A Royal Taming

Kathmandu's cauldron of politics has started to simmer all over again. Last week was arguably Nepal's most tumultuous from the time King Gyanendra grabbed power on February 1. Four distinctive elements stood out: Nepal's monarch rescinded his earlier plan to address the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) on September 16; two major political parties declared their opposition to even constitutional monarchy; the Maoists announced a three-month ceasefire beginning September 1; and the people braved police repression to voice their anger against the monarch.

King Gyanendra's tryst with destiny may have just begun. A nation may have rediscovered the politics of resistance.

The king's decision to skip the UNGA in New York was an inglorious retreat, brought about by the pressure the international community and domestic forces mounted. His trip to New York was anyway expected to be stormy. Heads of several European delegations had been contemplating a walkout during King Gyanendra's speech at the UNGA; outside it, expat Nepalis had planned a black flag demonstration. Worse, the US ambassador in Kathmandu, James F. Moriarty, announced that President George W. Bush was not going to grant an audience to the king. New York quickly lost its allure for the person who had planned to portray himself as the leader courageously combating Red terrorism.

"Where's the question of the king cancelling his trip which had never been announced," stoutly defended a foreign ministry official. But his sang-froid couldn't conceal stark facts. At the palace's behest, the Royal Nepal Airlines had cancelled its commercial flight to Mumbai to reserve a plane for the king and his 56-member entourage. A senior official said the government had even hired a public relations person for $50,000, in the hopes of rallying international support in New York. And the state exchequer released a whopping Rs 110 million for the trip, an amount never before spent on a Nepali delegation to the UN.

A series of developments at home, too, compelled the king to rethink his decision of visiting New York. "He does not have the constitutional legitimacy to represent the country," said Dr Ram Sharan Mahat, of the Nepali Congress, after a seven-party delegation handed over a letter to the local UN office requesting its Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, to not host the king as he was not Nepal's legitimate representative.

The growing distrust of the king prompted the two major political parties—the Nepali Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal-United Marxist-Leninist (CPN-UML)—to adopt a resolution declaring their willingness to initiate a democratic republican movement. The two parties were signalling to the nation that they were prepared to abolish the very institution of constitutional monarchy, a political concept they had always subscribed to. With 60 per cent of the cadres of the two parties below 40 years of age, their leaders could not ignore the radicalism of the younger generation which has neither emotional nor intellectual affinity with the kingship.

The resolution was an echo of the Maoist's demand to rewrite the Constitution and delete from Nepal's democratic arrangement a role for the king. No wonder, this development was swiftly followed by the Maoists declaring ceasefire and appealing to the political parties to work together to overthrow the monarchy. In his statement declaring ceasefire, Maoist supremo Prachanda explained that his group took to arms out of compulsion, because the "army generals and their leader king" were out to crush each and every right of the people, including their right to live. Quite cleverly, Prachanda was projecting the army generals, not the soldiers, as his enemy.

"We will not negotiate with the king", said Maoist spokesperson Krishna Bahadur Mahara in an interview.He added that the Maoists wanted an interim government to supervise elections to the Constituent Assembly, which could then institutionalise the democratic republican system.

That Nepal's political plates had started to shift became obvious as CPN-UML general secretary Madhav Kumar Nepal responded, "We are one with the Maoists on the question of the Constituent Assembly." As mainstream political parties and the Maoists began to move towards a common ground, Kathmandu's streets echoed with slogans of "Get out Gyanendra." These daily protests invited retaliatory police action and arrests of hundreds.

Against such a volatile backdrop, the king perhaps concluded it would be precarious to fly out of Kathmandu. Analysts here feel that the king has two options—either he precipitates the confrontation against the forces arrayed against him, or opts for conciliatory measures with at least the mainstream political parties.

Sore over the king's refusal to restore democracy at the earliest, India indicated for the first time that it won't ignore the demand for a republic voiced by political parties. It also thought the announcement of ceasefire was vital. "We hope that the three-month long unilateral ceasefire announced by the Maoists will create an environment in which a peace process can begin," MEA spokesperson Navtej Sarna said in Delhi. The European Union almost endorsed India's stand. "All political forces now need to work strenuously for a democratically based peace process leading to a durable negotiated solution, involving a national consensus and reintegration of the Maoists into a multi-party democracy," a EU statement issued by the British embassy here said.

Analysts feel the ceasefire declaration portrays the Maoists as greater votaries of peace than the king; it's they who have taken the risks, albeit for three months, to restore normalcy to Nepal. The declaration also helps them counter Nepal and Washington's accusation that they are terrorists. These perceptions were further bolstered with Prachanda asking Annan to play a larger role in the negotiations in Nepal—a role he is keen on, but is reluctant to embrace because of India's sensitivity to have the UN in its backyard.

The pro-democracy political parties too face a challenge of their own. It's difficult for them to share a platform with the Maoists who haven't yet put down their gun and who have killed scores of pro-democracy supporters in the past. "That will mean accepting the Maoist agenda and its leadership. We are aware of it," Nepali Congress leader G.P. Koirala is believed to have told his confused supporters privately. Revival of the Nepali parliament has been the demand of political parties. Its acceptance by the king could preempt the political parties and Maoists joining hands. But it would also mean the king accepting constitutional monarchy as enshrined in the Constitution. Should he not, analysts say he ought to prepare for a republican hurricane.