Various methodologies can be employed to analyse the routing of NC and UML. In power politics, when citizens find themselves losers, they challenge political authority in elections. Although the transition toward democracy in the 1990s was characterised by electoral success of the government, it became increasingly frustrating to observe the slow progress of political, social and economic development. Inability to establish rules of political game after the collapse of autocratic partyless system produced a degenerated form of parliamentary politics. Political inability of the leaders to reconstruct society, their monumental failure to develop models for internal stability and rising expectations catalysed the armed Maoist struggle.

The leftward move was triggered by insufficient attention to institutional mechanisms of change. There was no authoritative figure with stature and integrity to lead the transition, nor a diligent mediator to provide a framework of legitimacy and identity. Even more shocking was the government’s sheer inability to right popular grievances. Provisions were not made for political representation, social participation, self-determination, equitable power sharing, or to determine what is equitable. Politics turned into a search for office rather than an opportunity to serve the public.

The implication of rise in Maoist influence is multidimensional. The paramount proposition about Nepali culture is that values, beliefs and attitudes of Nepalis have changed significantly. Moreover, the synergy created by Maoists indicates their -ism may be compatible with democracy. It is clear that the stagnant equilibrium of three major forces — the palace, political parties and Maoists — has now been swept away.

International community and scholars continue to harbour suspicion that the Maoist may have hidden agenda of turning Nepal into a radical state. Evidence suggest a trial-and-error pattern is likely to persist. The -ism that Nepali Maoists espouse might be a Maoism engrossed in economic, humanitarian and democratisation projects. Some might question how tenets of democracy can be practiced and protected unless Maoists become integrated into the international market which only considers the forces that embrace liberal democracy legitimate. But every action is a choice. Obviously, the electoral participation of Maoists opens the prospect for democratic development. Of course, the ground realities are intricate. But politically, the Maoists have entered a new era and no longer have the power to threaten democratic order. In addition, no matter how devastating the insurgency, the events that followed have legitimised it.

Since Nepal is dominated by ethnic nationalism, clash of identities, conflict of interest, and exclusive vision, it must have a democratic regime that emphasises compromise and accommodation to bring about changes in modus operandi of the state. Identifying the direction and nature of change in political culture is difficult. It seems obvious that changes will have to be introduced, both in the structure of government and in the way political life is organised. However, the transition to democracy proceeds more peacefully when institutions needed for functioning of democratic society are in place.

Socio-politically weak states having no legitimate or effective institutions and are prone to instability and conflicts. Ironically, the remnants of authoritarian rule responsible for fragile democracy can favourably affect the balance of power, as authoritarian elites construct overt and covert rules of the game to protect their core interests. It also increases the ability of authoritarian leadership and its supporters to subvert transition. Yet in a world where people are free to choose and where information is freely available, all that matters is whether those at the helm are able to maintain a cohesive national strategy to promote stability, accountability, democracy and development.

Redemocratisation of Nepal with a long legacy of authoritarian rule is more likely to face hurdles than those with shorter authoritarian experience. Even if CA election is a white water passage, the evidence is not conclusive because a product of poorly designed institution can lead to an unruly electorate — a primary factor for the growth of ‘democratic deficit.’ In this sense, the election may have opened a new chapter in Nepal’s modern history, but any transformation without meaningful social and political negotiation and with authoritarian overtones is likely to intensify political instability. Nepal needs an associational democracy where civil society forms part of a broader institutional infrastructure. This calls for building institutional power in each sector of society, for if economic reforms and political development enrich only a few, the transition is likely to ignite a new vicious struggle. The future, as usual, is unknown, but the deftness of Maoists is unsurpassed.

Thapa is professor of Politics, TU