CA's address strikes a defining note

GIVEN our context, marked by the political parties aiming to secure maximum fulfillment of their demands, the interim government in a naturally probing, cautious mode, and the people expectantly awaiting an accelerated journey to democracy, the chief adviser's address to the nation was indeed set against a daunting backdrop.
From this standpoint, and read between the lines, his speech should actually go down well for the positive elements it contained, even though it would have been ideal had he come out with a definitive promise for withdrawal of emergency.
The chief adviser has set the date for elections, subject only to finalisation by the EC, he has allowed indoor politics throughout the country, subject to certain preconditions, and in concrete terms, he has set the date for dialogue with the political parties to begin on May 22.
So, we have two tangible things to concentrate on and apply our minds to: first, the indoor politics; and second, the dialogue process.
Political parties have been complaining of the restrictions on politics leaving no room for them whatsoever to have interactions within the parties, as well as between them, to respond to the demands for intra-party reforms as well as electoral and political reforms. Now that fetter is gone for the political parties to activate themselves. And to be sure, this is hardly a stage at which political parties should feel the need for taking out processions or staging rallies.
What is the dialogue for? The answer obviously is free, fair, and credible elections. Just as the government and the EC have their responsibilities in carrying forward the task, so also the political parties have their very important share as participants in making it all happen.
People expect of the political parties to guarantee that use of black money and muscle power will not be resorted to any more and that effective and sustainable democracy will be at work.
Yes, the chief adviser has not readily responded to some of the demands of the major political parties and may have even initiated some new ideas, but these do not come through as an imposition or a dictate by any sensible interpretation.
Indeed, his approach does not preclude a discussion on the entire gamut of issues, as is borne out by the emphasis he lays on dialogue with the political parties as a vehicle for resolution of differences. His very urging for national consensus rules out any possibility of dictating terms to any partner to a dialogue.
Without being obsessed with the shortcomings of his speech, the political parties should concentrate on its positive aspects to bring about the election that the people are so eagerly awaiting.