That was a strikingly bold editorial ('Ordnance against media', #249) given the circumstances that the Nepali press now works under. Despite the lifting of the emergency and the release of political detainees, the government is embarked on an insidious and sinister campaign to decapitate the media and it is taking a special focus on community radio. When will good sense ever dawn on the generals who are making this policy that they are shooting themselves in the foot? Things weren't this bad even during the Rana regime.

Gyan Subba,
Kumaripati

. All the major political players in Nepal: the king, the leaders of several political parties and now even the Maoists seem to be turning towards India for help and support. Some intellectuals, too, seem to be asking for Indian intervention. But let's not forget, we have seen time and again, India cares only about its own national interest. It doesn't matter to the Indians who rules Nepal as long as they can call the shots. By trying to seek Indian blessings, all the above players are playing a dangerous game that could turn us into a Bhutan or, worse, Sikkim. And let's not think that China, the US or Europe will come to our rescue, they won't risk straining their relations with India for some underdeveloped country plagued by internal quarelling. Having just read Indira Gandhi's biography and her role in Sikkim's annexation, it is fortunate for us that the current leadership in India is not in Mrs Gandhi's mould. An ambitious leader like her would have never allowed a neighbouring nation to dwell long in a situation where it could eventually cause harm to India itself through the 'red corridor' link between Nepali and Indian Maoists.

Sagar Sharma,
email

. I read with great interest the interview of American Ambassador James Moriarty ('Who's the roadblock?, #249). It is unfortunate that an experienced diplomat like Moriarty has not been able to understand the hidden goals of His Majesty the King. As a common semi-literate Nepali, I feel that the king has sent new district and zonal commissioners to strengthen his position and weaken the political parties. The only hope for lasting peace is to get the people's representatives to reestablish themselves. The ambassador should not be waylaid by the words but should also pay attention to the king's actions. He should see that the model here is General Musharraf of Pakistan: if elections are held in disturbed circumstances the role of civil society can be minimised and the security forces can be decisive. The question is: can elections be held unless the Maoists allow them to happen?

Srinivas Chalise,
Chabahil

. King Gyanendra is better known as a businessman than a politician, and is often compared to his father, His Late Majesty King Mahendra, for wanting more control over ruling Nepal. There is no doubt we ultimately need democracy but not at the expense of accelerated violence, corruption, street protests, extreme inter/intra party rivalry and incompetence in the governance. King G took a bold step to assume absolute power and preserve the integrity of Nepal. A peaceful monarchy is a better choice than a ruthless democracy. He is right when he says in the piece you translated from Nispakchya (From the Nepali Press, #250) that political leaders should reverse their priorities from "me, party and country". Unfortunately, three years after the dissolution of parliament, the parties have not realised their mistakes and are still caught up in pointing fingers at everyone but themselves. Now they are about to cement an alliance to the very people who butchered their cadre since 1996. Everyone should support the prosecution of these corrupt leaders. Countries like the UN, Britain, EU and India should not pressure the king but denounce these short-sighted political leaders for compelling him to take over to rescue the country. Long live the monarchy.

Pravesh Saria,
Chicago, USA

. It was a bit surprising to find the interview with Baburam Bhattarai by BBC Nepali Service published in Nepali Times, as if there is not enough news in Nepal ('From the Nepali Press', #250). It is even more astonishing to read that Bhattarai like most politicians/intellectuals of Nepal did not feel shame in submitting to the Indian leaders whom he had been calling 'imperialists/expansionists'. Has he also become unscrupulous like the bosses of other political parties of Nepal? How could Bhattarai find his way to Delhi when the only thing he can see is the blood flood of thousands of poor Nepalis? Who would believe a man who has resurrected 'Pol Potism' in a peaceful country when he says he is struggling to bring nationalism and democracy? Mr Bhattarai, your schoolteachers have expressed sheer disbelief with your monsterism long ago and your university professors whom I met appeared quite shocked. Even if you are accepted by dodgy politicians and individuals, the utter destruction of mother Nepal and the bloodbath you have ignited will surely burn you in hell.

Name withheld on request

. With its leadership dispute it is only a question of time before the Maoist movement loses its political agenda. In fact the Chitwan bus bombing shows it has already happened. This dangerous shift, may be unintended by its top brass, has left the Maoists with group of people with guns in their hands but absolutely no idea how to change society. The revolution is now in danger of degenerating into a criminal activity for ransom and killing. In his interview with the BBC that you translated a bright intellectual like Baburam took questions on Maoist involvement on the killings of Narayan Pokharel and Ganesh Chilwal very lightly. If a promising ideolougue like Baburam can't resist the temptation to be evasive and inconsistent there is little hope for the movement. The only way out of the present crisis is the restoration of democracy and the sooner the Maoists and monarchists understand that the better for everymore. The best alternative to democracy is more democracy.

Sameer Ghimire,
Sydney