It is pointless getting into a semantic discussion about Prachanda's statement on Wednesday in which he said there was "no more rationale for the time being for the ceasefire and peace talks." The Maoists have amply demonstrated what they meant: they are now embarked on a campaign of top-level assassinations possibly leading to urban guerrilla warfare.

Thursday morning's twin attacks on two senior army officers involved in psywar operations was proof of that. The targets seem to have been deliberately selected, and the attacks showed careful planning and stakeout. So we are now back to where we left off in January with the assassination of Armed Police Chief Krishna Mohan Shrestha. Seven months of effort, a lot of time and energy have been wasted. One lesson is that a peace process cannot succeed without political will, expert mediation and a monitoring mechanism.

The fragile hopes for peace of 23 million Nepali has been dashed again. All because of a disagreement over whether the 1990 Constitution should be replaced with a new one drawn up by a constituent assembly as the Maoists say they wanted, or have the changes incorporated into the statute through reforms as the government proposed.

It was clear the Maoists were in no mood for compromise, and the government negotiators, suffering under the active non-cooperation of the political parties, gave in to almost everything except the constituent assembly. After having got that far, it is difficult to see why this particular demand should have been such an insurmountable barrier. Unless the demand itself was just an excuse to buy time to return to war. Just like the last time.

An overwhelming sense of national despair greeted Prachanda's statement. Even though the comrade left a small opening for talks to restart, it is clear that the Nepali people now have to be prepared for the worst while hoping for the best. Prepared for an escalation of the war, with all its implications for human suffering and economic losses.

No war is civil. It is by definition a nasty affair, but we must be able to control the brutality and prevent the suffering of innocents. This time, we have to get both sides to agree to a human rights covenant not just a statement of good intentions, but with a mechanism in place to directly monitor violations on the ground.

Experience from other insurgency-hit countries like El Salvador, Sri Lanka and Colombia is that the Maoists' path of assassinations will have an equal and opposite reaction from the establishment, either directly or through shadowy vigilante groups and death squads. We can't afford to go down that road.

there is a way.

King Gyanendra legitimised his October Fourth action for seven months with this ceasefire. Now as the conflict restarts, he will have to urgently think of other political options. Throughout all this, it was only the people who seemed to crave for peace. The army had evidence all along that the Maoists were using the talks to prepare for new fighting and was itching to get back into the fray. The rebels knew they wouldn't survive if things went back to non-violent electoral politics.

The parliamentary parties, whatever their past misconduct, is the one entity that needs peace to exist. Because their very survival is tied up with an end to conflict, they have to be a party to its restoration.