THE SOLITITUDE OF A KING

The emergence of the Maoists as the single-largest party in the forthcoming Assembly, and the likelihood of a government under its leadership, has sent out the message that time and tide don’t wait for anyone. And in this tsunami of change, Nepal—which lost its status as an officially Hindu nation two years ago—looks set to lose the world’s only Hindu monarch whose forefather began the Shah dynasty 240 years ago.

Nepal is now speculating over the king’s future. Will he seek asylum in India? Will he counter the political tide? Or will he live on in Nepal as an ordinary citizen?

People who have interacted with him over a period of time say he is now reconciled to reality and will probably choose to become a commoner and live in his land of birth. “The king admits that the takeover of power by him in February 2005 was wrong,” says a former minister. “But political parties are after him because by holding him guilty alone, they will be absolved of their sins.” And since it is not prudent to be saying anthing favourable about royalty in Kathmandu these days, he hastily adds, “Please do not mention my name. I will be hanged tomorrow.”

The king, say many, has more reasons to fear than to hope. The only thing he is banking on is the procedural shortcomings in the Maoist determination to oust him at the first session of the new Assembly. “If established norms are to be followed, the first meeting should be devoted exclusively to the selection of a pro-tem speaker who will administer oath to the new members,” says Kumar Regmi, president of the Constitutional Lawyers Forum. “How can you decide on abolishing monarchy without a government in place?” he asks.

Regmi’s question is echoed by incumbent Law Minister Narendra Nembwang who says such a step is not possible if the rule book is followed. But the dominant political will, in all probability, outweigh the norms. The Maoists know that they have to make lot of compromises to run their minority government and the only way to give a message that it will not compromise on its agenda would be to dismantle the “biggest symbol of feudalism” in Nepal. After all, major parties like the Nepali Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal-United Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML), who were in favour of a constitutional monarchy, amended their party constitutions in favour of the republic model of governance.

“We give the king four weeks’ time to pack off and leave Narayanhiti,” says Baburam Bhattarai, the person who is likely to step in as Prime Minister if Moaist chief Prachanda insists on becoming the first president of Republic Nepal, a dream he has cherished for long and one that has invited the ridicule of his political rivals.

Gyanendra has not responded to the ultimatum. “How can he respond to press reports based on what Maoist leaders said at some public forum?” asks the ex-minister.

In the past two years, King Gyanendra has issued six messages—two each on Democracy Day and Vijaya Dashmi, on New Year’s Day on April 13 this year when he appealed to the voters to come out in strength to cast their votes, and then recently when he expressed satisfaction over the election process. Like Prime Minister G P Koirala, the king has, however, refrained from welcoming or making any comment on the poll results.

Many were surprised when Gyanendra chose to express satisfaction about an election that tolled his knell as king, but he was clearly sending out a message. “By appealing to the people to vote, he dispelled the news that appeared in a section of the Nepalese media that he was out to stall the poll by using the Madheshi Janadhikar Forum,” an official at the palace says. The Forum has emerged as the largest party in Nepal’s terai areas adjoining India

Many suspect the Forum, specially its leader Upendra Yadav, despite his long leftist background including his almost eight-year long association with the Maoists, of having deep relations with the India’s Bharatiya Janata Party leaders and RSS. But Nepalese politicians who have been bestowed favours by the monarchy over years, if not generations during its all-powerful regime, have begun deserting the sinking ship.

No one has come forward to speak for the king. And from a quiet, and almost deserted palace, Gyanendra has been keeping a watch on the hostile developments outside.

“I have no clue about his future plans. But I am sure he is aware of the developments that are taking place,” says Prabhakar Rana, his longtime business associate and a close relative.

But as some officials reveal, the king had been in an introspective mood, mulling over his miscalculation in arrogating absolute powers for himself in 2005. So, what made him do that? “It was partly the backing of the army, security forces and the bureaucracy, but more than that, it was the promise of international support in crushing insurgency way back in 2002,” says a former aide to the king. “When he tried to deal a decisive blow to the Maoists, the international community not only pulled out, but it also rallied round the alliance of the seven political parties and the Maoists on an anti-monarchy package.”

Independent political analysts say the withdrawal of the international community’s support also badly mauled the authority of the state and the restoration of rule of law will be the first challenge that the Maoists will face when they form the government.

Yet, the royal introspection has come too late. The biggest challenge for the king lies in how to respond to the emerging situation. “Prime Minister Koirala has not spoken to him and the Maoists’ appeal to him to vacate the palace has come only through the media. How can he respond in such a situation?” asks a Nepal Police DIG, who also refutes that the police will scale down security deployment for the king and other members of the royal family.

But the king must read the writing on the wall and “heed our four-week ultimatum”, insists Dinanath Sharma, a senior Maoist central committee member. This demand is mild in comparison to Prachanda’s earlier threat through the BBC that the king could also be executed.

The incoming government in all likelihood will evict the king from the Narayanhiti Palace—built by the present king’s great-grandfather, Prithvi Bir Bikram Shah, in the 1940s. The palace has undergone many expansions, demolitions and constructions since. Tribhuvan Sadan, the cottage named after Gyanendra’s grandfather, was razed and rebuilt after the palace massacre on June 1, 2001, when Crown Prince Dipendra pumped bullets into his father Birendra, mother Aishwarya, his siblings and six others. Gyanendra succeeded to the throne after Dipendra, himself in deep coma for three days allegedly after a self-inflicted gun-shot injury, breathed his last.

As per the royal tradition, the crown prince stays back in the Narayanhiti Palace and the brother princes move out to their own bungalows after their wedding. That’s how Gyanendra, once third in line to the throne, moved to Nirmal Niwas in Kathmandu’s Maharajgunj area some 37 years ago. The royal palace massacre not only elevated him to the throne, but also moved him back to Narayanhiti, some 2 km away from Nirmal Niwas, now occupied by his son Paras.

Last year, the government initiated the process of nationalising all the property of the slain king, as well as the six historical palaces, some of them as old as Nepal’s unification when they were under the occupation of the defeated lesser kings and their fiefs. The present-day Nepal was unified into a kingdom in 1768 by Prithvi Narain Shah, of whose dynasty Gyanendra is the 11th incumbent.

Gyanendra may lose his residences once he becomes a commoner. But he has substantial business interests and investments in Soaltee Hotel, Surya Tobacco, a subsidiary of Indian company ITC, and other ventures to fall back on. Yet the challenge for him still remains daunting: how to survive as a commoner and as an ex-king in a Red-regime.