so the maoists are now for a constituent assembly, with the *hope* that it will lead to a republican state. my question is: when the maoists went underground in 96, what was their demand? had they always been clamoring for a republic state? or did they want a communist state back then? or was it simply a case of the maoist leaders playing foul after having failed to be counted in the mainstream democratic process? because it seems like back in 96, nepal was for all intents and purposes functioning as a democratic state. it was pretty much a constitutional monarchy. yes, the army was not under the PM's control, but it was not that necessary. in fact people were questioning the usefulness of the army a few years back. i am askign these questions because i need to understand whether i can put faith in the recent conciliatory tone of the maoists. even if the maoist leadership is open to joining mainstream democracy, what guarantee is there that they have control over their cadre? on a related note, badal, the head of the military branch, was reported to have said that anyone making $100, 000 shoudl be killed (or somethign to that effect). i know people *want* to believe that the maoists' intentions are good. i do too (and sometimes you need ot have faith), but in times like this, one's emotions can sometimes overpower reason.