Give Nepal's King a Chance

By Ranjit Rauniyar
753 words
3 February 2005
The Asian Wall Street Journal
A9
English


Like most Nepalese this is a period of immense confusion for me, following King Gyanendra's decision to dismiss the government and assume sweeping powers Tuesday. With the country now largely cut off from the outside world, I am unable to call home or read Nepalese newspapers on the Internet, and am left wondering how my parents -- who are currently in India -- will be able to return home.

It is easy to decry the overthrow of an elected government, and express concern about the suspension of civil liberties. I, like all Nepalese, will be watching closely to see how King Gyanendra wields the sweeping powers he has assumed. But I hope the rest of the world, before rushing to instant judgments, will pause to consider how far Nepal had gone down the path toward becoming a failed state, before the king resorted to such desperate measures.

At least 11,000 Nepalese have been killed since Maoist rebels launched their reign of terror in 1996, with more than 2,000 dying since last October alone. Hundreds more have been kidnapped by the rebels, for indoctrination as part of their ideological war. Others have been caught in the crossfire between the Maoists and the Royal Nepalese Army. The economy has ground to a halt. Highways, needed to transport essential goods and medicines, have become combat zones. Tourism, formerly a vital source of revenue, has all but dried up. Not surprisingly, businesses are reluctant to make any fresh investments.

Like its predecessors (there have been 14 governments in as many years), the government that King Gyanendra dismissed Tuesday has only added to the country's woes. Schools continue to be closed with alarming regularity, political hooliganism continues to be dressed up under the banner of democratic protests in which the safety and security of ordinary citizens and businesses is seriously compromised. Rarely does a day go by without reading about a strike being called by either the Maoists or the political parties. Businesses are placed under duress to make donations to both the Maoists and political parties. The promised general elections were never held, and any hope of negotiating a truce with the rebels evaporated after they insisted on dealing directly with the king, and refused to talk to former prime minister Sher Bahadur Deuba.

All this has left the ordinary Nepalese yearning for a return to law and order, and a functioning economy. What we want, above all, is to be able to send our children to school again, and readily purchase sugar, rice and oil in local shops. Whether we're ruled by a democracy or a monarchy is a secondary consideration. That's why, at least for now, I'm prepared to give King Gyanendra the benefit of the doubt.

Desperate times call for desperate measures, and those who criticize the king's actions should remember how close Nepal had come to the edge of the precipice. I really wish to believe he has acted in this way not out of any desire to accumulate power, but in order to rescue his country. In doing so, he has taken a grave risk, both with his own reputation and that of the monarchy. The latter is a reputation that has already been weakened by the massacre of most of the royal family by one of their number in 2001, which led to King Gyanendra's accession to the throne.

Whether he has correctly calculated the risks and rewards in taking such drastic action may take time some time to become clear. What we have in Nepal today can be likened to a circus run amok, where all the clowns are putting on their own acts without any concern for the show as a whole. Now the king has chosen to take over as circus master, the responsibility will rest on his shoulders to bring the performance together in what may be the last chance to save Nepal from complete ruin.

Ultimately King Gyanendra knows the situation facing his country and the monarchy better than anyone else and, in this dangerous game of political brinkmanship between Nepal's monarch, politicians and Maoist rebels, I have only one piece of advice. The king has taken on sweeping powers and, in exercising them, he must always remember that every action he takes should put the interests of his people first.

Without pointing out the defficiencies within Nepe (which I honestly am unaware of), let me attempt to attack on the points he has made; while agreeing with Brook and GP and other with similar sentiments.


Nepe has correctly stated that Giving a chance is only warranted when much risk is not involved. Even King G knows the risk involved in this process. Here, nobody is giving anybody a chance to go ahead and rule. King G snatched it. The Chance that the writer (Ranjit Rauniyar) is referring to, is about being patient about the aftermath of the so called coup.

Now that the King already has the power, much less would be accomplished by creating a riot and dethroning him. Nepal is witnessing brutal rape of her own by her own sons, and it IS ABOUT TIME TO STOP RATIONALIZING EVERY MOVES (or after moves), AND TAKE A FIRM STAND. King has initiated a process, let's wait and see what is the outcome.

Very less people are certain what the King's real intention would be. I bet his intention could bewilder or change in the course of time, so even he cannot guide his intention solely. But THE KING SHOULD BE GIVEN A CHANCE on what seemed like never ending battle.

I hope I don't have bring all of my credentials to put a weight on what I am saying here.

have bring=have to bring

Fellow Sajhapurians,

Why am I NOT surprised?

On Sajha,

Our dear Nepe can be gallant and flirtatious toward ladies he has crushes on,
flattering toward those whom he knows personally in the greater DC Nepali political circuit (even if their families served the Royal family in Nepal), and
friendly with an amazing blindness with those who parrot his ideologies.

But disagree with him with reasons,
present a different viewpoint,
and watch the mask fall off his face.

At first, he tries to flatter you, sings your praises and attempts to charm you nonetheless to be on his side. But if you still disagree with him, then watch him
turn nasty and vicious . . . like an angry lover who finally realises that all his
wooing has had no effect.

This pattern by Nepe has been repeated so many times on Sajha that it comes as a surprise to me that he would try to "out" Brook for neither reason nor rhyme.

And, oh, don't expect him to issue a public apology too.

Then again -- if Nepe's self-referential PUBLIC postings give us any indication -- few
of us claim to have a resume that is about:

a) youthful years spent in crush-dissent-at-any-cost communist camps in Nepal and
b) middle-aged years on US government's payroll with
c) an abilityt to boast of having friends who are in Maoist high command in Nepal.

If Nepe didn't exist, we'd have to invent him -- to spice up our otherwise humdrum online life.

That said, let me go on record to say that if republicanism does come to Nepal,
Nepe's rushing to any credit for that would be like a rooster taking credit for sunrise.

oohi
ashu

LOLLLLLL!! BICHARA NEPE!!

DAMMN, HOW VICIOUS SAJHA CAN BE HAGI?

Ashu,

Your rant here is definately uncalled for.

Houston,

There are many reasonable Nepalis who OPPOSE the King's move.
There are also many reasonable Nepalis who SUPPORT the King's move.
And there are also many reasonable Nepalis who are not sure what to believe
and whom to support.

All of the above reactions to the King's move are FINE and EXPECTED.

Sajha's online DEMOCRACY , if it can be called that, is best served by allowing ALL
of the above views or their variations to be expressed OPENLY and WITHOUT ANY
FEAR or INTIMIDATION from anyone else on Sajha.

The last thing any poster on Sajha needs is intimidation from Nepe or anyone else
that his personal details would actually be revealed -- as Nepe has done above to
Brook -- just because they DARE to express views that are different from his.

Tetti ho.

oohi
ashu

" Houston, we've got a problem."

Oh yeah poor Nepe! Looks like he lost his "post" and all of us look like a fool not understanding what's the issue. Nepe, what did you do man/girl? Was that so bad?

Brook, I admire your "brook" response. Keep it up, you have always been an example!

lol, ashu..

nepe, says he's a beiliver of republicanism, but he is to given a chair of dictator, we wud change his views (maybe not change his views but declare himself as Republican - Dictator) :P :P

this is our nepe---->if u dont agree with me, I WILL CALL U NAMES AND INSULT U! :P :P

"if u dont agree with me, I WILL CALL U NAMES AND INSULT U!"

Is that right Nepe? Sorry hai, about my earlier post. If you didnt interpret it correctly, let me make it clear - I was trying to be very supportive of your deeds. Take it easy.

ashu wrote:

>c) an abilityt to boast of having friends who are in Maoist high command in Nepal.


Who cares if he has friends in maoist commandars or in Army's commandars...



>At first, he tries to flatter you, sings your praises and attempts to charm you nonetheless to be on his side. But if you still disagree with him, then watch him
turn nasty and vicious . . . like an angry lover who finally realises that all his
wooing has had no effect.
This pattern by Nepe has been repeated so many times on Sajha




I partially agree on ashu in this matter.

Ashu, You're missing a point, aren't you. No body disagree that every one has right to opinion. But please keep your personal opinion about other people offline. We are discussing very important issue facing country and so it would be nice if you can keep your discussion in that regard. We don't care what you feel about other sajha members. We care what your opinions on Nepal for now. You are acting like political party leaders - always focusing on wrong things when the country is burning.

Nepali Paakhe ji,

Thank you for reminding all of us the more important things at the moment. I had hoped the question of the moral basis of the argument of 'giving a chance' will get a brain-storming here. But we are draining our brain to mundane matters.

************************

DWI ji,

You seem to be the only one in this thread so far who understood and took my intellectual challenge regarding the question I raised on it own right. Thank you.

You are right upto stating that we are not in the time before the King did what he did when we would be hypothetically contemplating whether to give him a unanimous chance or not. He already snatched it.

Now we are divided into two groups (well except Ashu, who is always the third "ambivalent" group, it is different story that his actions always serve the purpose of one of the two groups). Those who support and those who oppose.

Among the supporters are those whose long held dreams came true right away and those who are willing to ignore this group as if they don't matter and are willing to interpret for themselves and the rest as well the event as giving the King a chance and hoping, just hoping, he would bring their version of 'peace and stability' and hoping, okay let's skip the rest, because there is a long list of hoping this and hoping that without actually knowing how exactly that would be.

This group is now trying to convince the other group to trust what they just hope and be patient and wait and see. This is where we are now, no ?

Now if this hopeful group succeed to persuade the opposing group entirely, everything will be working because the validity of their hope is dependent on the surety or at least very high likelihood of the success of their persuasion at the first place.

Now let's calculate the likelihood of the success of persuasion based on the facts both groups know. Calculation because the calculated risk is the only thing the opposing group is going to be willing to take. They don't want to lose their power and chance to defeat the King for ever. Remember this is the time when the iron is hot. To wait is to lose the hammer or the size of the hammer at least.

It will a lengthy task and rather redundant looking at the number of threads and discussions going on this forum to list these facts and assign weights to each of them. So let's leave it. Let's guess it for ourselves.

However optimistic guess you make, you will still have to admit you know a very large number of people are going to protest against the King and his actions. He will try to suppress them using everything on the book and violence only to make them protest more.

Supporters, if you want to close your eyes and just pray, do it by all means. But don't be the "willing executioners" of the rising Saddam Hussain of Nepal. Historians will one day write your Sajha nicknames and real names (in case of Brook) on the shameful page of the book. You have been warned.

******************
Ashu,

'Look, who's talking ! ' This is what I thought all I need to write in reply to you.

Then I thought let's have some fun. Let me draft and post a "communiqu?" alerting my well-wishers and well-wishers-to-be of the attempts by some "reactionary elements" active in this forum of my "character assassination" !

But then it occurred to me, hey, in our time when glamour is everything, no publicity is a bad publicity. What better way can there be than done by highly opinionated and some false allegation from Ashu ! I must be thankful to him. So here it is. Thank you !

I do not recall ever saying I still maintain friendship with peoples in Maoist High Command. But thank you for implying that. I don't think this rumor is going to scare my well-wishers. It works only for those who are intimidated by the terrorism, be it Gyanendra's state terrorism or Maobadi's.

Personal kura laai chhodam. What made me the most happy is the following lines of yours,

>That said, let me go on record to say that if republicanism
>does come to Nepal, Nepe's rushing to any credit for that
>would be like a rooster taking credit for sunrise.

So finally you are giving in to the possibility that republicanism might indeed come. That's a big step from the last time when you ..ok leave it. I don't think people will give me the credit, but I will certainly be proud of being always clear and happening on the right side of history ! I deserve that much, don't you think ?

And about Brook, this is not the first encounter I have with him. We have had far more heated debate on republicanism/monarchy in the past. And boy ! if you see the level of vitriolic he uses in his debate, mine will be called a sweet conversation. I don't know if he remembers but, surprised with his bitterness towards me, I had asked him if he is bullying and if that is because he is anonymous. I had told him not to be so sure about his anonymity.

But this is not the reason I revealed his identity. First, I sincerely believed, unlike for those protesting the coup who are now on the run and hiding in the country, this does not compromise his safety (the most important concern). Then I also thought he probably does not mind it. Then the most important one, I thought for the type of the moral/logical question I threw to him, the reference to who he is will make much more sense. If he is upset with my action, I will apologize. But I don't believe he really wanted to talk big big things in Sajha with a mask on his face.

Dadagiri ji,

>Who cares if he has friends in maoist commandars or in Army's commandars...

When you write 'Who cares' and post, you already cared. If you really don't care, you would not even care to write. Just joking.

And why did you partially agree with Ashu ? Do you feel you have already fell from my favor and politeness, ra bhanya ? Trust me, you will not. Until the day Gyanendra shoots hundreds of protesters and you come here to say that you are sad but you still support Gyanendra ! The moment of truth is yet to come.

Tyo Ashu ko kura sabai napatyaaunu hai. Fataahaa kura pani garchha oo. It is not true that everybody who don't agree with all of my views have fallen from my favor. I have already given in a thread you and I were together examples of Sajha posters who do not subscribe to my views including republicanism yet enjoy tremendous respect from me. I can even name an anti-republican poster whom I practically worship (fan bhaneko kya !). Ashu is just painting a wrong picture of me. But it is true that I can not stand verifiably dishonest people. That's my weakness.

*****************
Gorkhali-X,

I have already told you I am very reluctant to have any kind of debate with you. If you have not have a chance to read my explanation, go to this thread

- http://www.sajha.com/sajha/html/OpenThread.cfm?forum=216&ThreadID=19137

Nevertheless, you brought up a question of a real concern- the safety of our near and dear ones back home. I believe everybody in Nepal, irrespective of whose family they are, have their safety to worry about, if the record of the security force of abusing innocent people for various reasons is any guide.

As for myself, I know what I am doing and what risks are involved in it. This is a conscious choice I made a long time ago fully knowing this day will come. This is all I have to say.

And I hope this is my last conversation with you, if you don't mind.

*****************
Sangey ji,

Thank you for your cautionary note and urge for civility in the debate. Needless to say, I agree with you.

I hope my explanation in reply to other poster convince you of my harmless (I hope) intention in revealing Brook's identity. I am keeping the note of my apology in my pocket just in case.

The small attitude I showed got all the attention and the very profound and deep question of morality and reasoning I raised was sidelined. Obviously the apologists and the supporter of the coup have not much to talk about. I do hope the debate will continue here and other places and we will reveal our moral identity rather than personal identity. Aafailai pani bhaneko.

********************
Brook,

Most of the things I wanted to say to you is already told to various posters above. I hope you will forgive me if I do not repeat them here and ask you to go there to read. Just few paragraphs to climb.

Whatever I wrote in the first posting was with the hope that we will have an engaging debate on one of the most important question of the day. You wasted a good part of your reply by suspecting my intention and making wild speculations and what not. You also seem to have no memory of our previous discussions. Never mind. Let's focus on the substance of the debate and give less importance to our personality, identity and genetics (I was appalled with your speculation that I was provoking a family tree).

You wrote:
>The moral responsibility you want me to bear for G's future
>actions is only but an illustration of the tools you use to
>radicalize the views of those that don't chant your slogans.

You are not entirely wrong here.

>Therefore, I refuse your invitation to take sides

This is confusing. Are you saying you are not siding with the King ? Then what was the fuss about ?

>because either way it's the Nepali people that are dying

Are you saving people by not taking any sides at this point of time ? No dear, you are saving yourself. That's all.

>and I don't think the value of lives taken away by the King's
>men are in any way more or less precious than the lives
>that have been taken by the Maoists.

True.

>Nonetheless, you do have quite a reputation
> here and I am glad that through your last
>post you've shown the world that you are
>living up to it. Bravo.

Thanks. Hardcore republican that is. Will never deter.

नेपाल के घटनाक्रम पर अंतरराष्ट्रीय प्रतिक्रिया कैसी रही है?
स्पष्ट (119 votes)
25.6%
दबी-दबी (345 votes)
74.4%
इस वोट के परिणाम को जनमत सर्वेक्षण न माना जाए


Guys I got this in BBC hindi...What do you think about it? What is the reason?

Nepe jyu

Point well made, although your definition of "supporters" might not be all inclusive.

However, if you insist on a calculated risk, then you also have to juxtapose the Good and the Evil that will come out of King's dethronement. We all know where the country was and where it was heading before the royal take over. Would you rather want to be called a "Free and Democractic, constitutional monarchy" country and suffer all the wraths of Maoists and Govt Servants alike, or would you rather give hope a chance?

IFF King G abuses his power to a limit (he is already doing it, I have to admit) and make lives of Nepalese a hell, then that would be worse case scenario. But ponder upon what we had initially...we were witnessing the worst case scenario in the Nepal with incompetent leaders and murderous Maoists.

I don't support this prolonged ban of Press freedom & communication, but I do hope it will be eliminated soon. Did we really have Press Freedom in Nepal? Either from Govt. side or (mostly) from Maoist side, Press freedom had as much weight in Nepal as the weight of the rope the Maoists were hanging reporters with.

Bottom line is We were in darkness before. We have a hope for light now, let's not block it to create shadow of doom.

okey.. i lost my post

between 1984 and 1993 # of days my school was closed due to strikes "12"[all of them in 1990]

after that i lost count [ went to boarding school and outside nepal]

but then i was in nepal between oct 4, 2003 and dec 24, 2003 # of days my niece's school was closed "14".. this is scary.

i wished my school was closed [ i hated homework /study]. i worried about my haircuts, after school games, black shoes and class tests..... [ wished that school be closed every day...] but would it have helped me.... i guess not.. i did had that opportunity to have good educational foundation...

what % of nepalese have that today? so which is better?

from my point of a commoner... apolitical person... i liked those days when NEPAL WAS "THE ZONE OF PEACE"

DWI ji,

I think we are stuck in the circle of the same question. We are just hitting the bush. Let's hit the bird.

Let's determine the possible solutions first. Then we will be able to judge how close or how far or whether in a right direction or in the opposite direction is the King taking us.

You go first.

Don't say you don't know or don't want to do it. Cuz, then the whole idea of supporting, opposing, waiting and seeing etc would make no sense at all.

If you ask me, I think nobody except the King can solve our problem. So his participation, or call it intervention, if you like, was absolutely necessary.

If he really wants to do it, that is, if he is really ready to make great sacrifice for the sake of country and the people, he can solve the decade long quagmire within 3 minute.

Snap !

Just like that. In a magical way, in a wonderful way. He can make every Nepali hug each other, lay down arms, organize elections where 90% of the voters will vote, have a vibrant democracy, working towards good governace and social economic reforms, you name it.

And people, not only Vishwa Hindu Parishad people, but all Nepalis, will worship Gyanendra like no one ever was worshipped.

Is he in that direction ?

No. He is going in the opposite direction. Bringing more bloodshed, destroying democracy, and making sure people will hate him like nobody was ever hated.

More later

Ashu Ji,

What is your official stand on the current situation in Nepal (sorry couldn?t find your thoughts anywhere)? Or you are again sticking with your "I opposed it before I supported it? philosophy.

By the way how Dhaka is treating you?

Thanks in advance.

Nepeji, It is not like Girija and his stupid battalion were able to accomplish anything They made things even more worse because of focus on self, rather than the country. King G whether you like it or not is the best hope. No body has the "potential" to unite the country more than he does. What I think Rauniyarji is saying is that since he has that potential and given nothign else is working out let's give King G a chance. Otherwise we will just be caught endlessly in a vicious cycle.

Bhuvan ji,

I am not denying, in fact, if you are following my debate (- http://www.sajha.com/sajha/html/column.cfm?extraid=622) you will see my resolutions are entirely based on accepting the fact that the leadership that were in power failed spectacularly and beyond doubt.

Yet, Gyanendra is not our best hope, he is our worst fear.

But still, it is true that there is nobody in the country except Gyanendra to bring peace in the country.

He will do it some time soon. Hopefully within three years, when he says, ok I give up, I am ready to let the sovereign people of Nepal decide the future of monarchy.