Deputy Prime Minister Ram Chandra Poudel spoke to Nepali Times this week about talking to Maoists, Congress infighting, and the opposition street agitation.

Where do we stand as regards finding a solution to the Maoist problem?
There has been no development, no progress on the possibility of talks. His Majesty has approved the internal Integrated Security and Development Package (ISDP) which is now being started. It aims to look at our problems in totality, security in a national perspective of which the Maoists are a part. Security comes with development, which can take place when there is peace. There are attempts to make local government units defunct, development workers are threatened, road and bridge-building are stopped. The ISDP seeks to win the confidence of the people and create a situation to bring the Maoist to the mainstream. Both sides need to want peace for talks to take place. The ISDP does not mean we believe in crushing the Maoists, but would like to give development a chance. The plan needs political support. The insurgency is an attack on multiparty democracy and those that believe in it. That is why those who were active to bring democracy have to unite and support the ISDP. Only then will the plan succeed.

But the opposition is not even talking with you on the ISDP.

UML leaders are also concerned, but they have a problem because they are trapped by their earlier decision. The UML came with a single point-agenda: remove an elected prime minister without due process. That has made it difficult for them to come and talk with us. At the same time, the Maoists are pulling the rug from beneath the UML and wooing away their cadre. There is possibility of the Maoists making them irrelevant. But if this situation continues, the UML could even be pushed aside.

Is UML talking with you informally?
Informally, yes. But they say the problems can only be solved after the prime minister resigns. They want us to throw him out. But we can't do that. They want our party president to exit in disgrace on something that is yet to be proven. The party will never agree to that.

What is the reason for the deadlock in talks with the Maoists?
The Maoists are saying they're uncertain about talks because of the clash between and within political parties. They are unsure about what will happen to the prime minister, so they are saying who should we talk to? I think the Maoists figure the left opposition is demanding the resignation of the PM, and if they sit down for talks they could be branded opportunists.

What are groups preparing for talks with the Maoists saying to you?
I have been telling them let's not do a drama in the name of talks. Let us not make excuses and propaganda, it will just confuse the people. The government has been saying it is ready for talks-I have been saying I am ready-they are also saying they want talks. But there are no talks taking place. Why? I have told people coming with peace proposals: "Come, we're ready. What security arrangements do they need?"

Do you think the Maoists are serious about dialogue?
I still do not believe the Maoists are serious about dialogue. I have told the same to those coming to me with proposals. If the Maoists really want peace and don't want the country and people to suffer further, they first have to convince me that they are serious. That is why the government has to make its own preparations, which is what we are now doing. We cannot stop doing that, hoping that the talks will resolve everything. That is like saying the tiger will become a vegetarian. The training for Armed Police has begun but it will take another year for them to be ready for duty.

Have you and the prime minister been stepping on each other's toes?
So far there has not been one instance where he and I have a difference of opinion. I have coordinated with him and done everything with his concurrence. The PM had said the Congress may participate in an all party conference (excluding the Maoists) for finding ways to resolve the problem. I also say that Congress can participate in an all party meet of that nature. We both agree that any talks to resolve the Maoist problem has to take place between the government and the Maoists directly.

Do you have full support of the army?

How can the government not have support of the army?
Theoretically, but in reality.

They have been preparing and visiting the field following orders that have been given, so this is not the time to discuss if they support the government or not.

What about the confidence level in the army?
They would like to move in gradually and systematically. They are preparing work-plans based on that. Their work will be co-ordinated by civilian administrators at different levels.

Can the government pay for the new security program?
Because of the Maoist problem we've been forced to spend money that would otherwise be used for development. But you can be sure this programme will not stop because of lack of funds, what is needed will be mobilised.

How will you do that when the government is in such disarray?
The opposition blocked parliamentary proceedings, and that spilled over into our party with one group trying to reap benefits. Then we have had incessant Maoist attacks while the opposition has taken to the streets. All this has naturally affected government performance, and affected the people. We have not been able to use our energy to do the things we want to, we have been forced into day-to-day damage control mode. I have spoken with the dissatisfied group in our party and with the PM and told both sides we need to find a solution because the country is in crisis. I've told them let's put our individual interests on hold and concentrate on the Maoist problem. I have also asked all parties to think beyond petty interests and protect democracy and the nation.

Ultimately it is the prime minister's responsibility to find a solution. What advice have you been giving him?
I have told the PM he should try to include all (party opponents) because he is president of the largest democratic party, and for the sake of democracy which is under attack. And doing that would be his greatest achievement.

You haven't advised him to step down?
All of us have to work to give him a respectable way out.

Is he looking for a respectable way out?
The situation now is different. He is now under intense personal attack, and he has to face them. I don't know what he plans to do once he comes out of this round.

Will his exit bring unity in the Congress?
It won't be easy in the present situation. I don't think unity will come the moment he leaves, or that the Maoist problem will be resolved, and that all parties would unite to face the Maoists. Sher Bahadurji's group believe talks are the only way to go. I think that is a bit na?ve. If he is saying that for public consumption, then he will know better. But for someone who has been in a responsible position in the past, I don't think that is mature. The Maoists won't come to the talks unless they are cornered. They have to be forced to realise where they stand, only then will they come to the table.

As home minister, what do you have to say about the strikes next week?
We've been saying to all parties: let us not shut down the country just for party interests, because that affects the interests and livelihood of ordinary people. We have been requesting them to call off their strike.

What do they say?
They have not come to the meetings we have called, but we're still trying to hold discussions. As a responsible party they have to realise the impact such a long strike can cause.Over time the opposition may have to pay for the losses their strikes cause to the nation. It's their credibility at stake.