One look at the war-torn streets near Ratna Park, the pitch batles between riot police and protesters, and it may seem like we have jumped from the frying pan into the fire. A vivid present always distorts a hazy past, and we only need to look back at headlines in this paper from one year ago to remind ourselves of the dark days of blind slaughter that this nation suffered. Today, we are blas? about the absence of violence, as headline-grabbing street confrontations create new worries about the future.
It's getting ugly out there. When you see riot police running amok, cars being smashed and universities closed, it is natural to wonder where we're headed this time. The pessimism comes from the seemingly-intractable polarisation between the palace and parties. The name-calling has started crossing civilised norms, the king gives serial interviews to senior editors, and even the military drags itself into the fray. The two constitutional forces that logically should be on the same side to counter the forces of extremism are on a confrontation course that threatens to undermine the peace process.
This is a totally unnecessary dispute. It benefits no one. And there is a solution within easy reach. If two groups that have butchered each other for seven years can be seen sitting together and smiling away at Shanker Hotel, then there is no reason why seemingly-responsible political parties and a constitutional monarch cannot do the same. The real problem here seems to be a communication gap and a total breakdown of trust between the parties and palace which neither is doing anything to redress.
A government of national unity made up of the main parliamentary parties and even Maoist representatives may not be able to resolve the country's long-term problems. But it can be the first step in leading us towards necessary constitutional reforms and elections. Will the current agitation of the political parties help us to move in that direction? Not likely. In fact, it is looking more and more like an agitation that is fueled by a desperate realisation that the people don't care much for People's Movement II. Yes, Nepalis are desperate, jobless and hopeless, but they don't see the political parties as offering a solution. They don't want to rock the boat for fear that the ceasefire will break down. They see through the pro-democracy slogans, and are convinced that it is just a code-word for the parties to resume their feeding frenzy of the past 12 years.
The public opinion is also against a return to absolute monarchy. In his meetings with editors, King Gyanendra wondered why no one believes him when he keeps saying he doesn't want absolute power. Maybe it is a problem of perception, and more needs to be done to take that message to the public.
It is good to see that the political parties finally have the unity that eluded them in the past 12 years. But it is an alliance of convenience borne out of self-preservation, not geared to untangling the political stalemate. It is the unity of the left-out. If there was proof that the political parties now have a new vision to carry out a great leap forward, if there were glints of statesmanship and accountability then there may have been more people out on the streets. But no such luck. The more things change, the more they remain the same.
That is the central tragedy: this country needs more democracy, not less. The solution to this stalemate is a sovereign and empowered citizenry that can force the parties, the palace and the comrades not to hold the Nepali people hostage to their whims.
