History is often written in tears and blood, forged in darkness. But think what if those tears and blood had not flowed? If that mode did not come? Kantipur has introduced a new debate series - 'Alternative History', in which we ask, 'What would have happened then...?' If some decisive events in Nepal had developed differently, would we be a little happier today? Would you be happy?

Or were we struggling to achieve this achievement? In the first series, we are returning to the palace massacre of 2058 -

One such night, which transformed the Nepalese political history in an instant. From kings, queens, crown princes, palaces fell simultaneously, the map of power changed, perhaps the pillar of the republic stood on its foundation. But what would have happened if that massacre had not happened?

Could King Birendra have negotiated with the Maoists and led the country to the path of peace? Would he kill Shakti like Gyanendra and lead to the downfall of the monarchy? Would the mainstream parties and the Maoists clash and destroy one or the other? And, would we now be witnessing development and good governance instead of corruption and despair?

Yes, we cannot change history. But we can think, understand, learn and draw a path to prosperity. So in this series we will include the arguments of analysts, historians, writers, sociologists, students and common citizens.

...

Nepal has reached the Federal Democratic Republic after a long struggle. But since it is still in use, it is natural to discuss the implementation of the federal democratic republic. But some references should be seen in the country's relativity and historicity . It should be understood that political systems are products of the needs of history .

If we look at the period of the origin of human society and the state, in the beginning people lived in small groups . It was a society of its own nature. A chieftain was elected by himself and governed. For thousands of years the society ran like this . Gradually the kingdoms grew bigger, and needed an army to manage their kingdoms . Wars started between states. Hereditary monarchy system was invented to protect the society and the state . At that time it gave security and stability. Such a system has been maintained in the world for thousands of years .

About five hundred years ago, when the scientific industrial revolution took place in Europe, it was the beginning of the democratic revolution. Which is called promotion age . From that time the concept of modern democracy came. Hereditary monarchy system does not ensure mass participation of the people . It was realized that the choice of leadership in this system is also not in accordance with the era .

Therefore, after ending the hereditary monarchy, the era of ruling power by electing their own representatives came. What we call the era of democratic republic . This era basically started from Europe . The largest French Revolution 1789 to 1791 there was a major revolt against the monarchy Louis XIV, XVI and the king himself was executed .

Then the wave of the French Revolution touched different countries . The republican system was developing. For two hundred years, almost all countries had a republican system. By the beginning of the 20th and 21st centuries, all but a dozen countries have gone to a republican system of governance. Due to the need of the time and the country, the political system was built, so the monarchy remained in an insignificant state .

The state of Nepal is one of the oldest in the world. Because our Himalayan civilization was formed between the two powers of South Asia and Southeast Asia. Himalayan civilization has its own geographical, economic, social characteristics and environment. In this process, the present state of Nepal was formed at the end of the 18th century and the beginning of the 19th century. While it was being made, Nepal remained between two big countries .

A centralized state was necessary for the security of Nepal in the case of a British colony in the south and a large Chinese empire in the north. At the same time, small kingdoms and kings were formed. After ending those states, a centralized monarchy has emerged in Nepal. Then, along with the Shah dynasty monarchy, the hereditary system of the Ranas was also added there after the middle of the 19th century. After that, the dual rule of Mr. 5 and Mr. 3 remained in Nepal.

By the year 2007, a wave of democracy had arrived worldwide, which was the situation when the Second World War arrived. Yes, during the wave of democracy, there was a movement in Nepal that the ancient monarchical system, especially the dual system of Mr. 5 and Mr. 3, was not suitable for the country's environment .

At that time, the monarchy was thrown away, but the monarchy with Shri 5 was constitutionally kept. In the year 1960 (year 2017), King Mahendra of the Shah dynasty imposed his own autocratic monarchy by carrying out a military coup against multi-party democracy. The Nepali people have repeatedly struggled against the autocratic monarchy. 

After the people's movement in 2046, democracy came with a partial monarchy. A lot had changed in the world at that time. The consciousness of Nepali people had also risen a lot. The modern educated generation had come forward in politics and other fields. Our generation, who had developed political consciousness .

Nepal had diversity with geographical, economic, social, cultural and ethnic characteristics . It took our generation to end the discrimination of gender and caste system in the society and bring it to full democracy. The concept came that there should not be any kind of feudal monarchy in Nepal and the elected representatives of the people should be able to write the constitution.

In the movement of 2046, left-wing groups including us formed a front called Joint People's Movement Coordination Committee. On the one hand, the Congress was a supporter of liberal democracy, on the other hand, the Left Front of the UML was said to be . The third front was called the United National People's Movement of some revolutionaries.

I belonged to that front . At that time, through this front, we raised the point that the country should be taken to a republic, and a constitution should be made by the Constituent Assembly. In this way, the voice for the republic in Nepal became more vocal. There were protests, but we knew very well that this alone would not end the monarchy . 

The roots of the monarchy were deeply rooted. In the old structure of the Nepalese state, the relationship of feudal nature was maintained in the fields including army, administration, court and economic sector at that time. Due to the caste system, there was discrimination. Discrimination against women continued. A big push is needed to break this state system . The monarchy will not fall until the old feudal system is destroyed.

The conclusion was that there will be no full democracy until the monarchy falls. We started a great uprising in the form of a people's war on February 1, 2052 by forming the CPN Maoist Party. On the eve of that, I presented 40 points of demand on behalf of United Janamorcha Nepal to the government. Finally, we started the war with the main slogan of creating a constitution by people's democratic system and representatives elected by the people . After various ups and downs, a joint movement took place in Nepal in 2062/63.

In May 2058, the palace massacre destroyed the old monarchy. A new dynasty of autocratic monarchy was born. At that time, the Maoist people's war had also reached its height. At the same time, King Gyanendra Shah, who was in power at that time, took all the power in his hands . After that, the old parliamentarian party and the Maoist revolutionaries came together and a mass movement took place. On the strength of that, the Federal Democratic Republic was institutionalized through the election of the Constituent Assembly.

Why was monarchy necessary and lasted in Nepal at some point? Why was it not necessary at the last stage? It is necessary to go to its depth and understand . First, no system is sustained by human desires alone. It should have an economic, social and cultural basis. In the early stages of Nepal, the British rule was in the south and the Chinese emperor in the north.

Nepal had a monarchy in the sense that a strong ruler was needed to maintain its geographical integrity. It was the end of the 18th century and the time of the 19th century . Until now, there has been a change in the geopolitics of Nepal.

Democracy was established in the south while republican communist rule remained in the north. Especially after the Second World War, there was a wave of democracy and republic around the world. The awareness of the democratic republic that has come to the world has reached Nepal as well. The awareness that the democratic republican system will bring prosperity to the country led to anti-monarchy and republicanism.

Second, objectively, economic and social relations developed in Nepal, especially after the First World War in 2007 and with the political changes in Nepal in 2046 and the democratic wave that followed worldwide. The collapse of old feudal economic relations in Nepal, social  In the form of

, there were anti-caste, regional anti-discrimination movements. Awareness of the movement against gender discrimination also started among women . Voices began to be raised against the discrimination against Dalits under the Varnashram system. It objectively did not remain the material environment of autocratic monarchy . Therefore, along with the increase in the level of awareness of the people, the changes in the economic, social, and cultural fields also created a sense that the monarchical system is no longer suitable.

For example, when there was a king of Nepal, there should have been a Khas-Arya, Shah dynasty king of the same caste. While Nepal is made up of tribal, tribal, Tharu, Madheshi communities of Khas-Arya, Tibetan, Burmese language families and in a country where there is no majority of any race, the tradition of only Khas-Arya community being king was very narrow.

On the other hand, the king's eldest son was the king. Because of that, there was an awakening among women against it . Freedom, equality, has become a part of the current democracy, in that case, the fact that the son will be the king was directly gender discrimination . This distinction led to the development of awareness for women's liberation. In this way, it was necessary to end the monarchy .

On the other hand, Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras were divided into four classes according to the Varnashram system. There was no other varnaka to accept the system of Kshatriya being the king. As long as the Varnashram system existed, there was great discrimination among the Dalits. The monarchy remained as the guardian of the distinction. For the liberation of caste discrimination, the foundation of the monarchy had to be destroyed .

On the other hand, import-based dependence was increasing . As the agricultural economy of Nepal gradually collapsed, the industrial and commercial economy was also developing . The monarchy rested on the foundation of the feudal economy. After it collapsed, the legitimacy of the monarchy was over. Due to this reason, the situation of the end of the monarchy in Nepal has been created .

The demand for Maoist people's war

Maoist people's war is reaching its height and its influence is spreading to the roots . The discriminated women, dalits and farmers are waking up. The effect of the changing economic situation in the neighborhood was felt in Nepal. When Nepal was economically backward, the consciousness of economic prosperity was developing . Due to youth unemployment and economic poverty in Nepal, people's awareness and rebellion against the old system increased.

In this environment, by the year 2057/58, a serious structural crisis had arisen in the monarchy. In the year 2057, the Maoists held a national conference. That conference along with other political parties took the policy of promoting the external movement along with the people's movement for the new structure of the Constituent Assembly and the state. At that time, when the people's war was on the rise, the Maoists became one force, while the parties in the parliament, mainly the Congress-UML, also became another force.

On the other hand, the traditional powers were in the form of monarchical powers that influenced the military, administration, and courts. At that time there was a conflict between the tripartite powers . On 19th May 2058, the mysterious palace massacre took place, ending the traditional monarchy . The tradition of the eldest son becoming the king in Nepal's traditional monarchy ended with the Darbar massacre. After the death of the king's eldest son, the monarchy virtually ended.

On this subject, I wrote in Kantipur daily that the Darbar massacre should not be recognized as it is another Kotparva . The Maoist party also concluded that the monarchy in Nepal has virtually ended . We said that the monarchy after the Darbar massacre was fake. We said that Kotparva should not be recognized as we do not accept this monarchy. After Kotparva came Ranavansh . In the same way, we raised our voice in the sense that the coming Gyanendra should not be recognized. 

political fluidity 

A pillar of the monarchy fell while the conflict between the tripartite powers was going on . After the collaboration between the Maoist and the Parliamentarian parties, the monarchy was weakened . At that time, the situation of political fluidity was created . The monarchy was weak in the tripartite conflict . The idea that it will be easier to get power together with that has also come to the Maoist .

Some of the Maoist leaders in Kathmandu have a relationship with the Darbaria Shakti, and being influenced by the main leader of the Maoist Prachanda, is it possible to agree with the king in the year 2059? This matter has arisen within the Maoist . I thought that democracy in Nepal will not be complete and sustainable until the end of any monarchy. Since I have a clear understanding that the country cannot develop without democracy, I also raised my voice.

At this time, some people think that if Birendra was living, would the monarchy still exist in some form? Did the Maoists agree with the monarchy? Parliamentary powers went hand in hand with the monarchy ? The question has been raised. That was not possible. Because even though Birendra looked a bit soft in terms of his nature, he was the king of traditional monarchy . Feudal absolute monarchy was a differential system .

was a system based on class, caste, regional distinctions . As its hero, he could not solve the problems in this society. Even though there was a monarchy, the problem remained the same. Therefore, basically, the monarchy should have ended .

The end of the monarchy is inevitable 

Although there was no Darbar massacre, Birendra was not in a position to remain as king. The monarchy had become shabby and old in terms of the era . It could not meet the new needs of the new era. Therefore, even if Birendra's dynasty was not killed, the monarchy would have ended . On January 19, 2061, after Gyanendra took all the power in his hands, the parliamentarian parties were suspicious of the monarchy.

Congress considered constitutional monarchy . Even though the communists were in favor of the republic, they thought that they should go along with the monarchy. However, after the assassination of Gyanendra on January 19, it became clear that democracy will not be safe as long as there is any form of monarchy. The 2062/63 movement took place after a 12-point agreement was reached between the Maoists and the political parties after the situation reached within the Maoists that no agreement could be reached with the monarchy.

This is where the next part comes, if there is dominance, relationship, dependence with big and small countries in the world. Big countries also try to dominate small countries . America, India, and Russia all seem to be trying to dominate their small neighbors . Since Nepal is right-wing geographically and culturally, the Indian influence on Nepal's politics has been falling since the Sugauli Treaty, 2007.

In that sense, there was an understanding that the ruling side of India would have stability if there was some kind of monarchy in Nepal, and if there was no monarchy, the communists and revolutionaries would be more dominant. The founding party of India understood that the collaboration of traditional democracy and monarchy could prevent revolutionary change.

They called it the two-pillar policy . They used to say democracy with monarchy. That was their declared policy. From the beginning, we have been raising that India's policy of dominating and interfering in Nepal is not right. We have been maintaining that unequal treaties with India including 1950 should be cancelled.

When going into practical politics, balance of power should be taken care of. If the balance of power is not met in operational matters, the battle will be lost . How to balance power with India? While the 12-point agreement, the peace process, etc. were going on, it was not only the desire of the revolutionaries. Due to Gyanendra's foolish actions, the Indian side was divided .

After he talked about inviting China to SAARC, it was seen that the Indian side had reached the conclusion that there would be no benefit from this monarchy. Their desire was also that the Congress and the king should go together. After being betrayed by the king time and again from 2017 to 2061, the Congress also came to the conclusion that association with the monarchy is suicidal, so India also retreated .

Another thing was that Maoist had become a great power. Maoist had reached a situation where he would not allow others to exercise power easily . It was estimated that if Nepal falls completely into the hands of the Left, its influence will be felt in India. All these reasons led India to withdraw from the monarchy.

What should be considered again, during the movement of 2062/63, when the movement was reaching its climax on 8th Baisakh, Indian ambassador Karan Singh came to Nepal and tried to maintain a system with a king. At that time, the Maoists flatly rejected that proposal. The street movement had reached too much. Congress and others did not have the power to stop the movement. After all the political forces protested, India also backed down by abandoning the two-pillar policy on May 11.

The Nepali army, which is another big power, has supported those in power. The army was devoted to them during the Rana regime, with the king when the monarchy came, and supported the democracy after the democracy came. By the time he arrived in 2062/63, a new generation had arrived in the Nepali Army, a new consciousness had been developed.

He also came to the conclusion that peace cannot be maintained in the country by supporting the king. The pressure of the Maoists increased, political parties became eloquent, India reached a point where it could not implement the two-pillar policy, and the Nepalese army was unable to maintain peace and security in the country by maintaining the monarchy.

Understanding of 'full democracy' 

At the time of the 12-point agreement, we used the term 'full democracy'. We were in favor of going to the republic. Nepali Congress had not reached there. India's two-pillar policy was also in place. Therefore, at the suggestion of Congress  Now let's say full democracy and it can be interpreted as republic, but they had a 12-point 'tacit understanding' of republic with a king. But when it came to Baisakh 11, 2063, the opposition to the monarchy had become heavy.

In the beginning, the Maoists were saying that the Constituent Assembly should be declared immediately and an interim government should be formed. The Maoists declared a ceasefire only after the restored House of Representatives decided to go to the Constituent Assembly on May 15th.

After that, the meeting of the House of Representatives on 4th of June actually carried out "radical reforms" including the suspension of the monarchy, the Prime Minister playing the role of the head of state. That was also a trick. Because if it is not done in time, there was a danger that the Maoists would take it . So other parties have already suspended the monarchy. It was as if the wind did the work that the earth had to do. This is how we came to the peace process . Even if we look at the section on the peace process, it will be said that the Constituent Assembly will end the monarchy and declare the republic based on the majority.

After the peace agreement, the date for the election of the Constituent Assembly moved. And suspicions grew among the Maoists . Since the election of the Constituent Assembly was not held and the monarchy was still in place, we started a movement from August, October 2064 demanding the abolition of the monarchy and the declaration of a republic. For three months, there was a lot of struggle .

In January 2064, there was an agreement between the government and the Maoists to end the monarchy and it was said to be approved by the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly. Then the Constituent Assembly elections were held on Chait 28, 2064.

2065 On 15th June 2065, the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly declared the republic by an overwhelming majority. Out of 564, all but four people from RPP voted in favor of the republic . In this way, the republic came to be by ending the monarchy in a democratic manner by the power of the people in a lawful manner. This is a historical leap in Nepal due to the need of history, people's awareness and compatibility with the international situation. 

Europe, America and other countries had already had a republic. Although it was late in Nepal, at the beginning of the twenty-first century, Nepal reached the Federal Democratic Republic. The governing power came into the hands of the people and in the old system, the king used to issue the constitution claiming that the state power and sovereignty was vested in him.

But for the first time in Nepal, the representatives elected by the people issued the constitution using the sovereign power vested in them. It opened a great historical door . The source of all power is not a king, maharaja, or divine power. Nepali people are the main source of state power. Theoretically, they should mobilize the resources of the country and complete the work of development, prosperity and good governance in the country .

Weaknesses of practical implementation

The people's representatives are to fulfill the aspirations and desires of the people by implementing the republic in a practical way . But we have some imperfections in the government system. Democracy is democracy. But even within democracy, there are methods of government system and election system. In the Westminster system, representatives of the people are first elected and those representatives choose the executive. Similarly, another system is the people directly electing the executive . 

It is the opinion of the Maoists at that time that a system directly elected by the people and fully proportional is correct in the ethnic, religious diversity and geopolitical situation. But practically could not be taken there . Parliament was made proportional and direct.

Therefore, Baniha will not be able to form a government with a majority, and Baniha will also change parties and split the party. Even in a decade after the promulgation of the constitution, political stability could not be achieved . There was no political stability. Due to the lack of political stability, there has been a problem in economic and social transformation. Failure to get on the road to economic prosperity, employment, etc., caused frustration.

There is economic dependence due to the open border with India, so we are in a position of trade deficit with Sugauli Treaty. We import 10 times of export . It always keeps the economy dependent. On the other hand, economic progress could not be made due to internal political instability.

It has caused dissatisfaction among the youth. The disintegration of the old agrarian economy, the inability to build a new industrial economy, and the displacement of young people from the villages without finding productive jobs in the cities forced them to go abroad. This has led to frustration.

Therefore, it is not true that if there was a king somewhere, it would be okay, if there would be stability. There was stability during the autocratic monarchy, but the growth rate of the economy was never more than 3/4 percent. Industrialization did not exceed 8/9 percent . 90 percent of people had to depend on agriculture. The condition of education and health was also poor.

Autocratic stability was for 30 years . But there was no impact on Nepali people's life. There was no achievement . So stability is not the only big thing . Democratic stability is important. What we need is democratic stability. Undemocratic stability, autocratic stability was there for thousands of years . So that is not an option . What we need is a democratic system, where people decide their own destiny.

Dependent relationship with India could not be improved . Economic relations with India were not improved even during the reign of the King. Even during the king's time, the trade deficit had increased. It has increased even now. We are becoming dependent . We could not improve this relationship. We have to solve this .

It is an image that small kings were born from the union to the local level after we went to federalism. They are not kings. Because if someone does something wrong, they can be removed through elections. Therefore, monarchy cannot be a substitute for democracy in any sense. The only alternative to democracy is advanced democracy. We will discuss how to make democracy more inclusive. Power has been delegated to all three levels of federalism. That is positive .

We were stuck in autocracy for a long time . Along with the republic, we have empowered Dalits, women etc. The result is not the case at once and nbsp;.. But the consequences come slowly & nbsp;. So it doesn't mean the monarchical system was ok & nbsp;.