Bineet Ji, Read his article again..he makes a very clear case for the Monarch to step up his power and not give in to the party heard as he puts it..well, vis-a-vis the situation in Nepal prior to his ceeding power to the people, I presume you are aware of the measures that were in place: 1. Army stationed at News stations/FMRadio stations ets editing reports before they aired 2. The detention of student leaders without producing them in court and once the Suprme court ordered them released, re-arresting them on the pretext that the Supreme Court did not say that those leaders could not be "re-arrested" 3. Ongoing extrajudicial detentions and "forced dissappearances" against various people (Yes, I know the Maoists were doing the same) So..that is what I say is a double standard - it's easy for you and me to sit in another country and say that the Monarch should not give in and in fact be more powerful and consolidate his power when these measures serve to stiffle any form of disent, dissent carries with it the risk of loss of life (as was plain to see in Kalanki)...for Mr. Karki to make the case for a stronger Monarchy while he lives in the U.S and enjoys the protections of the 1st amendment (Right to Freedom of Speech and Association) and the guarantees of the bill of rights is what makes his stance on the monarchy a double standard. As to your point of "one can stay her and yet love Nepal" - was that ever in dispute. I have no doubt that he cares for Nepal, but I think the case can be made that given the show of public sentiments, writing articles that go against everything a majority of those out on the streets demanded is counter to what the people of Nepal want - does that mean that he loves Nepal less...no...just that his views would place him in a minority even in Nepal.