Chairman Prachanda's six questions to the government appear to be aimed at clearing the issues before potential future talks. To treat the six questions as obstacles to talks would be tantamount to a needlessly hurried conclusion. The six questions do not amount to pre-conditions for talks. In fact, they display an openness and provide an opportunity for the government to come to the negotiating table. Both sides now have the responsibility of creating the condition for talks so a compromise can be reached. The Maoists don't accept the current governance structure. They are determined to have their own kind of political and social revolution. The government can't agree to these demands overnight, but it appears ready to carry out necessary reforms. It is not possible to fulfill these demands under armed pressure. Since the two sides are so polarised, there is a lot of truth in civil society's view that the only solution is political. Since both sides also seem to reject a military solution, there needs to be confidence building measures for unconditional talks. The demand for a constituent assembly is something that has to be sorted out at the table. If the current constitution needs to be changed, there has to be a national consensus on these changes. The government is limited by the constitution. Pranchada's limits are not clear. Not all demands or proposals should be taken negatively. Let's talk openly about all proposals. Let's not play games, because all Nepalis are serious about their desire for peace.