The 'seasonal' rumor of the return of the monarchy housed in the museum is once again in full swing. On June 29, 2065, from the day the former king Gyanendra abdicated the throne of the Narayanhiti family by holding a press conference, discussions and debates about the possibility of the revival of the monarchy started. Since then, for a decade and a half, this rumor has been going on from time to time. Rumors of the return of the king in three cases have been circulating a lot.

First, when the former king gave a public speech. Secondly, when attending a religious meeting/ceremony or going on a pilgrimage. Thirdly, abroad more basically when visiting/visiting different cities of India. 

This time too, rumors of a return to the monarchy are widespread due to the former king's public expression and increased public presence. Some individuals/groups who are dissatisfied with the Rashtriya Swadantra Party (RPP) and the current party establishment have been spreading this rumor through social media in a planned manner. The latest rumors about the return of the king increased after Gyanendra's public statement on February 7. 

On the eve of Democracy Day, Gyanendra 'appealed to the countrymen to help him to save the nation' and it made waves in Nepali politics. After the statement, RPP workers held street rallies and demonstrations in his favor in various cities of the country. In Pokhara, he unveiled the salik of the late King Birendra. When he was returning from Pokhara to Kathmandu on Sunday, RPP leaders-activists reached the Tribhuvan Airport complex to pick him up. The protesting royalist group took him to Nirmal Niwas. 

The leaders of the major political parties have reacted to the recent activism of the former king. From Prime Minister KP Oli to the leader of the main opposition party Prachanda, they are expressing their displeasure with the former king's attitude. To what extent, Congress president Sher Bahadur Deuba, who speaks less, has also expressed that the king cannot return. Stating that the king has no place in the republic, he said in a program, "The republic came because of the king." Monarchy will not return unless someone wants it.' 

Even Oli and Prachanda have warned that if Gyanendra makes a mistake, he will have to pay a heavy price. Leaders of the second layer of Congress, UML and Maoists have also challenged Poorvaraja to open the party and enter politics. The Maoist leaders have returned to Kathmandu after suspending the public mobilization campaign and are preparing for a demonstration in favor of the republic. In other words, the political circle has been shaken by the previous activities of the former king, but has also become defensive. 

This is not the first instance of party leaders being aggressive and disgruntled towards Purvaraja. Even before, when the king's statement came out, there were rumors of the return of the monarchy and the leaders used to comment on it. However, this year's scenario is somewhat different. First, there is growing discontent among the general public towards top political leadership and party authoritarianism. The royalists have taken the time of intense anger towards the top leadership as an opportunity. Second, extremist currents are becoming dominant in international political circles. As a result, the power of the right-wing forces has increased. Third, the Bhutanese king has not only welcomed the former king by giving him the status of 'king', but is also playing a supporting role for the restoration of the monarchy in Nepal. A leader of RPP claims, "The Bhutanese king is playing the role of improving Gyanendra's relationship with India and conveying the message." 

Some of these references evoke Purvaraja and Rajavadi. Taking advantage of the fact that the common people are disappointed with 'Netaraj' and the south neighborhood is angry with the Oli government, they are spreading rumors about the revival of monarchy. But, are these foundations sufficient for the rise of the monarchy? A restoration of the monarchy adorned in a museum? Domestic public opinion and geopolitics have been favorable for this? This analysis has been done around these questions raised in the political circle. 

In particular, why did this institution, which had a legacy of two hundred and forty years, collapse when it comes to the return of the monarchy? It is necessary to return to the question. Before considering the possibility of restoring the monarchy, what were the reasons for its demise? Let's see that. 

There were two main reasons for the end of the monarchy. First, domestic. Second, external. 

First, the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly held on 15th June 2065 duly declared Nepal as a 'Federal Democratic Republic'. From that day, the monarchy was bid farewell and the republic was established in Nepal. Although one of the declarations of the Constituent Assembly seems to bid farewell to the monarchy, it has a special historical background. The establishment of the republic was a historic victory for democracy in the ongoing struggle for power between the court and the parties. Nepali politics was in a circle where the palace took away the basic rights of the people and imposed autocracy and the parties continued to struggle for the restoration of democracy. The historical movement of 2063 turned the country toward a republic. Earlier, the palace massacre on 19th June 2058 further weakened the Makkan monarchy. After the Darbar massacre, the country became a republic faster due to the actions of Gyanendra who became king for the second time. 

, that is, Gyanendra was the main factor behind the collapse of the 240-year legacy. He deprived the minimum and basic civil rights. In his quest to be a 'creative king', he became an autocrat with unnecessary ambitions. His ambition to rule by marginalizing both the parliamentary political parties and the Maoists, who grew up on the soil of violent politics, eventually brought these parties together on a single front to fight for people's rights. The mass movement was successful. On June 4, 2063, the restored parliament curtailed the authority of the monarchy. The powers vested in the king were brought under the control of the Parliament and the Council of Ministers. For some time there was discussion and debate about keeping 'Baby King' and 'Cultural King'. Finally, the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly bid farewell to the monarchy. The last king of the Shah dynasty, Gyanendra, made a mistake and due to the strength of the historical people's movement, the monarchy was bid farewell. 

Monarchy is a story that has been tested in history and has been disputed and failed. The Palace was the source of many examples of deprivation of basic rights of citizens, misrule and conspiracy in Nepali politics. In this background, will the restoration of the monarchy be carried out on the shoulders of the party of former Panchs, RRP or some low-class people who do not even have credibility? 

Second, international power centers that have direct/indirect influence on Nepal's politics also played a role in this farewell. Neighboring India was openly supporting the democratic movement in Nepal. China, which is said to be an Indian, Western power or a friendly power of the monarchy, has been involved since the 12-point agreement with the Maoists. 

Why is this background relevant here, the same question arises when the monarchy is being returned. As domestic and external conditions were favorable during the departure of the monarchy, are the conditions favorable for its return? Can the current motorcycle rallies by royalist groups be transformed into a mass movement capable of historic political transformation? Why would neighboring powers be ready to carry a harmless institution that has become history? 

There are two main reasons why the royalist group sees the domestic environment as favorable. First, frustration and disaffection aimed at major political parties and their top leaders. Second, processions and rallies in favor of the former king. Undoubtedly, there is a strong dissatisfaction among the public towards the party political leadership. People are looking for a capable leader who can instill hope in an alternative to the current party leadership. However, that option is not, cannot be, Purvaraja. The test of public opinion will be through elections. The results of the last few elections do not indicate that the general public is rooting for the former king. Instead, recent elections and the rise of some, like Balendra Shah, the National Independent Party, send a message that public opinion is looking for alternatives within democracy. 

Monarchy is a story that has been tested in history and has been disputed and failed. It is no secret that the palace was the source of many examples of deprivation of basic rights of citizens, misrule and conspiracies in Nepali politics. In this background, will the restoration of the monarchy be carried out on the shoulders of the party of former Panchs, RRP or some low-class people who do not even have credibility? 

It is true that crowds gathered on the streets at the public appearance of the former king. On Sunday itself, a crowd from the airport took him to Nirmal Niwas. However, the crowd is not only at Purvaraja's rally. The program attended by top leaders of political parties, who are becoming unpopular, is also crowded. No matter how unpopular the leaders are, there is no shortage of garlanded crowds here. Therefore, the crowd seen in the streets is not a measure of the restoration of the monarchy. For a republican coup d'état, the level of mass mobilization, the level of people's struggle, which is required, does not have the capacity to create the wave. Nor are they clear on the issue itself. What kind of monarchy are they envisioning? Are they looking for an active king like yesterday? Or a cultural or ceremonial king with a cocked neck? "Saving the country's existence 

Calling the king, is it not a ceremonian with a cock pulled? Is it then that the Purpanchas are trying to make the citizens raiti again? When talking about the restoration of the monarchy, many such questions arise, due to which domestic public opinion cannot be formed in favor of the monarchy. That's because, at least people don't want to be 'slaves' anymore.  Geopolitical compatibility is even more important for

dynasties. Certainly, the forces cultivating 'controlled instability' in Nepal may have backstabbed the former king to increase political conflict and polarization. If the foreign power centers are to help for the restoration of the monarchy, the former king started this effort with abdication. Photos of him meeting with Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leaders, meeting with Chinese officials at restaurants in Thailand and Singapore have been made public in recent years. Shaktikendras from north to south may have met him as a former king. A few months ago, the Bhutanese king welcomed him as a king with great fanfare. Those in the know say that these are just normal encounters with a person who once held the status of a king as per the 'Rule of Engagement' policy. On the basis of those meetings, the neighboring countries do not determine their position on the history of the monarchy, and have not done so. Against this backdrop, there is no question or rumor about the return of the king to the throne. Rather, the question is, the top leader running the party dictatorship should be targeted.