Also exemplified is the tide of shifting alliances whereby the congregation of forces necessary to topple the King, finds diminishing mutual interests. Each constituent now, is poised to pursue its own priorities as the entire polity embarks on a path of competitive politics.
New alliances are being formed, old ones discarded and complementing this process of changed circumstances are diverging agendas, priorities and interpretations of agreements that less than six months ago, were hurriedly fomented in the interest of defeating a common enemy.
The resurgence of such differences today, is an expected outcome of the on-going political evolution. These emerging disparities certainly have the potential to, but need not necessarily be, peace process “deal killers.”
Whether diverging priorities are permitted to drive the overall peace process or are forced to the backburner is as much a function of this parliament’s convictions (and the international community’s insistence that an armed faction not be permitted into the interim government), as it is, willingness on the part of the Maoists to reciprocate with concessions.
The ultimate outcome of this rapidly transforming environment is also likely to be a function of Nepalese civil society’s ability to endorse a non-aligned and apolitical platform, that is unequivocally free of political ambition.