Kathmandu: King Gyanendra will have presumably a very difficult time in the days ahead in dealing politically with the Nepali Congress President Girija Prasad Koirala who in the recent days has been making vitriolic remarks against the King.

Add to this the tirade that is being aimed at the King by the rest of the political parties now in agitation.

Koirala made an off the cuff remarks against the King and said that if the King continued to ignore their demands, the King would not find even a piece of three meters of land for himself.

Analysts consider Koirala’s fresh utterances as to have been the strongest and the most hard one since the former began hitting the monarch after the latter took a step as back as October last year. Analysts hasten to add that Koirala’s off-the cuff expressions against the constitutional monarch at some point of time might irritate the latter who could hit the NC president back with yet unknown measures.

“Koirala appears to have gone crazy to the extent that he has crossed all the limits in deriding at the monarch whose repercussions could well put the country in yet another danger”, said one political science teacher at the University on conditions of anonymity.

Hastens another political analyst who says that even if the King retaliates to Koirala’s outbursts, he would do so through the Government of the day. In effect, the government under Thapa has already reacted strongly Monday when it said that the establishment would henceforth not tolerate any untoward comments being made by responsible politicians against the symbol of national unity that is the King.

This means that the government under Thapa too has taken Koirala’s somewhat erratic utterances very seriously. Understandably, if the government loses patience and Koirala or for that matter the five agitating parties continue to make scathing remarks at the King, things might go upside down. If this happens would mean that the already fragmented country, politically speaking, would receive yet another jolt whose consequences could be disastrous.

Koirala’s fresh remarks against the King appears to have been made when the speaker knew well that his mild tones and political overtures were not sufficient to jolt the monarch and that he could make the monarch to listen to his demands only if he spoke harsh and uncivilized words against the King.

The fact is that speaking rough and tough words against the monarch might not serve his political purpose. What he and his colleagues in the opposition should have done to use their own channels for a straight tête-à-tête with the King and convince him of the rationality and of the relevancy of their demands in a quite cool manner.

However, the fact is that Koirala is a different personality for whom the nation and the King come only after him because he is Koirala—the younger brother of late B.P.Koirala.

What Koirala forgets, recall analysts, is that the present day Koirala is a tainted and painted Koirala who differs from a Koirala who used to be a symbol of political freedom, liberty and democracy. However, all along these twelve years of the democratic dispensation the Koirala who is leading the present movement sans the people is a Koirala who is engrossed in a series of financial scandals of the Lauda and the Dhamija dimension.

All in all, what analysts, wish to suggest the Koiralas’ and the men in the present day establishment that wisdom must prevail and any untoward event arising out of Koirala’s fanatical statements must be nipped in the bud. Or else the stage is set for a big-fight in between the monarch and Koirala in particular and the rest of the agitating parties in general.

Analysts modestly suggest the conflicting parties not to aggravate the matter in the larger interest of the nation.

Hopefully, Koirala is making harsh comments against the monarch to add fuel to the impending seventh round of the agitation considering that his remarks might irritate the King and hence he would be sacked which in turn might infuriate the people who could thus contribute to the impending agitation.

But the question is whether the King will retaliate directly or use the established channels? Perhaps the monarch would prefer to listen to Koirala’s remarks that are attached with excessive depression and inferiority complex of the highest order.

Common observers opine that the King might have exceeded his constitutional limits but then yet to bring to his notice his supposed unconstitutional acts some other polite methods could be used which is what Koirala utterly lacked this time.

A towering personality of Koirala’s political stature must not have gone to that extent in saying that the King might not find a three-meter soil for himself. Doesn’t it sound too much? Perhaps yes!