It has been reported from Nepal that King Gyanendra is planning a visit to India soon. If the report is correct we think it is a right move, although much belated. All right thinking Nepalis would agree with us that if any outside power, it is only India that can contribute towards resolving this Maoist insurgency that has been devastating Nepal for over a decade. It has not only divided the country into pro-King and anti-King factions but also alienated her friends and donors without whose sincere good will and cooperation quick repair and reconstruction of the devastated infrastructures and speedy economic development of the country is not possible. Most of Nepal ’s American friends and the Nepali diaspora this scribe has contacted here seem to be quite apprehensive that the poor country is gradually heading towards becoming a “failed state.” They further believe that if this trend is not arrested expeditiously, the small Himalayan kingdom might have to face a situation which might impel the democratic forces of the world to intervene. The recent statements of the former U.S. ambassador to Nepal Julia Chang Bloch cannot be ignored by the Nepali administration. Bloch’s remark that the King can “carry on as absolute monarch and end up possibly losing everything” is, indeed, a very ominous statement. And it reflects both official and non-official thinking of the American people. The American government, for whatever reason, is not unfriendly to Nepal . But she certainly has certain priorities in South Asia which she cannot afford to ignore. The United States towing the Indian policy in regard to Nepal must be understood in this perspective. Consequently, Nepal and specially King Gyanendra, in the present situation, has to appreciate the U.S. stance and formulate Nepal ’s policy towards her correspondingly. To suit the exigency of the volatile domestic situation Nepal needs to improve her relations with India tremendously. As a matter of fact, the bilateral relations between the two have never been misgiving-free. The constraints decreed by her size and physical vulnerabilities should have prompted Nepal to evolve a relationship utterly realistic and practical instead of emotional or rhetorical. Failure to do so has hurt Nepal most of the time while blaming India for coercion. Indeed, India ’s domineering behavior in the initial stages after she gained independence from the colonial rule sowed the seed of suspicion that has taken deep roots making it almost impossible to uproot. And neither country has ever taken any serious steps in that direction. For more than twelve years after the restoration of democracy in Nepal in 1990, Nepali politicians that ruled the country were not only submissive to India but prone to sacrifice Nepal ’s interests to safeguard their personal partisan interests. Besides, the unprecedented corruption, non-performance of the various governments and their internal bickerings paved the way for the King’s takeover of the administration. And it has now become King Gyanendra’s responsibility to mend fences with India . King Gyanendra’s job of bringing the Nepal-India relationship to the even keel, in the circumstances when the bilateral relations between the two traditionally friendly countries are at a very low ebb, cannot be an easy task. In the last eight months since King Gyanendra took over the administration of the country in his own hands nothing singular has been achieved in this direction to improve the relations. The events of the last eight months have shown that this establishment has, so far, not succeeded to win India ’s confidence. And, as emphasized by us repeatedly, Nepal does need India ’s goodwill and unstinted cooperation and not rhetorics, to resolve the Maoist problem. Even, if the problem needs any mediation, it might not be possible for Nepal to invite any foreign mediation without India ’s concurrence. No power would like to antagonize India to help Nepal . Consequently, King Gyanendra must visit India at the earliest possible time and have a free and frank talk with the Indian statesmen and leaders. And for this, he needs a panel of advisers who are not only patriotic and efficient but also respectable in all respects. We all know King Gyanendra is a wise and experienced ruler. As such he must not be led astray by sycophants and hardline extremists who try to revert the country to greater conservatism. They not only have any stake but will be the first to flee the country as rats from a sinking ship if situation becomes more explosive. Knowing fully well that truth is always bitter, we cannot take recourse to lies to make it more palatable. In the interest of the country, King Gyanendra has to rise above all personal prejudices and utilize the services of honest and patriotic Nepalis who not only command respect in the outer world but are also loyal to the crown. A sustainable long-term gain achieved through selfless hard work must always be preferred to easy short-term gain that ultimately leads to destruction.