Notwithstanding the jaundiced view of some people (Krishna Adhikari in Letters #279) in response to my column ('Rebuilding democracy',#277)King Gyanendra himself has said that February First was a temporary move. So the challenge to rebuild democracy lies solely in the parties' court. Since the leaders have confessed having 'made mistakes' (obviously, a euphemism for their massive corruption), the parties should have kicked out the stinking among them and laid out measures to provide clean governance in future. But sadly, the very corrupt continue to rule the roost. Lately, they have added to their sins by turning for help to our perpetual tormentor, India which, by facilitating the 12-point pact, has now reduced them to being the Maoists' mouthpiece in Kathmandu. So long as the parties do not go through necessary ablutions, the vast silent majority will continue to be beholden to the monarch. NRNs, UN officials, donors or diplomats, instead of behaving as partisan NGO activists, should work for taming the parties along this line. The brilliant success of the 1988 Panchayat-time innovation of community forestry results from three good governance conditions, popular participation, transparent management and accountability of leaders. Replicating this devolution across all development sectors could be one commitment the parties could make for their return to power.

Bihari Krishna Shrestha,
Kathmandu
After reading your editorial ('Let's not go back there', #279) it became even harder for me to figure out what is going on inside the head of Nepal's ruler . It has been a year since he took over power and it is clear to everyone that he has increased his isolation and fragmented the Nepali people. If he is reading the independent and credible media like yours, he will know that Prachanda has now put himself on the same pedestal as the king of Nepal. The Maoist chieftain may not be as powerful, the king's army may be bigger but in the people's perception it is now Prachanda vs Gyanendra. What could be worse for the continuity of the monarchy and future of this country than this? It is time His Majesty realised he made a mistake and take the least cost-option which is to patch up with the parties and then negotiate with the Maoists. It will save the Nepali people and him a lot of grief.
Name withheld
Seeing Prachanda's picture on your page one ('Prachanda's new path', #278) I now see why the Maoists get such good press. It is because you in the media glorify them and launder the image of these blood-thirsty criminals. It is now clear that the political parties, desperate for recognition have taken the risky step of riding the tiger. Sooner or later, the tiger will eat them up.
Mina KC,
email
Kunda Dixit hits the nail on the head by exposing India's double standard in dealing with Nepal by pointing out its support for the Burmese junta ('Indian sinophobia', #279). Is this another example of the Kirkpatrik Doctrine in action of everything being ok as long as "they're our sons of bitches"? What Dixit does not mention is that there is a bit of disquiet in India about Bhutan's king public relations exercise of voluntary abdication because it was done without New Delhi's concurrence. For once in Nepal we have a visionary king who knows where he is going and doesn't want to be anyone's puppet, and the Indians don't like it one bit. All this talk of democracy and constitutional monarchy is just for public consumption.
JB Shah,
email