodile tears will not improve their already tarnished and corrupt image among the public.

Has Nepal become guardian-less? Is there any authority who would listen to people’s grievances?

This is not to provoke the constitutional monarch to intervene. Nepali Intellectuals wish that the constitutional monarch remains where he is at the moment. However, if he is really the guardian, and perhaps He is as per the existing constitution, He could summon the men handling the system and could warn them all and instruct them to deliver goods. If He does so perhaps will be in the fitness of the things.