KATHMANDU: The optimism raised by last week’s second round of peace talks between Nepal and Maoist rebels has given way to doubts, now that the rebels have threatened to pull out of the peace process in a bid to pressure the government.

The developments came in the wake of controversial remarks by Minister for Information and Communication Ramesh Nath Pandey, a member of the government negotiating team, who told the BBC Nepali Service on Wednesday night that the government may not honour an agreement struck with the rebels last week to limit army patrols to within five kilometres of their barracks.

The next day, chief Maoist negotiator Dr Baburam Bhattarai hastily called a press conference to denounce Pandey’s remarks and call for his ouster.

“If the minister was just airing his personal opinion, then I call on the government to sack him. But if he was airing the opinion of the negotiating team, then the government must change its entire team or else we will not sit down for the third round of talks,” Bhattarai said.

Bhattarai’s threats have put in doubt the peace process, which has been painstakingly inching forward since the two sides struck a ceasefire deal in late January, after seven years of violence causing nearly 8,000 deaths.

The Maoists have been demanding a republican state in Hindu kingdom Nepal, but had in recent months toned down their demands to facilitate the talks.

Since the January ceasefire, the two sides have held two rounds of talks in the capital Kathmandu, the last one just last week and hailed by both sides as making significant process.

In the last round, the government agreed to limit army patrols to within a five-kilometre perimeter from their barracks to minimise the chances of clashes with rebel forces. It also promised to release three senior Maoist leaders still in jail.

But Bhattarai said that the government has not yet fulfilled its pledge. Worse, he alleges that some senior government negotiators are out to destroy the peace process.

“The remarks made by the minister (Pandey) has shattered the trust in the peace process,” he said. “We don’t see any use in sitting down for another round of talks until the trust has been built back.”

The pressure is now squarely on the government, which had been struggling to put forth a united voice during much of the peace process.

Rumours here swirl about a clash of egos between Pandey and Minister Narayan Singh Pun, both senior members of the government’s negotiating team. Though Pun is the official spokesman of the government on the peace talks, Pandey has been alleged by many of trying to hog the limelight.

Pandey was unavailable for comments about the developments and Pun too kept silent.

Prime Minister Lokendra Bahadur Chand, who was handpicked by King Gyanendra in October after sacking an elected government, is expected to consult with the king before announcing any measures.

A senior official in the Prime Minister’s Office, on condition of anonymity, said that the government is viewing the developments with concern”.

This is especially since the Royal Nepal Army, an institution loyal to the monarchy, has in recent days denounced the agreement to limit their movement to within a five-kilometre perimeter. On Thursday, Col Deepak Gurung, the army’s top spokesman, flatly rejected the agreement by saying the army would not “limit its movements”.

Sources in the security services said that the government negotiators had not taken the army into confidence before the agreement on their movement was made in the last round of talks with the Maoist rebels.

However, newspapers here have written extensively about a briefing that negotiators gave to King Gyanendra one day prior to those talks. The reports said the negotiators detailed the next day’s announcement and got the monarch’s blessing on the Maoist demand for limiting the army’s movements.

Neither the Palace nor the government has denied the reports. In light of the revelations, another question is being asked here: If the king had given his blessings to the limitations on the army’s movements, then why is the army, an institution which has been very loyal to the monarch, protesting it?

Indeed, only early this week, the Defence Ministry issued a strongly worded statement castigating Nepal’s opposition political parties and leaders for spouting venom against the respectable institution of the monarchy”.

Some analysts say the army is registering its displeasure and sending out strong signals that its loyalty cannot be taken for granted. “I think the army is trying to assert an independent identity,” a former minister who has interacted extensively with the Royal Nepal Army said on condition of anonymity.

“They are saying: ‘include us in the decision-making before taking decisions about us or else we may not agree’. They are saying ‘don’t take us for granted,’ he added.

In recent days, the army’s position has been helped ironically by the opposition parties who have also strongly criticised the government-Maoist agreement to limit its movement. This only demoralises the army’s spirit, “former prime minister and leader of the Nepali Congress party Girija Prasad Koirala said this week.

It is too early to say whether the peace process has been damaged beyond the point of no return.

Many seem to think the Maoists are using the flap as a bargaining chip to extract more concessions from the monarch who is facing, apart from the Maoists, the opposition parties’ nationwide protest campaign.

Rebel leader Bhattarai himself indicated as much. Asked what the Maoists would do if the government does not sack the minister in question, he replied: “We will see. There are grey areas in politics. Everything is not so black and white.”—Dawn/InterPress News Service.