The Nepali polity treats the international community with ambivalence. On one hand we ask that ambassadors keep off the national political turf, but at the same time hope for a rescue from that quarter if and when the Nepali players create a mess.

It now looks as if the transitional process to bring the Nepal Communist Party (Maoist) into open politics and move towards constituent assembly elections will be long and drawn-out. The confusion during this interregnum must not deprive the Nepali people of international support for recovery and development. The memory of the peace and progress sought by the April movement must not be forgotten.

The international community at large needs to weigh in-and not be accused of interfering if they do-on the importance of making a space for the Maoists on the open platform. Together with Nepali opinion-makers, they must ensure that the people's desire for peace and their commitment to pluralism, and democracy are not undermined during this transition period.

'Arms management'-total civilian control of the Nepal Army and activating the process of separating Maoist combatants and militia from their arms-is essential. We believe the most feasible option for now is included in the 'five-point formula': cantonment of armed rebels as proof of their commitment to resolution, which can pave the way for the CPN (Maoist) to join the interim government. The issue of constituent assembly elections in the context of full separation of Maoists from their guns (we think not) can be dealt with later.

It seems incongruous that among the plenipotentiaries only the United States ambassador has been talking. His alarming prognosis vis-a-vis Maoist intentions is the kind to spark immediate rejection due to his earlier pronouncements during the royal takeover, and more generally, because of the Bush administration's image.

The Nepali intelligentsia and the international community must now hold the Maoists to their 'cantonment commitment' while providing them a safe landing with dignity. Why should only Mr Moriarty hold court?