MONARCHY: WAR, PEACE & GRACE

MONARCHY: GRACE & PEACE

Monarchy in many countries is the symbol of national unity and identity. But as an institution, it should move with time. What makes some monarchies unpopular is when the monarch has disregard for popular attitudes, trying to keep privileges or authorities dating from centuries and which have little to do with political aspiration of the new generations. But there are absolute monarchs under disguise in some republics like North Korea or Syria where the leaders continued to rule until their death, then they were immediately replaced by their sons without a popular vote for the presidency.

Queen Elizabeth II is one of the rare monarchs on the British Throne. She can be compared to Elizabeth I and Queen Victoria whose period of reign witnessed fundamental changes in British society. Queen Elizabeth I reigned through the period of Renaissance. Britain was a respected and feared nation throughout Europe – the Spanish Armada Battle is a proof. Queen Victoria’s period witnessed the expansion of Britain. She was the Queen of the British Empire. This was coupled with the giant scientific progress which made Britain a superpower. For Elizabeth during her reign – we wish her longer years to live and reign- has succeeded in maintaining the respect of the royal family despite the fundamental changes in the British society – including the social revolution in the sixties and also the various scandals within the royal family during the 90s, the famous of which the worsening relations between Charles and Diana leading to their divorce. Queen Elizabeth on every occasion managed to maintain her strength of will, keeping the monarchy popular not in Britain but around the world, especially, in the United States of America and even in former colonies like India. Happy birthday to her and congratulation to the British for having such a wonderful queen.

MONARCHY: EXAMPLES & COUNTEREXAMPLE

Monarchy in Nepal has become shaky because the king has been facing internal opposition. In Japan and Thailand, monarchy is popular and a stabilizing factors because it is constitutional, leaving the choice to people to decide through elected governments in whose policy the monarch doesn’t intervene. As Thailand and Japan succeeded in progressing without relinquishing their traditions, monarchy is sure to continue in these countries.
In Japan and Nepal, the monarchs make frequent appearances. In Nepal, the king is in spotlight because of opposition to his rule. In Thailand, the monarch is almost invisible, making rare appearances and speeches. This has made him a semi-god enjoying absolute veneration because he is not an absolute monarch. Having absolute spiritual authority, leaving mundane authority to politicians who by a magic act of the king agree to put things in order instead of plunging the country into chaos as it happened in a military coup in the 80’s which was quickly ended by the intervention of the king.

MONARCHY IN NEPAL: WAR & PEACE

One negative aspect of absolute monarchy is when the king considers himself as the rightful guardian of society disregarding calls for change. It can be OK for a king to perpetuate a style of rule, subjugating his people by enshrining himself with sacredness. But in today's world, there is no place for despotism. The mass media has succeeded in showing people various forms of rule just by following the news of and from other countries. People in Nepal have the right to choose their style of government without having to overthrow their king if they both agree to a democratic style that includes instead of excluding sections of society - turning them in revolutionaries and thus perpetuating instability as each conflicting side has its own force to depend on. Monarchy is a part of the history of Nepal. But not to become completely obsolete, it should move with the aspiration of the people. The Nepalese are one of most peaceful people in the world. Neither they nor their king should come to bloodshed or violence to settle their differences about the style of government.

People in Nepal have the right to choose their style of government without having to overthrow their king if they both agree to a democratic style that includes instead of excluding sections of society - turning them in revolutionaries and thus perpetuating instability as each conflicting side has its own force to depend on. Monarchy is a part of the history of Nepal. But not to become completely obsolete, it should move with the aspiration of the people. The Nepalese are one of most peaceful people in the world. Neither they nor their king should come to bloodshed or violence to settle their differences about the style of government. The King by agreeing to power sharing will spare Nepal years of poverty and uncertainty.

The Maoist and the government in Nepal agreeing to hold a joint administration is to be considered as a new era for Nepal. The king should also be given credit for agreeing to earlier reforms following the popular uprising. Without his compromise, it would be impossible to bring the Maoist to an agreement with the Nepalese prime minister. It remains to see if the rebels will join the armed forces so national unity and peace will become a reality. Otherwise, the country will remain divided.