Maoist leader Pushpa Kumar Dayal, better known as "Prachanda," is hell-bent on ending the monarchy, which he claims is largely responsible for the myriad woes of the country, and warns that a "new Nepal" cannot come into being without abolition of the throne, no matter that it is just ceremonial.

"Prachanda" told a massive rally in the capital Kathmandu on Wednesday, marking the 11th anniversary of the start of the Maoist revolution, that Nepal must do away with he monarchy and be made a republic if the nation has to march ahead fulfilling the aspirations of the people.

The revolution began in 1996, and ended in November 2006 following capitulation by King Gyanendra to a mass upsurge jointly led by the political parties and the Maoists. The King has since been ineffective as far as the running of the country is concerned, but the throne has not been abolished. This remains a major bone of contention between the government and the Maoists, even though both reached a landmark peace accord on the future of the nation.

As part of the peace deal between the government and radical leftists, the once feared "Maoists" have begun handing over their arms to the United Nations, and this signals that the country is moving on the right track toward a new chapter in its recent turbulent history.

The handing over of the arms by the former rebels comes close on the heels of Maoists taking oath as members of parliament, thereby joining the mainstream conventional politics, and eschewing their armed campaign. They are also dissolving the "People's Army" which they set up during the more than a decade-long insurgency.

The Maoists have entered parliament -- taking 83 of the 330 seats -- but are yet to become a part of the government. Prime Minister GP Koirala is delaying the involvement of the Maoists in the government because, he says, the ultras need to cover more ground for the purpose, which has evidently made the Maoists somewhat unhappy.

Broadly, the recent developments have raised hopes for permanent peace in the land-locked Himalayan country which, not long ago, experienced the twin problems of struggle for restoration of democracy and leftist insurgency. Democracy was restored in the middle of last year, following a bloody and intense agitation that saw King Gyanendra accepting the people's demand.

In the process, a glorious chapter has been added to the history of picturesque Nepal, as the government and the "Maoists" have vowed to make every effort to turn their country into a land of peace and harmony, ending violence and instability in the poverty-ridden nation. Finally, the people in the country are seeing the light at the end of tunnel about a stable future.

The remarkable peace deal was made possible after long and difficult talks, belying skepticism in certain quarters that the two sides would eventually be able to ink the deal despite enough progress having been made earlier towards this direction. It was a great day for Nepal when the two sides inked the accord amidst tremendous national rejoicing. People danced on the streets, urging the two sides to remain united till their goals were achieved.

The earlier understanding between the two sides seemed to have hit snags, raising fears that they might fall apart on certain crucial issues governing the pattern of rule for the nation and the mechanisms for the coming national elections. But they demonstrated admirable unity in the anti-King pro-democracy agitation, despite their differences on some matters.

However, problems, albeit not major, seem to be coming to the fore again, and this certainly bodes unease for Nepal as the country is halfway through attaining its declared objectives.

The two sides are now working towards a constituent assembly, for which polls are due by the middle of this year, to draft the constitution. But sufficient progress has not been made to facilitate holding of the elections by June this year, and this is becoming a potentially divisive issue between the two sides.

The Maoists accuse the government for the slow progress in this direction, a claim which Prime Minister G.P. Koirala denies. But the fact remains that differences between the two sides seem to be on the increase on this issue. UN envoy for the Nepal peace process, Ian Martin, has warned that the deadline for the elections can be missed if parliament fails to take swift measures toward that direction.

Prachanda, clearly unhappy with the lack of progress, has said that Nepal would be declared a "Democratic Republic" by May if the elections for the constituent assembly are not held by June this year. Evidently, the Maoists may be at loggerheads on this matter with the government, unless the two sides agree on advancing the issue by consensus.

The ultimate shape of the monarchy is also certainly at the heart of the differences. The prime minister and some parties in the present seven-party alliance coalition favour continuation of monarchy without any executive power, but the ultras are against the existence of the throne in any form. They even want trial of King Gyanendra for, what they say, amassing wealth, and for the atrocities committed during the pro-democracy movement.

The government has stripped the King of key powers, including control over the armed forces and automatic accession to the throne on family lines, and limited their properties, but favours the continuation of the throne in line with Britain, Japan or Thailand. But the Nepalese throne has been badly bruised by the present King by his absolute power and anti-people measures.

The Maoists are now calling for total abolition of the monarchy, but the government has not spelt out its policy in unambiguous term on the issue although it has come down heavily on the powers and privileges of the King who, of late, sought to defend his action during the mass upsurge.

Despite the progress made so far about the shape of the nation in the future, and the unity shown by the government and Maoists on a variety of issues, things may not move in the expected line if differences soar on the future of the monarchy and the elections for a constituent assembly.

The two sides must remain careful to avert such an undesirable situation, and must strive for taking their country towards political and economic stability. They may not see eye to eye on all matters, but must not fall apart on critically important issues. Both sides must allay fresh fears, as far as possible, of government-Maoists differences, for the interest of Nepal which suffered badly in many ways in recent years.

Latest reports from Nepal say that the Maoists, who agreed to live in camps across the country monitored by the UN as a part of the peace deal, are leaving in droves because of food shortages, and their commanders allege that the government has failed to ensure their food and shelter as assured in the accord. The 350 million rupees that the government budgeted for the camps have run out, and this is creating new problems for the peace deal.

What is required at the moment is the smooth implementation of the agreement, failing which the deal may hit snags, and this is least desirable when so much progress has been made for a better future.

Zaglu Ahmed Chowdhury is a senior journalist.