ABSTRACT
This chapter addresses the issue of the plural context of dialogues, and the singularity of the dialogic act that often succeeds in effacing the multiple traces. For peace politics then the question would be how to re-inscribe into an event of peace making, which is singular and monolithic because it is congealed, the plurality of the context. Ceasefire the world over in the crooked history of peace politics has been shown to be a part of the politics of war. In Sri Lanka, as the peace question remained de-linked from any broad vision, even a unilateral offer of ceasefire could be rejected by the political class that thought and still thinks that simply agreed declarations of vague political principles could/can ensure peace. In the peace talks, as the chroniclers noted, more than the interests of the peace constituencies, the interests of bureaucracy, military establishment, factional party leaders, and a singularly monolithic leadership of the armed adversary were active.
