Kathmandu: Girija Prasad Koirala is now a frustrated man but yet he doesn’t lack the needed energy to warm up the streets.

So is Comrade Madhav Nepal.

Comrade Nepal has reasons to be unhappy with the scheme of things that have developed here after his Lucknow trip.

Firstly, he is not a consensus candidate for the prime ministership as agreed upon by the five agitating political parties at time of the beginning of their agitation against what they call, regression.

Secondly, his political bond with the Indian establishment has weakened as his secret trip to Lucknow has boomeranged on him. None less than India’s foreign minister Yashwant Sinha made this revelation only on Monday.

Thirdly, he is apparently not in the good-book of the palace for his intermittent threat loaded statements being made against the institution of the monarchy. This presumably caps the possibility of Madhav Nepal being elevated to the ranks of the nation’s Prime Minister. Albeit only if a miracle happens in his favor.

But then yet Madhav Nepal is not a personality who will stop playing games.

That he is playing a game both with the agitating parties and with the palace as well becomes clear from his fresh utterances wherein he is forcefully saying that he is “with” the agitators and concurrently appealing the King to come to the terms with the agitating parties. His appeal to the King is definitely polite. He then concurrently warns the King not to dismiss the role of the agitating parties as is being given to understand.

This is not all.

Even, one of the Maoists’ top-hat, Dr. Babu Ram Bhattarai too appears not that happy with his own party’s functioning these days. Or else why he should have hinted on the Party’s On-Line Internet edition dated 22 December that “a set of Maoists’ own men appear to be in a mood to take up a new role of the rulers which time permitting might give birth to a new counter-revolution from within the party itself as against the ongoing revolution” (literal translation only-Ed)

If Dr. Bhattarai’s expressions were taken in its face value then what comes to the fore is that the insurgency has already developed a sort of fissure and that the insurgency is prone to a split provided the attitude of a section of the Maoists leaders’ continue to be what has been hinted by internationally acclaimed architectural engineer turned Maoist leader, Dr. Bhattarai.

This means that all is not well inside the insurgency. Dr. Bhattarai’s written statement has come at a time when the insurgency is being talked by a section of the Nepali press as to be on the verge of a vertical split for varied unexplainable reasons.

This notwithstanding, the other camp whom Dr. Bhattarai alleges to have been exceeding their functions is yet to contradict the allegations.

Matured political analysts maintain that whatever happens inside the insurgency should not be a matter of concern to others as it is exclusively a matter to be sorted out by the rebel leaders only. However, what should really concern us is the question as to when the rebels come to the talks. Who brings them to the talks? How they should be brought to the table? Do we need any foreign support in this regard? And finally which force on earth could patch-up the differences in between the “old” and the “new” regime?

We have had, say analysts, enough killings on both the sides. It is time that wisdom prevailed on both the two warring rivals.

Is the government listening? Are the leaders of the insurgency listening to our SOS call?