A hard time for Nepal

Madhav Kumar Nepal's image as a moderate communist leader was helpful in getting him elected as prime minister. The Maoist party led by former Prime Minister Prachanda is still perceived as capable of reviving armed insurrection.
On May 23, over 350 members of the nation's 601-member constituent assembly extended their support to Nepal, 56, hoping he will be able to steer the country, a republic since last year, through a state of transition which is scheduled to end by May next year.
He served as deputy prime minister, handling the Defense and Foreign Affairs ministries, in the short-lived government formed after the 1994 parliamentary elections. His well-wishers also find it a pleasant coincidence to have a new head of government with the surname "Nepal".
The non-Maoist coalition led by Nepal is made up of 22 of the 25 larger and smaller parties in the constituent assembly (which also works as a parliament). This appears an incredible feat for someone who last year lost elections in two constituencies, leading him to quit his powerful position as general secretary of the Unified Marxist Leninist (UML) party.
His party, nonetheless, retained him by creating a position of "senior leader". A couple of months later, the UML made him a nominated member of the house by forcing an earlier nominee to vacate the seat. It is through this route that he has become the prime minister of democratic Nepal.
Other important work to be done in the next few weeks is the national budget for the year 2009/10 and other legislative functions. But how will it proceed without any cooperation from the Maoist-led opposition?
Prachanda and other top Maoist leaders have publicly described the new regime as a "puppet" of foreign elements, primarily referring to New Delhi. This first surfaced in a long televised address Prachanda delivered on May 4, the day he announced his decision to resign.
Basically, Prachanda's resignation came in the form of a protest against the president's step, which the Maoists dubbed "unconstitutional". While the case has reached the court, experts have expressed divergent opinions on the issue. Some agree with Prachanda, with others defending the president's initiative.
The interim constitution depicts the president as the custodian of the constitution, and the supreme commander of the army. So how could Prachanda remove the commander without giving prior information to the president of the country?
There is no empirical basis to believe this contention. What is clear, however, is that the Maoists do not appear to be in a mood to extend their cooperation either to the president or to Premier Nepal. The situation in parliament is unlikely to change until the president makes a reconciliatory approach.
In the views of some analysts, the president is unlikely to amend his decision as this would be political suicide. But he could retract his earlier decision and resign if that would help to install Koirala as the head of state. In such a scenario, Koirala's desire to be at the helm when the constitution is implemented would be fulfilled. One of his other desires was addressed when Nepal appointed his daughter, Sujata, as the country's foreign minister. Will the octogenarian Koirala's dream to be the source of Nepal's new constitution come true?