After days of informal but intense negotiations between the CPN-Maoist and the SPA government, along with the flurry of high-voltage foreign diplomatic consultations, the two sides have taken the peace process nearer fruition by reaching an understanding on the contentious issue of arms management, paving the way for the meeting between the Seven-Party Alliance and the CPN-M yesterday. The talks had become drawn out over whether a single or a double lock system should be adopted to safely store the Maoist arms. But now, the arms would be under a single lock system with the key remaining with the Maoists alone but subject to UN monitoring, which includes a mechanism fitted with a siren. As for the Maoist soldiers, they would be stationed in temporary camps. According to Prachanda, the Nepali Army’s weapons will be managed likewise.

It is hoped that the Maoists and the Nepali Congress will also win the confidence of the other six parties in the SPA on these and other remaining matters constituting the total political package, including the question of settling the issue of the monarchy through the constituent assembly alone or with a simultaneous referendum. The NC backs the CA-alone position, the CPN-UML stands for both CA and a referendum, the Maoists seem to be ready to go along with either if that helps break the deadlock. Almost all political parties, including the CPN-Maoist, have been in favour of resolving the crisis on the strength of a total political package. And on most issues they have already reached some sort of understanding. So, even on the few remaining ones, they should come together. Arms management indeed represents a major gain, but to avoid future rows, the entire political package would have to be hammered out.

The political parties should also make clear their disagreements beforehand, so that nobody is made to sign on the dotted line. What does not behove them, however, is their tendency to present a spectacle of themselves after having signed the agreement. A case in point is an arms accord contained in the 12-point, 8-point and 5-point agreements between the SPA and the Maoists. Subsequent somersaults on second thoughts will only damage their reputation, besides making the nation a prisoner of indecision. The rationale for arms management is that neither side takes undue advantage of its weapons. The single lock system with UN monitoring seems to fit this objective perfectly well. Matters of egos, narrow interests and one-upmanship will only delay or, in extreme cases, sabotage the peace process. With an understanding on consequential issues, the two sides may be expected to sign a comprehensive peace treaty, taking the ceasefire firmly forward towards a lasting peace and political settlement. The critical question to ask now and in days to come for all Nepalis is whether the sovereign citizenry will be allowed to make their independent choice in an atmosphere devoid of fear, threat, intimidation, violence, abuse of authority and rigging.