Kathmandu: The Maoists have nothing to panic. He is neither a military man nor an advisor posted in Kathmandu to assist the government..

Instead, he is a scholar of international repute who had come here to share his research works-findings, which he has gained over the years regarding conflict management and resolution. The Maoists negotiators too would apparently benefit if they studied what the US scholar revealed the other day in the capital

He is Dr. David Scott Palmer—a Professor of Political Science who also holds an appointment as Prof. of International Relations at the Boston University, USA.

Dr. Palmer was here in town last year around this time but could not talk to a larger audience which he did this time.

Dr. Palmer has studied very closely the Peruvian politics, the Latin American military and the Shining Path guerilla movement.

Sharing his experiences, Dr. Palmer, at an interaction program with the Nepali intellectuals including the media held last week at the American Center said that Peace process not every time goes smoothly but more often than not has to tread along topsy-turvy path and that the process in itself could have several pitfalls.

Definitely he was hinting at the peace process currently being initiated in Nepal to sort out the Maoists insurgency.

“Nepal is not alone, others too had such similarly movements and insurgencies”, said Dr. Palmer.

According to Dr. Palmer, there were about nine principles which could be brought into practice to get out of the mess of the insurgency of the sort of the Maoists.

Compromise: Compromise is the first principle, according to Boston University Professor. “Both the sides on the negotiating table must be able to listen to the other sides’ agenda if they were to arrive at a resolution to their long standing conflict. Once they compromise with the existing realities, it paves the way for further fruitful talks.

Complexity: Peace process, as Dr. Palmer sees it, is a messy affair and at times one has to come across with practically diametrically opposed views. Variety of obstacles, according to Dr. Palmer, could come at time of the talks.

Leadership: Conflict resolution demands a strong and sensitive leadership on both the sides for principles pragmatism is attached to it. According to the expert of International relations, the leadership involved in the peace process must have a determined and strong personality having popular credentials.

Honest brokers: The mediators or for that matter the intermediaries engaged in the peace process for the resolution of the conflicts must be honest and that their non-partisan attitude is what becomes very important. Unless the brokers were honest, none of the parties in conflict would prefer to take the words of the said broker(s) in good faith.

Trust: If you don’t have trust on each other, says Dr. palmer, the peace process can’t move an inch forward. “Mutual trust among the contesting parties must be developed in order to arrive at a positive solution to the conflict. In the process, confidence-building measures, CBMs, must be developed so that the process goes on smoothly.

Articulation: The two sides in conflict must reiterate their frame of reference, which in any case must be clear. There should be no hidden agenda. Dr. Palmer says the two sides have got to explicitly lay out their agenda whatever it is at time of the debate.

Consultation: As is not unusual, division of ideas and views on any one particular agenda is not quite unexpected but instead very natural. Some of the participants at the conflict resolution process might be on your side and some might be in the other camp. Palmer suggests both the sides to explain the hitches to your respective constituencies. Don’t give surprises to your men in your camps. Be in touch with your own constituencies so that they remain abreast with the developments at the negotiating table.

Confidentiality: Dr. Palmer suggests the contesting parties at the table to keep the proceedings a guarded secret. No need to divulge the happenings or for that matter the agreements unless both sides agree to it seriously or assure guaranteed that were demanded of it. The insurgency expert advises the parties not to get tempted by the press.

Implementation: The whole agreements arrived at the negotiating table will go to the dogs if the parties concerned don’t implement the agreements effectively. Whatever is agreed in between the two must be effectively implemented. The commitments made at the table must be kept if the conflict were to be resolved once and for all.

Nepali academia who were present on the occasion were of the view that the nine point principle as spelt out by the US Scholar could be a guideline to those who have been currently engaged in the peace process.

It would have been nice if the US scholar talked to those self-proclaimed experts and enlightened the politically biased facilitators who appear more political than the contesting parties.