Its easy to write one's own perspective, but its difficult to say what is good and with respect to the problem. At times this individual perceptions becomes the corner stone of our foreign policy, especially with our neighbors. This has been the case right after freedom. We at times fail to see things intheir right perspective, in terms of what is good for that country, namely Monarchy or democracy. If democracy what kind of a democracy? Is it a democracy the west advocate in its own style. Or the one we (India) perceive in its own style, or its rule that would be for a stable and prosperous Nepal? I think the last one is important not the former. One must know the situation in Nepal and say what is good for them at this moment when Maoists are in full control, in terms of streangth and power. When the polititians has lost their credibility, they became weak and when the people is divided and they themselves dont know what is good and what is right, they just clamour DEMOCRACY. The point is that maoists are more than happy with democracy for they can run their bussiness as ussual and grow in streangth. What India is doing in Nepal now is a serious crime by making the KING WEAKER.
