No. 4 (II) is a good option. - The existing system, according to the law of requisite variety, fails to accomodate different cultures, languages and ideologies rendering itself primitive. Which state has acocmodated different cultures, languages and ideologies in its working? There's always going to be one majority group, one principal ideology and one national culture. Others are reduced to the Sub-status. The problem in Nepal was/is, all things minority has been reduced to sub-sub status. However, this can be changed without changing the system itself, after achieving a national consensus on the problems and their solutions. Right now, the state exists even if its weak. It has certain decision making powers. But if we are to make a transition now, the new state will be really weak, because it won't be able to fight tribalism and regionalism because the transition was made without agreeing on the PROBLEMS and their SOLUTIONS. Instead oif all working together for a better Nepal, all will be fighting to establish their SUPREMACY because every group, every region sees Nepal based on its heritage and cultural tradition. So first a national consensus on the problems and what exactly needs to be chanegd, the regime or the workings of the regime, then go for any system the majority wants. Then the new regime will be legitimate, otherwise welcome to the Hobbesian Jungle! Enter at your own risk.