When King Gyanendra took over the reins of government back in February 2005 for, as he then said, a period of three years, it seemed plausible that he would remain at the helm for quite some time before the forces of history would compel him to hand power back to the people. But the king lasted barely 15 months before being shunted aside by what is now called the People's Movement II. That popular uprising against royal rule was as much a cry for the restoration of democracy as for a return of peace. After all, with both the major political parties and the rebel Maoists having made a common cause out of opposition to the monarchy and resolution of the decade-long conflict, both seemed possible.
And thus it has seemed since April 2006, as milestones have been reached and passed one by one: a resurrected Parliament deprived the king of any role in the state, and brought the army under civilian control; in November 2006, a peace agreement was reached that effectively ended the Maoist 'people's war'; two months later, an interim constitution was promulgated; soon thereafter, an interim legislature was convened, with the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) as a major presence; the definition of the country's very identity was reconfigured to reflect its demographic plurality, through actions such as dropping the controversial provision that declared Nepal to be a Hindu country, and a promise to redress the exclusion felt by many social groups; this past April, an all-party government was formed that included the Maoists; the country is now looking forward to elections to a Constituent Assembly, which is to write the new constitution. The Constituent Assembly elections are currently slated for 22 November.
That is the rosy outlook. On the flip side, there are too many imponderables involved to be able to predict where the country is headed. On the political front, there is creeping doubt as to whether the elections to the Constituent Assembly, already postponed beyond the rather unrealistic June 2006 deadline set by eager politicians, will even be possible in November. For the first time in more than a decade, despite their continuing erratic conduct, the Maoists do not pose the primary threat to Nepal's political stability. Rather, greater potential for volatility is now found among myriad social groups – including the 'indigenous nationalities' and the Tarai plains-based Madhesi groups – seeking a place as equals in the country's polity.
Uppermost in the minds of the people, however, is the law-and-order situation. At times, it seems there is hardly a government in place, in Kathmandu or anywhere else. Bandhs are a nearly daily occurrence in one part of the country or another, whether instigated by the mundane or something loftier; armed groups have sprung up in parts of the Tarai, and have been killing people at will; the most daring robberies and most criminal shootings do not even make the front pages of newspapers anymore; the Maoists have unleashed their youth wing on the people, ostensibly as part of a national political campaign, and this behaves like a vigilante force unto its own. In short, public security is at its lowest ebb.