Ball in Maoists' court

So what transpired between the three major parties – UCPN (Maoist), Nepali Congress (NC) and CPN-UML – inside the closed doors of Kathmandu’s Radisson Hotel [break] on Saturday evening? Let us begin with good news, which has become so rare in recent times. The parties managed to agree on a range of contentious issues that were proving to be obstacles to the statute-drafting process.



These include a consensus to start the process to manage Maoist combatants, return properties seized by Maoist cadres and disband paramilitary structure of Young Communist League and other similar sister organizations latest by May 24th. Similarly, the other crucial agreements include establishment of a State Restructuring Commission and formation of a national unity government also by the same time frame. That the parties were able to see eye-to-eye on such complex issues is laudable to say the least.



However, the bad news is that the parties could not formalize the agreement in writing after the Maoists and the other two parties disagreed on whether or not the resignation of Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal should constitute a part of the “package deal”. While NC and UML maintained that PM Nepal’s resignation must be a component of the package deal, the Maoists stuck to their stance that they are only willing to strike a deal once the PM resigns. The parties had resumed their negotiations on Sunday evening and we can only hope that they are able to resolve their difference vis-à-vis the resignation of PM Nepal.



While we understand that it might be difficult for the Maoist party’s high command to save their faces in front of their cadres if they back out from the protests before PM Nepal puts down his papers, something that they had pledged to see through, we urge them not to make this an ego issue for the larger good of the nation. In any case, PM Nepal has repeatedly maintained that if the parties are able to agree on a package deal, he would not stand in the way.



Unfortunately, if the Maoists stick to their demand for too long, it might force many to question their intention. After all, history stands as a testimony that they have not always abided by agreements. For example, it is common knowledge that the management of combatants should have happened six months after the Comprehensive Peace Agreement was signed in November 2006, but even three years later, the combatants are still wasting the prime of their lives in UN-monitored cantonments. It is time for the Maoists to be flexible.

Related story

Nepal to host South Asian Roll Ball C’ship