Editorial»
Inherent, natural & inevitable
DEC 30 - Many people, including the political parties, had expected that the October 4 royal move would restore peace in this country. Sher Bahadur Deuba, the then prime minister, chose guns to suppress the Maoists after the first truce broke down in November 2001, which led to the royal coup.
In fact, Deuba became more confident in quelling the “reactive” Maoist force than adopting any “proactive” approach. Had Deuba undertaken the pro-active approach, it would have curtailed the power the monarchy enjoys. However, Deuba sided with the monarchy and ultimately became a mere royal tool, though he continues to show his distance with the King.
All intelligent people are not good in making judgement. Many intelligent persons suffer from poor judgement. For them, it appears like a disease when the time comes for passing any judgement, though they master the art of jabbering. But some people, with less intelligence, are good judges. Such people become successful in their lives because they understand the reality and judge well about the situation. In this context, Deuba is neither an intelligent leader nor a good judge. Nor do the so-called nationalists meet any of these two criteria. Hence Deuba’s reading of democracy remains as poor as the so-called nationalists’.
King Gyanendra handpicked Lokendra Bahadur Chand with a hope of restoring both peace and Panchayat. Unfortunately, Chand, too, failed to meet the royal-outlined political criterion when Surya Bahadur Thapa patched the political ties between Kathmandu and New Delhi, ignoring the possibility of generating anti-monarchy sentiments among the political and student leaders.
Surya Bahadur Thapa made attempt to restore peace only to break it down in August. Thapa, a diehard royalist, who undermines political parties and makes attempts to revive Panchayat, continues to generate anti-monarchy sentiment among the people. In recent months, those who lit their houses with traditional diyo on October 4 are turning against the monarch.
Politically, since the five political parties launched agitation against the October 4 royal regression, political parties and various students’ organisations are moving gradually closure to the Maoists, though they differ in concept and attitude with the Maoists. This can be cited as a less possible unity but a need for restoring peace as well as democracy, perhaps at cost to constitutional monarchy.
Forty years ago, Nepal was a country ruled by pious frauds, who believed in and practised myths in order to remain rulers. For instance, the King would not have visited the Kamakhiya temple on the bank of Brahmaputra river before he ousted the democratically elected government. Obviously, in Hindu mythology, this particular temple symbolises power and perhaps the king visited the temple for more power.
How many so-called Nepali nationalists believe in such an absolate faith that continues to haunt them remains to be surveyed. However, over four million Nepalis, who have visited the temple, are powerless because they do not believe in such faith. And India’s northeast Assam is not only one of the poorest states but also the least powerful.
Half of the Nepali students, who attend higher learning centres in this country, do not visit temples as frequently as their parents do. This indicates that the nationalist force, which is in power, is facing a new generation that seeks more freedom and liberty to express their opinion. The recent street protests and slogans against the monarchy are a few examples. The more Thapa delays to restore the constitutional process, the more it will fuel the demand for a republican state.
The country is going through a critical phase, and it appears that it is inviting a new system that will last longer than any other systems practised by our predecessors. After all, a king cannot become a king without people. Neither a king can show his royal image in a dark room nor can a handpicked prime minister do anything so long as he remains loyal to the king. A dictatorial system may drag the people near the water but it cannot force them to drink water. It depends on the choice of an individual, which is his inherent, natural and inevitable right. Unlike Deuba, King Gyanendra and Thapa appear intelligent but bad judges.Posted on: 2003-12-30 03:07
Headlines
Advertisements
