Incorrect analysis

In his article published recently in THT, Shailendra Kumar Upadhyay advocated that the parties should accept royal usurpation of the state and join the palace on its terms. He takes the youth of the country to task for their overwhelming support for the abolition of the expensive, archaic and unpopular Monarchy, realising little that we share this sentiment with most of the people. He rightly states that the goal should be to restore peace, but he fails to realise that the distance between the positions of the parties and the Maoists is minor compared to that between the Monarch and the Maoists; following his prescription, it guarantees prolongation, and not resolution, of the bloody and destructive civil war. Obviously, the writer understands neither democracy nor statesmanship. I remember Abraham Lincoln saying: “Better to be silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubts.”

Sandip Mishra, via e-mail

Disagreement

I strongly disagree with the announcement of Janajati Mahasangha (JM) that the janajatis have supported the ongoing agitation. The JM has no authority to authenticate the five party agitation. If the parties were banned, the move would have been considered to be egression. But they are free. Being a genuine member of janjati community, I vehemently disagree with the misuse of the janajatis in this case. The agitation is absolutely a non-political vandalism.

Moreover, all-party government is equal to party less government, since in multiparty system, there must be an opposition party.

D P Kandangwa, Lazimpat

One-sided

You are unfairly covering one-sided news stories about the ongoing agitation. For example the news entitled “29 days on, protests see no end” on April 30 has not mentioned the ruthless battening of the protestors by the police after encircling them in Tundikhel area on the previous day. This is not the right approach if you intend to help in reconciliation between the King and the agitating political parties.

Utsuk Shrestha, Chabahil

Give numbers

Media cover news regarding the casualties during confrontations between the security forces and the insurgents. However, the figure of casualties is usually given in dozens like ‘more than four dozens died in fighting.’ Earlier, the figure was given in numbers like ‘about 50 persons died in fighting.’By giving the number of people dead in dozens, I feel, people are being treated as animals or objects. Can we not count the casualties in numbers rather than in dozens?

Sanjiv Luintel, via e-mail

Unfair

It is quite disheartening to find the Pakistani Cricket Board (PCB) insulting senior players like Akhtar, Razzaq and Moin Khan, over providing fake medical reports. The players are made scapegoats for the whole team’s failure. The same was the case during their first round exit in the World Cup when Waqar Younis and Inzamam had to take the burnt. PCB then made a great mistake by denying Waqar, an all-time great wicket-taker through his reverse swings and “beamers”, a place in the squad. As a result, this man had to take retirement early.

Hope the PCB gives due respect to its players and drop its charges against the aforesaid players.

Amit Jha, Ghattekulo