Kathmandu: As chinks in the coalition government’s already fragile armor continue to widen speculation on its longevity begun on day one of its formation become only naturally rife. This becomes the primary cause of the public skepticism that it is this government that will prove panacea to the country’s mounting problems. Already Deuba is said to be facing challenges from a bureaucracy whose loyalty has been made dubious over the years of politicization. This no doubt effects speedy implementation of cabinet decisions what affects the cabinet more is that the several parties that their components constitute have taken several standpoints in contradiction to the cabinet ones.

It is not surprising therefore that nonpartisan cabinet member Dr. Mohammad Mohsin has been appointed spokesperson for the cabinet while others have been asked to shut-up on government decisions on security matters. Dr. Mohsin also has been included in the high level political committee that is to take charge of talks with the Maoists. It is his inclusion now in the all party-cabinet committee to oversee decisions made by the cabinet on the basis of common minimum program that is apparently to be the bone of contention. After all, Mohsin’s non-party status has been purposely projected by the political parties and the partisan media as evidence that he is a “Royal nominee”. And so he must be opposed for sake of party credentials “against regression’.

These potential sources of conflagration within the cabinet suggest that when and if the expected cabinet break-up will take place, it will be done also on the plea of Royal intervention. It is another matter that the constitution does not recognize the matter of Royal nominees in cabinet and it is Deuba that Mohsin is responsible to.

This leaves limited choices for the Prime Minister. He must frst consolidate his hold over his own party and have the requisite organizational strength to cope with the expected organizational onslaught of particularly, the UML in his cabinet.

It is not that things seem difficult for this given the varying standpoints of competing opinions in the UML itself. It is not only in Deuba’s own party that the chinks are showing, senor UML party men have begun voicing differences publicly about what government should or should not do and, more importantly perhaps, what that the party should do.

Obviously these do not reflect well on the cabinet’s primary task of creating an environment congenial to the holding of elections. While the media appears oblivious to this, the Maoists seem to have done well to cash in upon this.

As things stand, whatever the status of under-the-table contacts between government and the insurgents, the Maoists do well to enthuse the public clamor for talks while simultaneously heightening their terrorist presence in the urban areas including Kathmandu.

It is predictable therefore that Maoists pressure will build through as increase in violence that successfully propagates Maoists efficacy.

A government incoherent in its public defense seemingly on purpose will serve more to enthuse the clamor for peace talks fueled also by media publicity and supposed civic society activities.

Inevitably, this will demand cohesion on pat of government. This will be Deuba’s immediate challenge.