Nepal's ruler brings back legacy of turmoil

King Gyanendra who seized absolute power over all of Nepal's 27 million people on February 1, is the conundrum upon whose personality, history, intellect and whim depends a country that diplomats, Nepalis and experts say could be on the verge of collapsing into bloody chaos.

Both hated and worshipped, a living incarnation of a Hindu god educated at a Jesuit school, a businessman who was never meant to be king, Gyanendra remains a mysterious figure even to those who have regular contact with him, even to his closest friends and family.

Figuring out Gyanendra and deciphering his true intentions could be crucial if the world's powers and his subjects are to know how to deal with him best. His coup came with promises that he was taking power only to restore proper democracy.

Since then, influential Nepalis and diplomats say, he has only solidified that power and done his best to suffocate the country's political parties, media, human rights workers, courts and civil institutions.

Six months into his direct rule, observers almost unanimously agree the king's autocratic some say dictatorial style is increasing the likelihood that Nepal's civil war will develop into a crisis that could bring Maoists to power, causing a humanitarian disaster and pulling neighbouring superpowers India and China into the fray.

Every week, students, journalists, lawyers and other activists take to the streets of Kathmandu to protest not only Gyanendra's harsh rule but the continuation of the monarchy itself. In recent days, the protests have turned more violent, with demonstrators throwing stones at the police.

Not all Nepalis want another revolution. But other than the king's friends, relatives and royalist allies, it is hard to find people in Nepal who have faith in Gyanendra's royal proclamation made six months ago: "We have no interest other than the restoration of sustainable peace and exercise in meaningful democracy for the welfare of Nepal and Nepalese people.''

The royal palace did not grant this reporter access to Gyanendra or the controversial, hard-drinking Crown Prince Paras, but there are many clues in Nepali history, Gyanendra's personal history and his interactions with others that help decipher the king.

A good place to begin is the living room of his brother-in-law, Suraj Rana. To be Rana's guest is to be a visitor among royal ghosts. They're all around, murdered members of the royal family, posing stiffly in formal photographs that hang on the walls and sit on side tables in the room the king visits on social occasions.

Nearly everyone perhaps everyone in the photos has one of two last names Rana or Shah. These are the two families that have dominated Nepal's politics since the first Shah king came to the throne in 1769. The two families are inextricably linked through numerous marriages.

The portraits are reminders of the most dramatic day in Nepal's modern history when a drugged, gun-slinging Crown Prince Dipendra gunned down eight members of his family, including King Birendra, on June 1, 2001.

A nation in shock instantly became a nation of disbelievers in the official version: that Dipendra killed his family because they would not allow him to marry his girlfriend.

To this day, most Nepalis seem to believe Gyanendra and Paras engineered the massacre to seize power. In their eyes, it was an old-fashioned, fratricidal, regicidal coup by a power-hungry man who had always hated democracy and felt he was the rightful king.

No evidence has been produced to back up the theory that Gyanendra orchestrated the killings.

Many people interviewed for this story suspect or believe Gyanendra truly sees himself as a paternalistic figure who knows what is best for his country and who, as king, is the only one who can bring security and stability to Nepal.

A diplomat and one of the king's friends both suggested President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan might be the model Gyanendra has in mind: a strong military man who has seized power ostensibly to serve his unruly nation and with the backing of foreign powers, including the United States.

Unlike Musharraf, however, Gyanendra is part of a hereditary dynasty.

And with each passing month of increasing authoritarianism, diplomats and Nepalis say, the king could be inducing a chaotic and violent end to Nepal's monarchy.

- Los Angeles Times-Washington Post