As Nepal continues to spiral into bloodshed and chaos, a solution to the crisis appears to be increasingly hard to find. In a three-way power struggle between absolute monarchists, Maoist rebels and parliamentary democrats no one has been able to build a winning position.
The struggle can be broken down into two parts - a battle for political legitimacy, in which all sides claim to support the principles of democracy and truly represent the wishes of the Nepali people, and a battle for power, in which guns and bombs are the weapons of choice.
King Gyanendra seized power in an army-backed coup 14 months ago, claiming that democratic politicians had failed to deal with the Maoist threat. He vowed to crush the rebels, but constitutional experts have been scathing in their criticism, and even the Supreme Court has questioned the government's legality in a judgment that went largely ignored. This explains the state's heavy-handed response to the latest anti-government demonstrations, in which four people have been shot dead and scores more injured.
'The king lacks political legitimacy so the political parties are the biggest challenge. The Maoists are a soft challenge because the army can deal with them,' said Rajendra Dahal, editor of Himal magazine.
'The whole regime is based on the army's power. If it only has this type of power, then it has no other options to face the political challenges of peaceful political forces.'
But if King Gyanendra's position is weak, he still holds at least one strong card. No one doubts the loyalty of the army, even if some officers may have their doubts about him, and the king's enemies have problems of their own.
The opposition parties ruled Nepal between 1990 and early last year, and many people saw them as incompetent and corrupt. The same people still lead the parties and many people are loath to see them in power again.
