A deep, personal distrust that King Gyanendra harbours against politicians lies at the root of the standoff between Narayanhiti and the parties agitating at Ratna Park.
Suspicion holds the populace in limbo even as the polity dips into a tailspin: the economy, state activity and development work lie in tatters. The major road arteries are blocked, Kathmandu Valley and the business centres are cut off and the army and Maoists prepare for a confrontation that will extend far beyond the coming monsoon.
The political solution that could provide a nikaas with the insurgents, which can only come from an all-party government coupled with the revival of the parliament, seems to be remote as the king keeps the parties at arm's length.
The origin of the royal distrust is unclear, but it is obvious that King Gyanendra regards the parties as dens of venal politicians, both corrupt and inept. This belief jives with the conviction of certain sections of Kathmandu society, that the politicians ran the country to the ground after 1990.
Is the king focussing on well-publicised malfeasance of a few to tar the rank and file of the political parties? Does one detect in this a trace of self-interest, the king having expressed his intention of being 'constructive'? Is there a fear that revival of parliament will wrest away too much power?
Whether there was failure of democracy under parliamentary rule remains a matter for debate and not the basis on which an unelected entity can take decisions for the people. In the sliding scale of corruption and mal-governance, the politicians are asking where the parties stand in relation to the three-decade-long Panchayat system, as well as the 19 months of the king's rule-by-nomination (during which period there has been no accounting of public expenditure).
"If the king means what he says about seeking a prime minister without corrupt associations, what does he have against me or, say, Amik Sherchan (of the United People's Front)?" asked Madhab Kumar Nepal, seeking to call the bluff.
On Wednesday, the king did finally meet the leaders of the five-party alliance but, while asking them to play their hand, as the principal player, he chose not to show his cards. He thanked them for coming but a date for the next rendezvous was not set. At press time Thursday, rumours were rife on what the palace might do next, the majority opinion being that it would ignore the five parties yet again in selecting a prime minister.
The monarchical distaste for political parties has short-term ramifications with regard to who is going to head the next government. In the long run, will such excessive animosity allow King Gyanendra to serve as facilitator between the parties in times of crisis? That would have been the hope.
