The crisis in Nepal once again shows the widening gap between the king and the country. The resignation of the prime minister, Mr Surya Bahadur Thapa, is only a footnote to the larger constitutional deadlock facing the Himalayan kingdom. The government of Mr Thapa, which was appointed by the palace after the country’s parliament had been dissolved, never had any political legitimacy. Ironically, the longer Mr Thapa’s government survived, the more difficult it became to fill the political void. When he began his uncertain term, Mr Thapa had two crucial tasks on hand. He had to start negotiations with the two major political parties — the Nepali Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist) — on the resumption of the political process. And he had to continue the even more important dialogue with the Maoists. If he failed on both fronts, the main reason was his government’s lack of credibility with both the parties and the people. No wonder that the parties are back on the streets of Kathmandu with their old demands for a “consensus” prime minister and restoration of the dissolved parliament. It is not difficult to predict that they would continue with their agitation if King Gyanendra foists another prime minister on the country without taking the parties into confidence.

The real issue is, however, more complicated than the choice of a prime minister acceptable to the parties. It revolves around the question of the right equations between the constitutional monarch and the democratic polity. At the centre of the question is Article 127 of the country’s constitution which allows the king to take away the powers of the executive. There are two ways the article can be withdrawn — by a fresh decree by the king himself or by a majority vote in parliament. King Gyanendra has to take the initiative to dispel doubts about his commitment to constitutional monarchy. Mr Thapa’s resignation offers him an opportunity to do so. The first test of how he does it will come in the manner he chooses the next prime minister. More important will be his brief to Mr Thapa’s successor about reviving the democratic process. The restoration of the dissolved parliament may not end the country’s political instability. The sooner the new government announces fresh elections, the better it would be for the restoration of the democratic process. That would also create an atmosphere of mutual trust between the interim government and the political parties. It could also help resume the suspended peace negotiations with the Maoists. King Gyanendra cannot afford to let Nepal continue with its dangerous drift.