Nepal is going through a tough time. But we have not seen enough yet. Things will get worse before they rebound. Of course, political stability is needed for a nation to survive but the term “political stability” is quite a dynamic yet delicate concept. Whether Nepal becomes a republic or remains a constitutional monarchy, I don’t see political stability in Nepal for many years. The so called political leaders including the king, and Maoists rarely address weakening socio-economic structures of the nation. Slogans fuel frustration if not supported by actions. Without sound socio-economic plans and the executions, or at least good faith attempt, of those plans, no political system can survive. I seriously doubt the current political leaderships in Nepal have concrete socio-economic plans in place. All they care for is political visibility and power grip. If you doubt my position, just ask these so called political leaders “What do you think about socio-economic situation of Nepal?, and what plans do you have and how are you going to executing those plans, if any?” Let me know what they say and if you are satisfied with their answers.

The nation belongs to its citizens. King or no king, Nepal will survive. However, we must write a new Constitution. The new constitution should be directionally aligned with the U.S. style Presidential system rather than British Parliamentary to avoid frequent “madhyabadhi chunab”, and “ MP kin bech”. The Prime Minister, who will be the head of the government, should directly be elected from the people. We can have bicameral Parliament with elected members (no nominees). Parliament Members must be restricted from being in the cabinet. Also, we don’t need 264 MPs (About 100 should be enough). If one mayor is enough for Kathmandu city then why elect a bunch of MPs from the same territory? In lower chamber, we can have members based on population and area but the upper chamber should have equal representation from each region (e.g. two members from each zone). Head of the state, call it the king or the president, should be ceremonial.

Why is it necessary to revive the parliament which was legally dismissed? If SPAs want to talk with Maoists, they can do so without reviving the dead parliament. In my opinion, they should form a government now and start negotiating with the Maoists. If the SPA government determines that only the Constituent Assembly can guarantee peace then they should go ahead and publicly, and officially announce the process for CA. I don’t see any reason why would they need the king’s permission for that. If the king does not like that, well..too bad! Let him deal with that.

If the political parties sincerely want the peace to prevail, and political process to continue, they should show their leadership now. As soon as the political process starts, they (political players) should start restructuring for socio-economic structures. Otherwise, falano chor desh chhod ...chakka jam...Nepal Bandha..nara will continue to echo the streets, and hills in the nation for decades to come. I hope Maoists got the point that they don't need guns to change things. What Maoists could not do in 10 years with armed militia, unarmed people did in 10 days.

This current situation of no confidence should end. The king has no confidence that he has enough support to for constiuent Assemby, Political parties doubt if they can win enough seats to swing the government, and Maoists not sure how much support is dedicated and how much is feared. When all the players have doubt about their positions, the game will suck.

Whatever Indra runs the show, people want change that leads them to better life. What leads them there? It is for the people who call themselves “the leaders” to figure out. Can they?

Let's watch. The whistle is blown already.