Two very different viewpoints from two foreign sources: (1) http://us.rediff.com/news/2005/feb/10swadas.htm There is no alternative but for India to make the defeat of the Maoist insurgency in Nepal its immediate and unwavering goal. The Royal Nepal Army has to be given all the assistance to mount an offensive against the insurgents to force them back to the negotiating table. The restoration of democracy is a medium and long-term imperative. (2) http://www.iht.com/bin/print_ipub.php?file=/articles/2005/02/09/opinion/ednepal.html In Nepal, only democracy can defeat the Maoists. There is a lot of grey area in the whole debate, of course. But the question is, do you like Musharraf? Is he legitimate? Do you like the autocracy in Bhutan, the military junta in Burma, the communist dictatorship in China? Democracy is not a situational thing. It is universally good and true. It is not good or not depending on time or place. Personally I stand on democracy's side.