Conflict is not independent or proactive but dependent or reactive force. From my observation I see you consider feudalism as the factor that is fueling current Maoists movement in Nepal. I, as mentioned earlier, consider strong and gradually strengthening socio-economic weakness is the reason that is provoking the movement. I think feudalism is a part of socio-economic spectrum. Is it not? Unless the proper measures are taken to address the socio-economic weakness for the majority of the population, no political or developmental activities will be supported by the desperate ones. That means conflict will keep on swinging with one name or other. Just speeches or rhetoric provoking sovereignty to people or democracy mean nothing constructive. Survival comes before anything including democracy or sovereignty. Nepal is in chaos. I don?t think Maoists will come to table to negotiate unless a major concession is given to them. Why? Because I notice their confidence is solidifying, and the government is nothing but defunct because it has no agendas that support national interests. My opinion.