After Nepal

The resignation of Madhav Kumar Nepal as prime minister of Nepal on Wednesday did not come as a surprise. In the year that he had been in the post,his winning virtue appeared to be that among other aspirants he invited the least resistance in the ruling 22-party coalition. Even as he weathered persistent street protests by the Maoists this summer to press for his resignation,and in that time successfully got consensus to extend by a year the deadline for the constituent assembly,Nepals capacity to pull along as PM seemed uncertain. Indeed,in a televised address,he said as much,claiming that he was stepping aside to end the political deadlock. But if this pause is an opportunity for Nepals political parties to assert common cause in securing the process of constitution-making,and thereby the countrys hard-won democracy,there is also anxiety. A stable government must soon be put together,if the middle ground of the peace process is to hold,given the growing polarisation on the left and right extremes of Nepals politics.

The Maoists,whose government fell after differences with the president over the dismissal of the army chief,argue that they have the most seats in the assembly and should form the government. And these past months they pressed that case with countrywide disruptions. For their part,the 22 parties in Madhav Nepals government also saw that the pressing task of constitution-writing needs a far greater critical mass than their slim majority in the legislature. Amongst an overwhelming majority of its members,there is still a common desire that the constituent assembly succeed and by extension,that the country get a democratic constitution by the summer deadline next year. At stake are decisions on the exact structure of government in post-monarchy Nepal,the division of powers,etc,so that the next elections can take place with a constitutional framework in place. For this the Maoists and the 22-party coalition need to reach out to each other.

India is firmly invested in a democratic future for Nepal,and the weeks ahead require deft diplomacy based on a focus on the larger,long-term goals. The Maoists will obviously try to return to power,and New Delhi must be open to doing business with them. For all the perceptions of partisan diplomacy,Delhi knows that the peace process cannot succeed without the Maoists on board. But given the insinuation rife in Kathmandu over who is being supported or undermined by which outside power,Delhi must iterate the primacy of the constitution-making process and its support to the widest spectrum of Nepali political parties for that end.