Nepali Times: Mr Koirala, sir, it has been more than 20 years since you have been in self-imposed exile in heaven. This has given you a certain perspective on how things have turned out after your departure. How does it look from paradise?
BP: Well, let me put it this way. It doesn't look as bad from here as it probably does from ground level where you are. Yes, a lot of the stuff flying around may remind you of December 1960 when my parliament was dissolved and we were sent to jail by the present king's father. But the Nepali people have come a long way since then. The 1990 constitution was not perfect (no constitution is) but it began the process of restoring sovereignty to the people. Of course, people made jokes about it: they said Nepalis are now free, but only free to complain how miserable they are. But that was precisely the point: before that they weren't even allowed to complain.
In hindsight, you could say that our expectations were too high. 1990 was an unfinished movement, it bought us time to set things right. Unfortunately, my successors squandered that period. The people were impatient, they wanted democracy to bring immediate tangible results to their lives. And it did: maternal mortality, infant mortality and literacy all got better. But the change was not dramatic enough. The people got disillusioned. Still, public opinion polls you have done down there show that people blame the leaders and not the system. It's only the cynical Kathmandu elite that blames democracy, in the rest of Nepal democracy has struck deep roots. Democracy is the worst system in the world-except for all the others, as Winston Churchill, who is here with me, keeps saying.
Yet, there seems to be an attempt to put democracy into reverse gear, will this work?
No it won't, and for the reason I just explained. But having said that, let me add that the king has a point. You could say that his October Fourth move was unconstitutional and undemocratic, but the fact is that the Maoists were at the gates. My brother, niece and former proteges were carrying on as if the only thing that mattered was to cling on to power. Our party won an absolute majority in parliament in 1999, and what did we do? We changed prime ministers three times in two years, and kept fighting each other. Kishunji had the vision and could rule by example, but he is so disappointed he has taken a vow of silence. My brother is a good fellow, he has organisational skills. But his long-term vision is impaired by his obsession with day-to-day politics. I always had nothing but admiration and affection for Shailaja, in the family she alone has integrity and commitment. What the king needs now is an efficient and united team to conclude the peace process and lay the groundwork for the next elections.
Speaking of the peace process. Do you think the Maoists are genuine in their offer for peace?
My views on extremist communism have not changed. I would be stating the obvious if I repeated that in the dialectics of Leninism with its Maoist modifications: the end justifies the means. So the modus operandi is the same whether it is the Sandinistas or the Senderistas, they can shelve the armed struggle from time to time (even when they are winning) to infiltrate a weak government and destroy it from within because they find that an easier option. Why should our Maoists continue with a war if the cabinet cannot speak with one voice and the constitutional forces are fighting each other like cats and dogs? They can just wait for the right moment and pounce.
You've had some time to think about this: you came back to Nepal in 1977 with the slogan of national reconciliation. Is it time for another national reconciliation?
You know, I often think had I accommodated King Mahendra's ambitions, maybe we wouldn't have been in the wilderness for 30 years. But then, what kind of democracy would that be? You've got a similar situation down there now. In the row between the palace and parties, it is difficult to say which is blacker: the pot or the kettle. Both sides think they can win, but in this game there are no winners, only losers. And if both lose, what kind of Nepal will we have left? Still, it is the king who took control, and it is his responsibility to set things right. He can't say he doesn't have executive powers. There is nothing preventing him from calling that famous tea party for all the parties. That would set the ball rolling. A substantial discussion can then start on the composition of an interim administration. Of course, my brother will then be fighting with everyone else about berths in that cabinet, but that's a risk that comes with the turf.
So, a government of national reconciliation?
Precisely. It wouldn't be the ultimate solution, but at least it will take you out of this quagmire. The present crisis is a fantastic opportunity to reform our laws, our society, have a more inclusive democracy, and devolve power to the people through local government units. And I just don't see what is holding things up. Actually, I do. It is the political egos of the protagonists.
Do you sometimes wish you were back?
Not really. I can watch it all unfold from up here.
