After Nepal's royal coup:

The executive monarch has banned criticism of the security forces, "made directly or indirectly," and threatened to seize people's property whenever "necessary." Communications in Nepal remain under tight surveillance even as political leaders escape to India.

Evidently, strong criticism of the coup by the United Nations, major Western Powers and India hasn't yet had much impact. This might appear strange considering that Nepal's monarch rules -- shakily -- one of the world's 10 poorest countries, and that his writ doesn't run in two-thirds of Nepal's 75 districts, where the Maoists hold sway.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

Clearly, King Gyandendra has had tacit support from a major Power. Or else, he wouldn't have ignored repeated warnings by the US, Britain, and India against dismissing Mr Deuba.

That power is probably China. On January 21, the King closed down the Dalai Lama's offices in Nepal. Beijing lavished praise on him. China regrettably describes the coup as an "internal matter" of Nepal. The King is playing "the China Card." (Nepal also plays the "India Card" whenever that suits it.)

This is a high-risk gamble. Chinese support alone won't see King Gyanendra through his troubles. Beijing could easily dump him, as it did in the early 1990s.

The King has risked an even more reckless domestic gamble. He has removed the buffer between the Palace and an increasingly restive population. Now, he won't have the luxury of blaming political parties for the nation's growing problems.

His actions will probably further aggravate Nepal's multiple crises of governability and erode his own authority and credibility.

The King's takeover is spurring Nepal's parliamentary parties and the Maoists to jointly demand restoration of democratic freedoms. The opposition is becoming more coherent.

Since the King's dismissal of the first Deuba government in 2002, mainstream politicians have increasingly demanded a new quasi-republican constitution. They include leaders from the Koirala and Deuba factions of the Nepali Congress, Communist Party (United Marxist-Leninist), Ekta Mashal, and Sadbhavana Party.

The King is committing a huge blunder in underestimating the pro-democracy sentiment amongst the Nepali people. The Nepalis have tasted freedom for 15 years. They prefer multi-party democracy to monarchy.

A 2003 survey by Tribhuvan University shows that 62 percent of Nepalis say "democracy is always preferable to any other form of government." Seventy eight percent favour either a limited monarchy or its abolition. Only 22 percent want an executive monarchy.

The King's rule by proxy since October 2002 has produced poor results. No wonder 91 percent of Nepalis want either a new constitution or amendments to the existing constitution.

So, the Maoists' demand for a round-table conference, an interim government, and a Constituent Assembly is likely to gather popular and political-party support. If this happens, the future of the Shah dynasty could be in jeopardy.

The King is inviting the Maoists to talks. They will probably reject this offer after the February 8 helicopter raids on them. They regard the King as an absolutist "national betrayer," who wants to take Nepal back to the 15th century.

A pre-condition for talks between the King and any representatives of the people is the release of political leaders, and restoration of civil liberties.

The King must be firmly told this by the whole world, in particular, India. India and Nepal have innumerable family links and an open border with free movement of people and goods. Nepalis can join India's armed forces -- where over 30,000 Nepalis serve -- and rise to the highest levels. They can also join India's civil services.

Many Nepalis would feel let down if India doesn't pressure the King to restore freedom. But India must be sensitive to Nepali sensibilities. The Nepalis resent India's perceived past political "interference," its proposals for construction of dams on common rivers, and its blockade of their landlocked country in 1988-89.

The Nepalis keep their clocks 15 minutes apart from Indian Standard Time -- a sign of independence!

What should India do apart from deploring the coup, which will accelerate the collapse of the Nepali state -- right on its open borders? It should stop giving arms to the Royal Nepal Army and aid to the government (as distinct from NGOs delivering services to the people).

In recent years, India supplied Rs 375 crores worth of arms to Nepal, including helicopters, landmines, etc. which are liable to be used against civilians as well as insurgents.

One reason for this is New Delhi's fear that the Maoists would forge links with Indian Naxalites. This preoccupation was especially strong under the Vajpayee-Advani dispensation. (RSS organs Panchajanya and Organiser support the King's coup.)

New Delhi was wrong to cancel the Dhaka Summit of Saarc to register its annoyance with the King. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh should have attended the Summit and rebuked the King.

India must oppose a military solution to the Maoist insurgency crisis. The 78,000-strong RNA has proved incapable of defeating it although the Maoists only have 3,000 modern guns.

The Maoists use questionable, indeed deplorable, methods. But they are not terrorists. They have support in the countryside, which is a cesspool of unaddressed grievances and unredeemed injustices. These can only be addressed through land reform, minimum needs programmes in health and education, and a sweeping drive against corruption. India must encourage this.

India shouldn't expect much help from the US here. The US sabotaged talks with the Maoists by declaring them "terrorists" in April 2003. Earlier too, its post-9/11 militarist posture had a negative impact in Nepal and derailed negotiations.

However, India can count on the support of many other states -- and above all, large numbers of Nepalis.

Praful Bidwai is an eminent Indian columnist.