Matthew Kahane, the chief of the UN system in Nepal, has called on all concerned to take measures that will lead to dialogue and peace in the country. Speaking at a programme in the capital on Monday to mark the UN’s 60th anniversary, Kahane reflected what the UN secretary-general, Kofi Annan, has stressed more than once; Annan has even offered the use of the UN’s good offices in the pursuit of peace. Virtually all major external powers that exert considerable influence in Nepal have stressed peace and democracy, pointing out dialogue as the best way of resolving the crisis. During CPN-UML general secretary Madhav Nepal’s current visit to New Delhi, Indian leaders have reiterated their support for the restoration of democracy in Nepal.

Mostly, the concern for peace expressed by foreign countries has been confined to expressions of goodwill. Their emphasis on the need for reconciliation between the palace and the parties is unlikely to materialise, given the government’s power ambitions. The present crisis is not only one of the restoration of democracy under the 1990 Constitution, but also of the resolution of the Maoist insurgency. Here, many foreign powers seem to be guided by their various interests, and so they are not seen to be utilising their influence adequately for the good of the Nepali people. Admittedly, the domestic powers have their own agendas, which conflict in most respects. But foreign powers and certain domestic quarters do not appear to give much importance to ascertaining what the Nepali people themselves want.

In today’s world, no solution will be acceptable outside a democratic framework. But there are variations and degrees of democracy. The political parties are talking of ‘total democracy’ which they could interpret in any way, depending on the situation. The Maoists stress the establishment of a republican order; however, as they have said, they are ready to leave the question to the verdict of the constituent assembly. And the establishment wants to increase and consolidate its powers. Under the circumstances, an amicable settlement is almost impossible, left to themselves. It is here that the international community could play a highly constructive role by leaning on the domestic powers to agree to a fully democratic framework and to let the people decide and be the arbiter of their destiny.