Editorial»
Shattered myth
JAN 08 - A myth that King Gyanendra has charismatic leadership ability to handle the state of affairs, like his late father Mahendra did during the 1960s, has shattered.
Ever since his accession to the throne, followed by the tragic royal massacre on June 1, 2001, each and every political move he has chosen subsequently brought no respite and political stability to the nation. In public, he expresses commitment to multiparty democracy and constitutional monarchy, but in action, he chooses to act as an “active and constructive” monarch.
He has severed relations with democratic forces committed to constitutional monarchy. He has earned more enemies than friends within less than two years of his accession to the throne. A convent-educated monarch, he is acclaimed the world over as a nature conservationist. But he has failed to protect his own people from abject poverty, on-going violence and mayhem, bad-governance and corruption, external mass-migration and internal displacement.
The continued street protests against monarchy in the capital and other urban centers, and unabated Maoists insurgency in remote rural areas, remind us of the Roman emperor Nero, who enjoyed playing the flute when entire Rome was burning.
The King’s maneuverability reminds us of the proverbial playing of flute and burning of Rome. But the King has limited room for maneuvers given the anti-monarchy slogans in the streets and violent insurgency in the rural areas. The King cannot rule the country for long with an iron-fist in velvet glove without political back up support. The more he tries to rule with an iron-fist, the more his image would tarnish.
A handful of people who had immensely benefited from absolute monarchy before 1990 were exalted with the Royal takeover on October 4, 2002. It was a clique that wanted only to serve its vested interests standing by the King.
Now, it reminds us that King Gyanendra is still trying to follow the footprints that his late father King Mahendra carved during the 1960s. But in reality, there is a vast difference between then and now. The late King Mahendra sought political counseling with his contemporaries to rule the country as an absolute monarch.
The striking difference between then and now is that King Gyanendra has largely relied on a handful of people with anachronistic worldviews, who do not even have the capacity to understand what is actually happening in the streets, colleges, cyber cafes, internet websites, coffee houses, media, and in the rural areas.
The rural areas, where over 85 per cent people live in the dark, used to be a strong support base of the Hindu King before the beginning of the Maoist insurgency and the royal massacre. But this support base, a myth in other words, no longer exists today in the hearts and mind of rural folks. This is the biggest spiritual loss to the monarchy.
While the young generation that grew up along with Crown Prince Paras is taking to the streets and shouting anti-monarchy slogans, the King, on the other hand, is busy in political consultations with one-time handpicked politicians like Kirtinidhi Bista, Marichman Singh Shrestha and other invisible persons, who do not have any political bases in their constituencies.
One can easily guess what sort of political advice these people may have given to the King to grapple with the problems facing the country. The handful of persons will surely mislead the King and further damage his image.
If the current street demonstrations are any indications, the mood of the young generation is dead against the practice of absolute monarchy. It is also exerting tremendous pressure on the major political parties to take a tough stand against it.
If the King loses an opportunity of reaching a compromise with the political parties even this time, he would lose it forever like the Shah of Iran. The King must not ignore the rising tide of public discontent. One of the best ways to brighten his image as a constitutional monarch is to hand over the executive power to the people through the political parties, who can best deal with the Maoists as well.
Time and tide waits for none. This is applicable to the King as well. The King has shown positive gesture by holding consultations with the major political parties, though only after the student organizations took to the streets violently. The powers that be should not forget the wider impact of the student movement in Nepal’s politics. They know it undoubtedly. So, the King should listen to the voices of the wider section of the population, not to a handful of people, who simply want to fish when the water is murky.Posted on: 2004-01-08 03:22
Headlines
Advertisements
