Maoist's rejection of talks will mean continued violence -Shrish S. Rana, Political analyst, Nepal

TGQ1: Is the government fifty-day deadline is an offer or an ultimatum to the Maoists? How should the government proceed now after Maoists rejection of the government's gesture?

Mr. Rana, your comments please!

Rana: It is both offer and ultimatum.

As a political organization, the Maoists, I believe, will seek benefit from any move it takes. Unless its current actions become politically expensive, it will not seek recourse to alternatives. This much is clear.

Government too must keep both the options open and so the deadlock.

Just as the Maoists rejection of talks will mean continued violence, the government option is to seek constitutional recourse through elections. This represents standard postures in conflict not unique to Nepal. There is nothing surprising. The clamor for peace can only break the deadlock when they begin defining-and not those in conflict- what they mean by peace. Is it the Maoists notion of peace or the government's? It is only when organized opinion is thus sufficiently polarized and exposed, that meaningful talks can take place. As yet this polarization has yet to occur. Perhaps the elections will contribute to the exposure necessary for the real parties to talk peace.

Prachanda's statement doesn't rule out possibility of talks - Dr. Surendra K.C, T.U

TGQ2: Dr. K.C! What ought to be done now given that the government's offer for talks with the Maoists has been summarily rejected by the insurgents? Your comments please!

Dr. K.C: Finally, the government's patience came to an end.

The last cabinet meeting provided the Maoists a timeframe for talks wherein the government abundantly made it clear that it can't wait for an indefinite period for talks with them and would go in for the polls should the rebels don't attend to the talks within the stated time frame.

But the Maoists Supremo, Comrade Prachanda, too instantly rejected the government offer for talks stating that the offer was "abstract and loaded with threatening". Nevertheless, Prachanda's statement does imply that the rebels were not against the talks provided the other camp heeded to their minimum demands. He says that an atmosphere free from intimidation and fear has become an urgent for the elections to the constituent assembly.

But the government appears averse to their demands. The government's mood is to institutionalize the regression by increased militarization. Thus what becomes clear is that it is not the Maoists but the government which is the main hurdle for meaningful talks with the Maoists.

Now the government has to make its stand clear on the three bottom lines of the Maoists. The establishment has to tell the nation as to how it takes those Maoists demands? It has to tell the nation whether it is in favor of the roundtable conference, interim government and election to the constituent assembly as demanded by the rebels or not?

The government can't escape by talking abstract things like it would become maximum flexible and would talk any thing under the sun at time of the talks. This would not do. At a time when the government should have brought the entire parliamentary forces in one camp is seen talking vague which is in effect making the situation for talks even more complicated and dim. This is a fact that can't be easily dismissed.

U.N facilitation would be more desirable -Dr. Gopal Pokhrel, Political Science Dept, T.U

TGQ3: How you Dr. Pokharel evaluate the scenario after Maoist's rejection of talks with the government? Do you see any solution to this dead-lock? Your comments please!

Dr. Pokhrel: Once better known as a peaceful Shangrila to the world, Nepal, at present possesses an ugly scene making the lives of the commoners miserable. Mainly three sets of actors are involved in pushing this tiny country to this precarious situation. The common citizens in the nook and corner are frantically shouting for help to restore peace and normalcy in the society, but the actors involved in the fray are adamantly pursuing a policy of brinkmanship and fulfilling their self-aggrandizement. One set of actor, better known as CPN-Maoists, are engaged for the past nine years in bringing about a radical socio-economic transformation through people's war for which they have resorted to armed struggle as historical necessity in their own words.

Another set of actors could broadly be categorized as the forces and supporters of peaceful transition through parliamentary process strictly trying to confine the role of the monarch as constitutional head. Paradoxically, these actors belonging to different political organizations have miserably failed to abide by the norms and values of participatory democracy, which has given enough space to the monarch to become ambitious and assertive in terms of power exercise.

The third set of actors constitute the traditional monarchy and its close supporters seem to have been bent on to maintain a status quo by trying to interpret the constitution in somewhat discretionary manner after the Royal takeover of October 2002. In fact the current stalemate is the outcome of mistrust and self-styled working tendencies between different political forces.

As regards the recent call given to the CPN-Maoists by the government should be viewed against this backdrop. Each of these forces are never tired of talking about people's welfare but are seldom sincere in caring for the sufferings of the masses. In other words, the sensitivity and vulnerability of Nepalese society seems to have been completely ignored by these actors. The recent initiatives and actions taken by both the Maoists and that of the RNA are not conducive in creating a climate for reopening a meaningful dialogue for a peaceful management of the ongoing conflict. None of these actors trust each other. One is apprehensive of the bonafides of the other. The response by the Maoist Supremo should be seen under this backdrop. The ambush action of the Maoists and the RNA action in Pandaun have further exacerbated the situation for dialogue. Therefore the accusations and recriminations between and among political forces are unlikely to bring peaceful solution to the ongoing problem. But the steps that would ensure confidence towards each other are immediately called for. If the parties engaged in conflict can't manage affairs themselves, even outside help, preferably the UN facilitation could be a better alternative in the larger interest of the nation.

Nepalese society currently passing through a critical situation where crisis of confidence is predominantly reigning in addition to the six crises as mentioned by Lucian W Pye-the famous American Political Scientist.

Talk offer is a tactical move of Deuba government - T.N.Dahal, President FNJ

TGQ4: As a responsible journalist, how do you view the prospects for government-Maoists talks? Any suggestions you have Mr. Dahal? Your remarks please.

Mr. Dahal: The government's offer for talks is not that much serious as it should have been. This is just the government's tactical move taken under compelling conditions.

The government has failed in carrying out the instructions provided to it by the King at time of appointment.

The required safe environment for conducting the elections does not appear in sight. But if the government can't conduct the elections, its relevancy in being in government can't be justified. The Maoists have already rejected the offer for talks stating that atmosphere was not conducive. Nevertheless, they have not altogether rejected the possibility of the talks.

The situation has not yet deteriorated to the extent that peace talks could not happen. Given the confidence among the conflicting parties, talks could be initiated in order to arrest the increasing shape and size of the violence. This calls for a need of equally capable, competent and reliable mediators. This also demands increased pressure from the civil society to both the sides.

It appears that the coming days will witness more violence which might contain the seeds of Nepal being declared as a failed state.

Headline | Opinion | Dateline | National |  Editorial | Letter | 2nd Impression | Views | International | Past