The King must now make new move

July 30, 2003
3 MIN READ
A
A+
A-

Kathmandu: Focus on the government-Maoists exchange of letters and the increasingly harsh conditions being placed by both in the letters come in contrast to the mild, resilient tones of exhortative speeches by both seeking to sit for the talks. One wonders whether this is result of serious manipulations preventing talks from actually taking place and encouraging a breakdown that is likely to result in the resumption of hostilities. If this happens, it is one front.

The other front is already open. Five agitating parties show their token presence on the streets in relay hunger strikes calling for the recall of the now dissolved parliament. Party cadres in the media retain their presence in publicizing their hostilities against the October 4 Royal move. Party cadre in the class and professional organizations instigate a breakdown of essential services in the semi and the non-government sectors.

A third front is likely to be opened. The lack of direction and determined action might encourage a slide in the partisanized civil service reflected perhaps at the government level itself at this crucial point. A Thapa cabinet that can neither woo the participation from the agitating parties nor take the talks with the Maoists ahead may be provoked to attempt to secure a “liberal” image by calling for the reinstatement of the dissolved parliament citing the lack of motion in the responsibilities its has undertaken.

This highly abnormal fluidity encouraged, in part, by government itself becomes ground for suspicion of a ploy to isolate the monarchy which remains the focus of the current change. The Maoists insist that they want to talk to none other than the King. The agitating parties blame the King for regression. The people at large want a definite direction from the King.

It is clear that this abnormal situation should not be allowed to prevail. Having exhausted the liberal options of constitutionalism, the King must either go back or forward. Going back will be costly for the constitution and the political process. Going forward will mean a heightened opposition of the political parties who have monopolized political organizations over the decade. Since such a step will have to determinedly look to the restoration of the parliament through the elections ignoring the agitating parties’ bid to claim a monopoly in an election government. Experience over the past decade has made the public more than aware that the agitating parties have risked constitutionalism repeatedly to claim the privilege of a government that conducts the polls. It is this awareness that keeps the public away from the agitation while seeking a solution from the monarch.