Imagine this: Deuba announces elections. Koirala Congress, the UML, half of Deuba Congress, and the rest declare they are not going to take part. Then what? Reviving parliament. Even according to the Grandpa Of The Idea, Koirala, it will have to be done by the king through the universally loathed Article 127. And the king has made it very clear he will not go for it. Koirala is angling for a revived parliament because that will bring him center stage. Madhav Nepal wants a revived local bodies, because that brings him center stage. It is almost like it is business as usual for these people. That there is no crisis. And political angling for power should continue on as usual. For Deuba (or any Prime Minster) to say they will talk with the Maoists, but only within the current constitution is like saying they do not want to talk. The Maoists on their part have crossed many human rights boundaries. Child soldiers, for one. What about this: (1) Deuba announces open talks where all options are on the table. (2) Agree to the Constituent Assembly talk, but only if the Maoists disarm. To that the Maoists will say, no, instead we want to merge into the Nepali Army. Deuba says, fine, but all of your cadres will have to apply individually. Like new recruits. And all those who pass the "entrance" requirements will be taken in at the level of their qualification, but not en masse, not in "Maoist battalions." (3) Then hold elections. The new elected body drafts a new constitution that is put to a referendum. If the referendum accepts the constitution, the elected body stays on as parliament. Or new elections are held. Two elections will be cheaper than the ongoing civil war and paralysis. (4) There is a strong possibility the monarchy might come back. The people might decide to keep it. Most important the Maoists will be disarmed. The Maoists are the weaker party. But it would be a bad idea to try to rub their nose in the dust. Better to help them save face. True, they are theoretically Maoists. 70 years back they would have been Stalinists. But then 20 years back the UML were communists. 30 years back Koirala hijacked a plane. 70 years back the Shahas did what the Ranas asked them to do. The Maoists are a protest movement. They are not communists in the old fashioned way. Most of their grievances have been Janajati grievances. That is more ethnic than industrial labor stuff. If you are going to hold elections anyway, there is not much difference between an election Deuba and the king want, and one for a Constituent Assembly. karmapa: "... it is a fallacy to believe this is the niji agenda of the Maoists ONLY.... the truth is politically-conscious Madhises to Janjatis to Dalits to Adivashis to women to other minorities - even those have been victims of the Maoist violence - are increasingly clamoring for contituent assembly....." Exactly. Maoists or not, I am for a Constituent Assembly. A constituent assembly to draft a constitution. Referendums for all major decisions. Parliamentary elections and processes for regular power stuff. One person one vote. Democracy. It is a democracy thing. It is to say the 23 million Nepalis are the ones who ought to decide.