Your editorial ("The Kathmandu spring", #139) should have been called "The Nepali spring" since all over Nepal there is a yearning for peace. the shaking of hands and the seeming reconciliation is not an indication of peace, there is still a long way to go with lots of twists and turns. That is why the leaders should desist from activities that create disputes and make each other more suspicious and give direction to the peace process. Nepal belongs to every Nepali irrespective of caste or creed. Neither King Gyanendra nor Comrade Baburam can be excluded. Since we are now in the process of peace-making, let us forget the heinous deeds of the past. It is not easy, the desire to avenge past wrongs will be great, but there is no other way.

"Razesh",
Lagankhel

? Thank you for the two excellent travelogues through the Nepali heartland by Manjushree Thapa and Kiyoko Ogura ("Peace bridge" and "Spring in the heartland", #139). While attention is focussed on Kathmandu, it is instructive to be taken on a tour of the countryside to hear what ordinary Nepalis have to say. And the message comes through loud and clear that the ceasefire does not yet mean peace, the people are still afraid that the war will start again, there is no presence of government, and the people are not confident enough to return to their villages. If the negotiators on both sides read the articles, it should be clear to them that the longer they delay the peace dialogue the more difficult it will be to preserve the peace. It is too precious to let go again.

M Manandhar,
Lazimpat