Kathmandu: Nepalese intellectuals fail to understand as to what has happened to president of the Congress-Girija Prasad Koirala of late more so after the royal step of October 4, last year.

He speaks of a grand design to sabotage the gains of the popular movement; he daringly tells his activists that he would expose the architects of the said design; he smacks foul in the announcement of the ceasefire; he smells a sort of conspiracy in the ceasefire announcement to thwart his “broader democratic alliance”, a theory propounded by president Koirala which his own close aides have failed to understand; he sees a threat to democracy when the Chand government prepares the background for the talks with the Maoists rebels; he concludes that the King of late has been leading the group which prefer the reversal of the system; and above all, president Koirala envisions the Maoists-government talks as nothing but a ploy to undermine the role of the major political parties which fought for the restoration of the system back in the 1990s.

On top of that, what comes to the fore is that Koirala’s recent utterances being made against the monarch appear more personal than political one.

Why is this vengeance then? What makes Koirala to go wild at times?

It would be nice if Koirala himself clarified his blunt allegations against the King who at best is listening to the blistering attacks being made on his personality.

Analysts opine that reading Koirala’s off-the cuff remarks against the King it appears that the septuagenarian leader wishes to hit the media headlines if his wild utterances could in any way irritate the monarch to the extent that he ordered Koirala’s arrest.

The monarch appears less interested in elevating the ranks of a political leader who himself is loosing his credibility in the eyes of his cadres and then ultimately at the grassroots with each blistering attacks made on the King.

The fresh attack on the King came when Koirala visited Inaruwa, a town close to Biratnagar, last week.

It is here at this gathering that Koirala made these remarks: (sic)” If people’s rights are to be curtailed; if the gains of the 1990 movement are to be scrapped and if the 1990 constitution are to be trampled, and that if the country is to be pushed towards a reversal, then that would mean the non-existence of the institution of the monarchy.

Not only this, president Koirala also made it clear that “if one carefully analysed the events that followed after October 4 move of the monarch, it leads us to conclude that the monarch himself has assumed the role of the one who preferred the reversal of the system”.

In the same vein Koirala also made it abundantly clear that his party would boycott the round table conference if it were summoned by the King.

And many more such attacks on the King, Koirala made on that occasion.

Analysing Koirala’s utterances what also comes to the fore is that in the recent days he has developed a sort of personal enmity with the King and that he is deadly against the monarch and that he was ready to pose challenges of any dimension to the King and his would be moves in the coming days.

Is he talking sense? Or is he talking nonsense? Could be both.

The moot question here arises as to why Koirala is hell bent against the present announcement of a ceasefire with the rebels? What factors and which forces make him to speak on these negative lines? Is he really concerned for the system and its consolidation? Is he really worried over the possibility of a ploy of the government-Maoists talks that could later minimise their role in the future?

Unless he clarifies what he prefers to call a “grand design”, the people will take his speeches as if it were a cry in the wilderness and nothing more than that.

Till he clarifies, we wish to quote yet another impression of a TU scholar. Mr. B.K.Shrestha who says of Koirala in his own words: ” Then, there is Grand Design (theory of) Girija Prasad Koirala who flies off to Delhi every once in a while more or less in the same manner as that of the Sikkimese politicians immediately before the “Sikkimization” of Sikkim”. (See the Himalayan Times dated Feb.18-ed).

The fact is that Koirala would love bouncing back to power. If he is allowed to do so, the designs would vanish; things will become instantly constitutional and perhaps he will praise the King for his graciousness in having offered him the chair he loved most.

In sum, this is Koirala’s politics.

However, the fact is that such personal vengeance would harm the country’s politics more than what Koirala could have ever imagined. Informed sources opine that the King might touch upon Koirala’s utterances in his own subtle manner when he will be making a speech on the occasion of the National Democracy Day, today. Others say that the King might announce some thing more that would have its long-term impact in the ongoing politics of the country.

Our own interpretation is that the Palace should once invite Koirala and do away with his suspicions which he has been nurturing since October 4, last year. It would be fitting , say political scientists, that Koirala too makes efforts in this direction and patch up the differences that are both political and personal ones.