Nepali Democracy? The Maoists have all the Answers Bichar Nepali March 13, 2007 Describing democracy in a few words is easy: people power, strong institutions, fair. Describing Nepali politicians in a few words is even easier: irresponsible behavior, loathe to accountability, clueless. Before I go any further, let me be clear. I am not (yes, I am not) an expert in Democracy and Nepali politics. However, as a firm believer in the power of people and democratic institutions, I can't resist commenting on the ongoing circus in Nepal. Capable people own up and learn from their mistakes, take appropriate corrective actions and move on. Losers, on the other hand, make excuses for everything, blame others for their failures and are incapable of looking into the future, because the past holds promise for them, not the future. Take Prachanda's recent tirade against "palace elements" as an example. First he confidently barks that the palace "hatching conspiracies" by assassinating an American official and blaming it on the Maoists. Then, two days later, amidst rebukes from all sides, he proudly asserts that the Maoists are “collecting evidence” to prove his point. Of course, when the King spoke – irresponsibly, according to SPAM – his statement was made into such a big issue. And now Prachanda comes in and blurts out something that, to me, is no less ridiculous and irresponsible than the king defending his coup-de-tat. The next day Mr. Mahara made another astonishing statement about the palace spending Rs 600 million to assassinate SPA leaders. The story also talked about a CD being filed at the parliament. Upon closer look, it seems that the only things the CD contains are a bunch of anti-Maoist articles. We should expect a DVD (perhaps a Bond movie) that proves the alleged palace conspiracies against American officials. Going a step further on Monday (March 12), Prachanda proudly claimed that the Maoists have technical human resources and weapons outside cantonments with the ability to launch massive simultaneous attacks on many places. Of course, the excuse this time was that the UN did not register them. A few questions arise from these episodes: 1.If all the evidence had not been collected, why did Prachanda make such a serious allegation? Or, was he simply blurting out random thoughts? 2.Do we have a clear double standard in Nepal about who can say what? 3.If arms are swept by rivers, parliament will bypass the CA election to declare Nepal a republic, and the Maoists can renege on most of the tenets of the peace accord, what kind of democracy are we supposed to expect in Nepal? And as for democracy in Nepal, regardless of what system we have, will it suffice if the Maoists say that we have democracy?