UN was trying to make Nepal's case the Model Peace process. In that process IAN compromised a lot with Maos. Was that good or Bad? I am not in a position to strongly debate either of the answer. But if someone asks if UN compromised a lot with Maoists to bring them back to peace from their past, then the answer is yes.

Some call Prachanda a devil of peace process by lying to UN and Nepali people and others call him a hero for telling people exactly what they needed to hear at that point. Most Millitants were not ready to come to the peace accord had Prachanda not lured them with the capture of state by the means of constituent assembly elections. Who was Prachanda lying in this. If he was lying to the Millitants then good for Nepali people, he tricked Millitants into joining the peace process and if he was telling the Millitants the truth then its bad for Nepali people. So to make this a great MODEL PEACE PROCESS, UN tried really hard. Lets face it UN has not been able to implement any peace process in the world lately and they wanted Nepal's situation to justify UN's existence. In that process, yes UN could have overlooked, not looked, ignored, and pretended for fair count for the number of PLA count just to make Maoists party happy.

So coming back to the thread question

Ian Martin must have come to Nepal to tell Prachanda this

" Dude....i thought we were tight, how could you lie to me on this"

OR

"Dude....you need to learn how to keep your home videos safe,Didnt you learn that from paris hilton"


Peace !!!


"