Kathmandu: The spokesman of the Maoists insurgency, Krishna Bahadur Mahara, is a different political creature presumably.

However, what is for sure is that whatever he says must have been backed by his high command or else he would not dare to speak the unthinkable.

Mahara bluntly stated last week through a statement that his party would wish to have straight talks with the monarch.

As if this were not enough to boggle the minds of the Nepali intellectuals, Mahara went on to declare that “had they talked to the King in the past, issues regarding the conflict would have already been sorted out”.

Analysts draw some meaningful inferences from what Mahara said recently.

Firstly, in the Maoists scheme of things, the King is a force who holds key to the settlement of the issue. In saying so, Mahara wishes to hint that talking to Tom, Dick and Harry in the government would have no meaning in its truest sense of the term and thus appears to have decided to ventilate the inner feelings of the insurgency.

Secondly, knowingly or unknowingly, Mahara is enhancing the prestige of the King. Mahara understands it or not but then his statement does speak that in the given context the role of the King can’t be dismissed. In addition, Mahara prefers the King to act in settling the overly stretched issue even if he, read the King, had to cross the constitutional limits. This means that the insurgency would not mind if the King crossed his constitutional limits provided such endeavors favored the Maoists aims and objectives.

Its negative corollary would also be to show the international community that the King could cross the limits should he so desire.

Analysts remain puzzled to know as to why the Maoists prefer the King to take the initiatives?

Does this mean that they have concluded internally that the concessions that they are demanding from the state could only be given by the King and hence it should be the King and the King only with whom they can talks?

Question arises as to how a monarch who is committed to a constitutional monarchy could venture to go extra miles as demanded by the Maoists?

It is in this context the fresh declaration of the high-level peace committee has to be understood which said in part that the HPC would soon come up with some brilliant formulae that would try to accommodate even the main demands of the Maoists. Should this mean that the King has agreed to go in for constituent assembly elections, which is what has been the prime demand of the insurgents? It will have to be watched as to how the constitutional monarch satisfies all including the Maoists without crossing his stipulated constitutional limits?