Reading CK Lal's 'UNder-developed' (#206) and the letter ('Below the belt' #207) in response to it, I feel what Lal wrote was an understatement. Instead of an apology, Lal has provided and opportunity for all those who work for the world's poor in these institutions that have become redundant to review their positions. Let us just ask one other question: How can equitable and sustainable development happen by perpetuating structures of inequity? In the face of such blatant irony, can anyone still be so na?ve?

Name withheld

. CK Lal's last two articles about Nepal's cultural diversity (#206, #207) show that the once-taboo subject is at last beginning to attract the attention of the media. It is a fruit of the long years of struggle waged by cultural societies and ethnic groups. I remember a time when 'nationalist' journalists used to pretend that Nepal's varied cultures did not exist. I would like to request Lal to go further. Let's get down to the nitty-gritty. What exactly are the features that he recommends to make 'Nepali nationalism inclusive and democratic'?

Bhai Kaji,
Kathmandu

. UN peace envoys visiting Kathmandu should read Dipta Shah's guest column in your paper before proceeding any further ('Peacemongering', #207). Like 'constituent assembly', UN-mediation has also become a code word for desperate Nepalis who are willing to clutch at straws for a restoration of peace. Since these two points are high on the Maoist's agenda at the moment, Kathmandu-based peaceniks want the government to give in to the two demands so that the Maoists can be persuaded to the negotiating table. But until the Maoists show that this time they are serious about talks, and are not using it for tactical advantage, there is no reason for the government to mediate. This a determined group of revolutionaries, they will use any short-term advantage if it takes them closer to their strategic political and military goals. Besides, there is the India factor. The UN mission should also be talking to policy-makers in Delhi who are opposed to any third party mediation. Prachanda's repeated calls for UN intervention, as Shah also points out, is only a way to gain international legitimacy. We know he knows it's not going to happen until India wants it to happen.

T J Thapa,
email