At a time when the Maoists and the government can't agree on the fate of parliament, other disagreements have surfaced. They may look serious, but they're not natural, and if there is a commitment to negotiate, a solution can be found. However, there are elements posing as allies trying to provoke both sides.

It may not be a bad idea to keep parliament so there is no political vacuum and so it can help the peace process. However, if parliament becomes a den of murky conspiracies it may actually end up being destructive. Why was the Speaker in such a hurry to instruct the government to sign the Rome Statute? Why was it done without consultations, and on behalf of which organisation or group was the move made?

There is a similar danger from the Maoist side. Prachanda now wants a parliament that has already agreed on an election for a constituent assembly to announce a republic through the interim parliament. This is disingenuous coming from a man who earlier had promised to abide by the constituent assembly verdict even if it was in favour of monarchy. Why is Prachanda emulating the king to wrest away the people's choice? Making such a statement when the Maoists haven't yet laid down their weapons smacks of \'terrorist' tactics and not open politics. The future of the monarchy is something that the people have to decide through free and fair ballot, not through threats. Prachanda should also remember that even if Koirala or Sitaula give in to all his demands and hand power over to the Maoists it won't have any meaning. Only the people can make such decisions, and in a free election.

In all this there is a section of civil society and parliamentary left leaders who seem more responsive to what the Maoists want than what the country needs. If civil society is now on the streets as a pressure group for the Maoists, then we can conclude that civil society no longer exists. Civil society can't be used by anyone as a twin brother of any one party.

True, there are doubts about the constituent assembly elections. But these doubts can be tackled by talking to the government and the Maoists. Instead of taking responsibility for patching up and finding a solution, civil society is taking to streets to widen the gap between the Maoists and the government.

The government, Maoists, parliament and civil society should be showing responsibility and playing a creative role to solve problems. After a point, \'agitation' becomes not just counterproductive but also gives birth to anarchy.