Given that Nepal is a nation of unity in diversity between its different ethnic and religious groups, as well as our plaid exercise of democracy over the past 15 years, it is clear that we must pursue the monarchy as a symbol of unity and stability. Overall, this agreement offers sufficient reasons to move forward to achieve our dear goal of achieving a lasting peace and a functioning democracy. Nevertheless, it appears to contain two controversial elements: UN surveillance of the RNA and Maoist militia during elections and parliamentary elections. Let us remember that the RNA was initially mobilized to contain destructive and terrorist activities. It is illogical to put the Maoist militia and the RNA on an equal footing, because one is a rebellious cloth day outfit that works to oust a democratic terrorist-style regime and the other an authorized guardian of national security. With regard to the Assembly`s inquiry, which seems to be a meeting place, it is important that this is also acceptable to the king. Given the silent acceptance of the constitutional monarchy, it would be reasonable to expect that the king would also be accessible to the prospects of a constituent assembly that would draw up the new Constitution if constitutional monarchy and multi-party democracy were considered fundamental and inalienable. The search for integration paths for peace has become, in recent years, one of the cornerstones of the international peace-building agenda. While there is growing consensus that the inclusion of different constituencies and interests in conflict resolution processes is a determining factor in the establishment of lasting peace, there remains great confusion and differences of opinion as to the timing and succession of the integration of several factors into the organization of the peace process in order to find legitimate, just and lasting solutions to complex long-term armed conflicts.

This report contributes to this debate by conducting a comparative assessment of “incremental integration” approaches for armed groups and non-signatory civil society actors during the negotiation and implementation of four peace/ceasefire agreements. (3) “The parties, the Maoists announce 12-point agreements,” Kathmandu Post, 22 November 2005, URL: www.kantipuronline.com/kolnews.php?&nid=57919 Amid much speculation about the frequent closure of some leaders of the seven-party alliance between Kathmandu and New Delhi, as well as diplomatic maneuvers by some members of the international community, the truth was finally revealed. The alliance and Maoist leaders have signed a 12-point agreement that can lead to the restoration of peace and democracy. The main characteristics are that all democratic forces should unite and fight the authoritarian monarchy by creating a storm through the ™ movement of the people and sweeping it by force. The strength of the movement should be used to restore the House of Representatives, which will form an all-party government, to negotiate with the Maoists and hold elections to the Constituent Assembly. Delhi Agreement was a tripartite (verbal) agreement in Delhi after agreement between Ranas, the Nepal Congress Party and King Tribhuban. [Citation required] The text of the agreement shows the willingness of democrats – both parliamentarians and revolutionaries – to reconsider their respective strategies in order to save the coordination achieved so far. While it is difficult to predict all the effects of this agreement, conflicting attempts are clearly reflected in the text. The reluctance of moderates to go beyond the constitutional monarchy is reflected in the criticism of the “autocratic monarchy” rather than the monarchy itself.