It is our current misfortune that many analyse King Gyanendra's appointment of a new prime minister last week in terms of victory or defeat for the palace or the parties.

Actually, both lost. There are no winners in a confrontation between forces that are supposed to be on the same side, especially when they are fighting so close to the edge.

It is wrong for the palace to rub its hands in glee about breaking the five-party alliance. The job of a constitutional monarch is not to divide and rule over political parties, it is to persuade them to work together to resolve the more threatening crisis that has engulfed the nation.

One wouldn't be surprised about an unprincipled politico eating humble pie. But it must be said that for someone with King Gyanendra's reputation for haughtiness, it was a major climbdown to bring Deuba back.

But there is no need for the Sher Bahadur camp to pop champagne corks. The third-time prime minister better start doing some serious homework on his three-point checklist. His first order of business is to get a can-do team off and running, not another lazy and greedy jumbo cabinet that is hell bent on plunder like last time. The indefinite nationwide education strike called by the Maoists is the initial major challenge. Clearly, this is a rebel tactic of disruption to force the government to negotiate. How is Deuba going to juggle that with the military's current aversion to a ceasefire?

The prime minister also has to be much more precise when he opens his mouth. Any waffling like we saw in media interviews and at the National Human Rights Commission anniversary on Saturday will send the wrong signals. He received another chance to set things right and, for the country's sake, he better not bungle again.
Deuba's arch-nemesis, Girija Prasad Koirala, is circling like a vulture waiting for him to do just that. Which brings us to the question of the second

Mr G: this man also has attitude. What he sees as consistency others see as stubbornness, what he perceives as a struggle against regression most Nepalis see as a self-seeking effort to put himself and his coterie back in power. He sees himself as his brother's prot?g?, but even his own colleagues don't believe it.

The man who has been prime minister longest since 1990 must own up to the massive malgovernance during his watch. But instead of hints of behaviour change we see a familiar dog-in-the-manger mind-set: if I don't have it, I won't let anyone else have it either.

The king has made a concession, Koirala can't move the goal posts again just because the palace made someone he didn't like prime minister. The country is in a much deeper crisis now than in 1994, he can't keep playing the same old games.

The Nepali people want peace. They really don't care who delivers it. Let's not split hairs about who did what and when to whom. We urge the remaining four parties not to be too hung up on process, but make a visionary and statesmanlike compromise for stability. It won't be seen as a weakness. In fact, when the time comes, the people will reward them for it.