How was the dialogue with the Maoists? Didn´t leaders had claimed it to be decisive?
It was almost decisive. The talks was positive. We proposed them to move ahead. And not to further wrangle in one particular ministry. We urged them to understand the situation. They said, "We will study, discuss and will be back."
When will you meet again?
That´s not fixed yet.
How optimistic you have become, after today´s meeting, in Maoist joining government without home portfolio?
I see cent percent possibility. Maoist leaders have said in public that they are not wrangling for one particular ministerial portfolio.
Isn´t there any possibility of UML giving up its claim over the home portfolio to end the stalemate?
We are ready for making deals in the ministries other than home.
Why can´t UML allow Maoists to head the home ministry?
There are some specific reasons, cases and circumstances that are related to ideology and political goals. Maoist leadership will have complications in heading home ministry. We understand that. The tasks of completing the peace process will be seriously in trouble if they head the ministry. We have to save them from that problem.
What happened about the proposal to settle the row by keeping the home portfolio by the prime minister himself?
Keeping the home ministry with the prime minister is to keep it with the prime minister´s party. There is no difference whether Jhalanath Khanal himself looks after the portfolio or any other leader [from the same party] heads the ministry. Some of the leaders from within the UML may want such a situation, but Maoists don´t think that way.
Then, what will be the prime minister´s move? Will he wait for Maoists or expand cabinet?
There will be no problem in expanding the cabinet. It can take place. The Maoists will also join but there is no need to wait them. Other parties will also join the government.
Are the talks in these days concentrated on the seven-point deal or only about the row over home ministry?
We have already taken the decision over the seven-point deal.
But Maoists have said that the UML decision over the deal is ambiguous.
No, its very clear. There is no ambiguity as we have taken categorical decisions on each point and that is in writing.
Is the dispute related only to a ministry or there are other contentious issues as well?
The issue of the ministry itself is related to many other aspects like the peace process and constitution writing. Therefore we are sticking to this point because the Maoist leadership will be in difficulty if we give the home ministry to them. We don´t want to push them in trouble.
Then, are you staking claim over the ministry to do a favor to the Maoists?
Don´t interpret that way and don´t try to provoke the situation.
One of the Maoist vice chairmen said that they may withdraw their support to the government if the stalemate continues. What´s your take?
I don´t believe that he said so. How could they say so while they told us at the meeting that they would discuss over our proposal and take a decision?
What about Dahal´s latest threat to revolt?
I don´t want to comment on that. It is not possible to respond each and every speech. At today´s meeting, they said they are for joining the government.
Related story
Home ministry should be given to RSP: Oli
-1774196637.webp)
