I cry silently when I think of the situation in Nepal. What saddens me most is that there seems to be no workable solution in sight. The land of peace has become the headline news for massacre and killings and many negative news. Our leaders have had the opportunity to work things out more than once, yet they have bungled it badly. The continuing bad governance coupled with rampant corruption has disenchanted the common people. Thirty years of panchayat regime did not prepare us for democracy that we gained after a hard struggle in early 90s.
I am no royalist; I am just a simple plain Nepali who only wishes the very best of Nepal and Nepalis that will also contribute to wellbeing of our neighbours and, ultimately, to the world. Nor do I think that our leaders, who have been in the news in the last few years, are capable of handling the situation. They are good only to look after only their own petty interest. We have lost more than 12,000 able bodied Nepalis in this ongoing Maoist insurgency. They were our very own people. Killing in anyway is bad, but killing Nepalis by Nepalis on a daily basis? It is unimaginable. This nonsense must be stopped at once.
The king is now the full incharge of the country. We must appeal to the king to restore democracy. As a community living outside Nepal, we must let him know in a constructive way how he can truly meet the expectations of the common Nepalis. I know the king has asked for three years and I strongly feel that we should give him full three years. The clock has started ticking since 1 February this year, and, as it is well known, sadly, that some of the actions of the King?s direct rule do not give confidence to the people.
We gave more than three chances to many leaders worth his salt in the last decade or more. Why not 3 years to the king? I do tend to believe that the king has accepted the challenge to reform the country by putting his crown at stake by going to the direct rule.
Perhaps what we should do is ask the king to form a ?set of milestones? for the three-year period by which we can assess his direct rule.
Where do we expect the king to be at the year end of his take over? And, thereafter each year end, and finally where the country will be at the end of the three-year period
A clear road map is needed.
Yes, a parliamentary democracy is good but in a country where people cannot practice their franchise at will and where people are so much struggling in making their both ends meet, the government should not only make their priorities known, but should clarify how are they are going to implement them so that we can observe the progress. Education and health care should never be allowed to remain only the privilege of a few. It will only create a gap that will sow the seed for another type of insurgency in the long run.
Well, if the king comes up with a clear set of milestones and a road map that ensures the restoration of democracy, I think we should urge all parties and the Maoists to forget their petty politics and rise high in the interest of the people and support the king for the three-year period.
Therefore, friends, instead of showing a black flag to the king when he comes to New York in September, we should rather invite him to speak to as many gatherings of Nepalis as possible in various US cities he plans to visit.
Much prior to speaking to a gathering of Nepalis, the king should be presented with a list of what we thing should be included in the ?set of milestones? and ?a roadmap? so that the king would have reviewed it in advance and thus, he could express his opinions or commitment on them.
It would be good if the various organizations could start working on the draft of the milestones and roadmap, without any bias from any party, caste or religious affiliation. It will afford us and the king direct first hand opportunity to interact on the pressing subject that is dear to our heart.
We have often heard or read that the king gives a patience hearing to the people and then goes his own way of doing things ignoring the inputs from various people he met. This is our opportunity to judge him in first person. Bringing him to an interaction, assuming he is willing, is more productive than waving him a flag in a foreign land.
Methinks that would be more productive way in dealing with the king. What do you think?
.png)
