Two important news statements must be mentioned in this regard.

The first is an American embassy's press release warning the seven agitating parties against an alliance with Maoists. It also castigates the parties for not living up to their word: To have nothing to do with the Maoists until they laid down arms, renounced violence and showed commitment to multi-party democracy. The communique also urges the parties and the King to hold dialogue.

The second is another news item in local papers headlined "US Congressmen for multi-pronged Nepal strategy." Seven US Congressmen have, in a letter to US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, mooted the idea of a package that sees a solution to the crisis in Nepal in holistic terms.

These, one can safely assume are signs of a shift in perception based on the ground reality of Nepal. In the current scenario, misrepresentation of the state of affairs by agitating political parties had misled India, the US and the UK. This precluded any effort that could work towards a resolution of the Nepal problem.

In the first place, these countries were made to perceive lack of democracy in Nepal as the main problem. The truth was very different indeed, for this very unusual situation was only a consequence of the terrorism that has gripped the country for over a decade. The so called "terrorist card" the agitating parties accused the government of using to gain international approbation, was only intended to circumvent the real issue.

Recent history is evidence that these very political parties are responsible for nurturing terrorism in Nepal. When the entire strength of the Nepalese Maoist outfit was barely a handful back in 1996 when the insurgency first began, the then government saw it as nothing but a law and order problem. This attitude continued through successive governments. While the Maoists grew from strength to strength, politicians of the day busied themselves with self-aggrandisement, turning democracy into the con game of the millennium. The terror that had gripped rural Nepal was fast spreading to urban areas, but the leaders could hardly see anything beyond their own bickering. They betrayed their own cause and they betrayed the people. They eroded their own credibility and along with it the efficacy of democratic institutions. Nepal was on the fast track to becoming a failed nation. Yet, our leaders failed to read the signs.

The House of Representatives was dissolved just so that a Prime Minister could continue his status indefinitely. Almost a year passed, yet elections were not held and intent never expressed. With no parliament and the Maoist insurgency raging, the King had no choice but to take the initiative. A series of governments involving all major political parties followed from 2002 onwards and all of them showed the same kind of motives and behaviors, not willing to hold any elections.

If this was the case with the combination in power, those out of it rooted for the restoration of parliament, which for all practical purposes they themselves had dissolved. Further, more had the ruling endorsement of the Supreme Court against any judicial ground of possibility of its restoration.

These failures finally culminated in the Royal proclamation of February 1, 2005. Since then, these very political parties who have let the Nepalese people down have been crying foul, calling for the constituent assembly and misrepresenting the real problem to the international community.

It's hard to understand how the democratic credentials of the very people who saw to it that the institutions of democracy were dismantled can find such credibility with the likes of the US, UK, and India -- even when they ally themselves with terrorists. It's harder still to understand why the current proclamation of municipal and parliamentary elections --the only way to restore democracy -- does not receive even the benefit of doubt from these so-called democratic parties of Nepal.

If political parties hope to attain democracy by aligning themselves with a force that has only one agenda in its mind -- toppling the government by terrorising the people, they are only deluding themselves. Even more erroneous and myopic is the western mindset, replete with the tendency to see a potential terrorist in every one hailing from the Middle East or bearing a Muslim name. George Bush's declaration of "War on Terror" had a hollow ring to Nepali ears. Instead of helping Nepal fight terrorism, the US, UK, and India stopped supplying weapons to the army.

India deserves special mention. The realisation ought to have dawned by now that the growth of Maoist terror is by no means confined to Nepal alone. The success story of the insurgency in Nepal has inspired Maoists in India as well as Bangladesh. Reports of resurgent Naxalites that operate under different names in North-East India, Andhra Pradesh, Bihar and other states, as well as similar outfits in Bangladesh and the linkages and they have networked, are well established. The Maoist threat is blooming into a regional one and India by hobnobbing with the Nepali Maoists is nurturing this threat now to more than one country in the region, including themselves.

The implications of such a policy are not hard to point out. On more than one occasion, the Indian establishment has burnt its fingers by coddling terrorists. Bhrindanwale, who Indira Gandhi had reared and protected, eventually rose to plunge Punjab into bloody terrorism. Similarly, a Tamil terrorist assassinated Rajiv Gandhi for his involvement in the Sri Lankan conflict. One can only hope that better sense will prevail and South Block will not sustain Maoist terrorism to India's own peril.

If, on the other hand, India, as the regional power, does want to play a constructive role, it can do so by driving some common sense into those Nepali politicians who make it a point to pay regular visits to New Delhi for consultation on any issue, that elections are the only way through which democracy will be restored.

In this regard, the King's message on Nepal's Constitution Day has also made it clear that election is the only way to restore the dignity of democracy. Political parties truly committed to democracy cannot ignore this call. They must participate.

As for the terrorists, the war will go on until they renounce terror as a way to power. Nepal's political parties may defend themselves by saying they're only talking to the Maoists, trying to bring them to the mainstream, and not developing alliance with them. If this is indeed the case, they should get the Maoists to lay down arms first. Only this way will our fallen leaders be able to redeem some of their remaining reputations.

Bijen Jonchhe is a freelance writer whose works have been published in Nepali Times, The Rising Nepal, Tehelka Newsmagazine India, and The Nation.