The demand for Home Minister Krishna Sitaula’s resignation has come from different quarters. What’s more startling is the repeated demand being made by Sujata Koirala, prime minister’s daughter and central committee member of the Nepali Congress (NC), as well as from Narendra Nembang, one of Sitaula’s cabinet colleagues. It is natural on the part of Madhesi leaders to demand the home minister’s resignation — irrespective of the person occupying the chair — because of the immense responsibility that falls on the shoulder of the concerned minister.

Although any home minister is expected to incur the wrath of agitating groups because of the vanishing norms in politics and methods of opposition, his resignation is not the solution. Nor can it fulfill the demands of the Madhesi or the Janajatis if the seven parties are not prepared to meet the demands of proportional election, regional autonomy and federalism.

So far, the government or eight parties have addressed the issues raised by the Madhesis and Janajatis only superficially. A more comprehensive policy needs to be developed for redressing the grievances of various communities and regions.

The current time presents both an opportunity and a challenge to remake history. Those who have not understood the intricacies of nation-building through the process of accommodation and instead prefer integration or subjugation are aghast at the sudden explosion of demands and strikes. Though the people are fed up of routine disturbances, the demands of the agitating groups will not disappear unless the agendas of new Nepal are settled. The piecemeal approach of the government whose own direction is not clear has further compounded the crisis. The government headed by the octogenarian PM whose health does not allow him to actively engage the agitating leaders in serious discussions or to move around the country for addressing the emergent issues has not helped the situation either. He has to depend on his close relatives, ministers or other leaders who meet only when a crisis develops. But these people act in a haste to find a solution without any serious study of the emergent issues.

Meanwhile, King Gyanendra’s Democracy Day message comes in the wake of agitations and bandhs called by the Madhesis, Janajatis and Tharus. Others are also joining the fray to make their presence felt. The parliament was summoned to take the King to task. All parties were unanimous in declaring the King’s statement a dangerous step back into active politics. People thought that the parliament was going to make another history by declaring Nepal a republic as the leaders’ fiery speeches indicated. But it turned out to be a fiasco with their “sound and fury signifying nothing”. It directed the government to take action as if the “sovereign” parliament wanted to avoid the agenda.

Nepali politicians have never learned lessons from their past mistakes. Failure in governance and the psychology of fear that they would be beaten down by the regressive forces led by the King have made them timid to take any bold decision to change the status quo. Now they have joined the anti-King chorus without taking any final decision towards declaring Nepal a republican state. Monarchy in Nepal has outlived its utility because of its failure to cooperate with the democratic development. Even moderate democrats who saw a role of the King now think that the days of monarchy are numbered despite the ambivalent positions taken by leaders and parties. Some political parties are still in a dilemma and have failed to foresee the emerging trends. The King, by defending his February 2005 coup, is trying to resurrect his position citing the failure of the politicians. More puzzling is the fact that some think

that the King should be made to retract his statement as the present parliament has no mandate to declare a republic. If they want to take refuge under excuses, then all actions of the present parliament should be nullified.

The fast erosion of popularity of political parties would provide a great relief to the traditional elements which still hope to fish in the troubled waters, especially by shortsighted politicians. If the parties fail to address the Madhesi and ethnic problems and if the current trend of misgovernance continues along with the anarchical conditions, political parties are likely to suffer a great deal, as has happened in Bangladesh.

When the two political Begums in Bangladesh failed to reach a compromise on the issue of holding elections under a caretaker government, a virtual anarchy engulfed the country, prompting the army to run the show. However, the army also knows that it cannot provide a long-term political solution as the people feel empowered but let down by selfish politicians. Thus enters Mohammad Yunus, a Nobel laureate and pioneer of Grameen Bank, in politics.

Prof. Baral is executive chairman, NCCS