Kathmandu: The party of the communists, the UML, has either gone fanatical or is on the verge of a vertical split becomes clear from the erratic utterances of some of its summit leaders on the current politics of the nation as it is obtaining today.

A party that demands strict discipline from its leaders as per its dogmatic theory has begun ventilating any thing under the sun contra to the party’s established norms and general practices.

It appears that the UML has either become more democratic than Abraham Lincoln or were approaching an abyss wherefrom its return would be simply unthinkable.

Look how the UML leaders have been expressing their feelings of late.

To begin with let’s take what Pradip Nepal has to say about the government that is partnered by its own stalwarts.

Mr. Nepal says that the UML should immediately quit the government as the Deuba’s coalition set has neither been able to restore peace nor could bring the Maoists to negotiation table. He further sees the need for the revival of the parliament or that of going to the constituent assembly elections.

To recall, revival of the parliament is not in the agenda of the UML.

Now comes the firebrand Bam Dev Gautam. He says that the parliament should be restored and that the UML’s men in the government should be sacked or replaced to save the party’s sagging image among the population.

Mr. Gautam’s expressions go contra to the party’s stands and also is in contrast to his own colleagues, Mr. Madhav Nepal’s’ official line.

Then here we have yet another aggressive UML stalwart, K.P.Woli, who is known for his power-struggle with senior Nepal, the GS of the UML.

The UML leader bluntly endorses the government deadline offered to the Maoists and says that the establishment had no other options left and hence the deadline.

Mr. Woli says if the parliament can’t be restored and the elections not being held, what the hell the government should do in such a precarious situation?

Woli clearly endorses Deuba’s reiteration.

The all-powerful UML leader who in the recent past has traveled to several European countries plus been to the United States for a month or so rejects the government’s assertion that if the Maoists did not attend to the talks within the stated timeframe, going to the elections will be the only option left.

“If the elections are held without the restoration of peace would mean inviting a bloody war”, is what senior UML leader Madhav Nepal said the other day.

This is not the end of it all.

The deputy Prime Minister, Bharat Mohan Adhikari, one more influential member of the UML party, signaled the Maoists that this deadline were the last offer from the government side and that if the other camp did not respond positively to the government’s offer would be very expensive for the insurgents.

A threat loaded statement indeed which the finance minister should have avoided in order to keep the rebels in good humor. But he did not do so for unexplained reasons.

Let’s see what the ministers from the UML quota have to say.

The UML ministers in Deuba’s coalition appear less interested in poking their nose in the political issues but instead have managed themselves to remain engaged in matters that benefited them materially. But then yet as they are a part of the government thus they appear to have sided with what the government has said in the recent days vis-à-vis the Maoists.

This means that the ministers more or less differ with their own party leaders who oppose Deuba and flay the offer of the talks to the Maoists.

This clearly makes the analysts to conclude that there is already a rift in between and among the UML leaders whether they are in government or in the party.

The increasing internal rivalry in the UML in between and among its own leaders does clearly indicate that all is not well inside the UML and that an earthquake of higher scale is about to shake the party soon.

Its inference would be that the UML under Madhav Nepal is already in a grave crisis and that senior Nepal’s leadership is being questioned by his own party men to the extent that Pradip Nepal, once Madhav’s chum, has begun questioning the raison d etre of the UML continuing in government as against Madhav’s preference to continue in government.

Prachanda not averse to talks

Kathmandu: It appears that the constitutional monarch demanded the resignation of Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba when the latter invited the monarch for a “quiet dinner” at his official residence some two weeks ago.

Presumably, a flabbergasted Prime Minister appealed for a “grace period” for the resignation as demanded by the King.

What emerges from this presumption, could be a wild one, is that the King granted a definite timeframe for Deuba to materialize what the King had instructed to Deuba at time of his appointment as the nation’s prime minister some four months back.

Coincidently, after receiving a grace period of apparently three months, Deuba too set a deadline for the Maoists to attend to the talks with his government. Could have some connections to his own deadline what he presumably received from the monarch.

Now that Deuba has set a deadline for the Maoists to come to talks or else the government can’t wait for the talks to happen for an indefinite period. The offer of talks made by Deuba also hints that if the other side rejected the offer of the talks, the government would have no option left other than to go for the polls.

As was expected, Maoists Supremo rejected the talk-offer stating that the offer itself was not only “abstract” but a threat loaded one as well.

Prachanda describes the offer as a sort of conspiracy.

Nevertheless, Comrade Prachanda in his fresh statement implies that his party was not “against” the talks and could come to the table provided the other side heeded to their minimum demands, more specifically that of holding of the elections to the constituent assembly.

Prachanda has also hinted that talks could be initiated with the government should some “recognized” international mediator who could be trusted comes to the scene.

While saying so Prachanda appears to have dumped the idea of having the UN good offices at time of the talks with the government. If not the UN then, Prachanda, will be more than happy if some reputed international agencies mediated at time of the talks. A grand departure from the previous stance indeed.

The statement issued by Prachanda summarily rejects the Indian mediation. ( See KP dated November 13, 2004). This explains that the Maoists are still angry with the India for obvious political reasons.

To sum up, Prachanda favors talks. He needs an impartial international mediator. He will not settle for less than elections to the constituent assembly.

How the government would react to Prachanda’s fresh political mood will have to be watched.