Two weeks ago, after the seven political parties announced their alliance, we said the ball was in His Majesty's court. Last Friday, the king whacked the ball back, rejecting the call for a restoration of parliament and saying he was prepared to talk if the parties came to him. Predictably, the parties rejected it outright.

We are going round and round in circles. If a relatively simple difference of opinion such as this is approached with such implacable stubbornness how are we ever going to find a solution to the much more knotty problem of the Maoist insurgency?

In essence, February First was an attempt by the royalists to turn the country's triangular tug-o-war for power into a two-pronged fight. It was to obliterate or at least make irrelevant, the parties who were holding on to middle ground. Even some supporters of the royal move now admit that in the last four months the insurgency has been used to systematically dismantle what remained of our tottering democratic institutions.

The free media, one of the few legacies of the 1990 People's Movement that was still intact, has been deliberately and methodically torn down. The most recent ban on Communication Corner represents a cynical attempt to choke an FM radio network that was acclaimed the world over for giving a voice to Nepal's voiceless. These are not the actions of people who have a vision for the future, they betray deep-seated insecurity about public opinion and the mindset of a clique that knows its time is up.

It has also been a fortnight of fast-paced developments on the Maoist front. It is now clear that despite denials, a section of the Indian left has been trying to repair the leadership rift and convince the rebels to join the mainstream. Our rulers in Kathmandu must have got the hint- this is the last chance for the palace and the parties to patch up, otherwise the parties and the Maoists are going to patch up. That would also turn this from a tri-polar to bi-polar struggle but not quite the way the king intended.

King Gyanendra has repeatedly said his ultimate goal is parliamentary democracy and constitutional monarchy. So, the disagreement between him and the parties is only about the sequence of the steps to be taken to get there, not about the destination itself.

Democracy demands pluralism, an abhorrence of secrecy and a rejection of violence. We must accept that there must be more than one centre of power. And if history has taught us anything, it is that you can't wrest power from the people and hope to remain in power for long.

It's time for a whole new ball game.