So it is in Bangladesh politics. And as the end of the tenure of the current government approaches, everything hinges on the skill and sagacity with which the prime minister and the leader of the opposition are able to play out the endgame.

The clock is ticking, and one way or the other, this current government will have to step down within 15 days of October 27 to make way for the constitutionally mandated caretaker government.

The much-vaunted dialogue between the two sides has finally got underway, and this looks like the last chance for both sides to reach a compromise on reform. But it must be said that early indications, including the elaborate charade that has been interminably played out these past few months, weeks, and days, do not suggest that either side is much interested in compromise.

Each side believes that it has the upper hand and that there is thus no need to back down from their core demands.

The AL feels that its demand for reform of the caretaker government and election commission both reflects the popular sentiment and is necessary for credible elections.

The BNP, for its part, feels that it cannot be faulted for abiding by the letter of the constitution, and that it is under no compulsion, either legal, moral, or political, to back down.

It remains possible that the two sides will be able to reach a mutually acceptable compromise, and that the government can step down and be replaced by a caretaker government that will be able to hold elections to the satisfaction of all concerned.

But the unhappy reality is that the chances of this transpiring are quite slim, and the time has come for us to ask where things are likely to head in the rather more likely event that the talks do break down. At the very least, we need to be aware of what the stakes are.

The first alternative is that the BNP sticks to its guns and insists on installing Justice Hasan as the caretaker chief and then proceeds to install a hand-picked slate of advisers who would go ahead and hold the election without any of the reforms demanded by the opposition.

I don't know. There is general consensus that election reform is necessary, specifically that the voter role needs to be redone, and that the current chief election commissioner cannot credibly preside over the elections. Elections pushed through in the absence of minimum reforms and in the absence of the AL seem unlikely to garner credibility, either inside the country or outside.

In the second place, it remains to be seen whether such a caretaker government would be able to function in the face of the massive agitation on the streets that would welcome it. Somehow I doubt it.

This is every caretaker government's nightmare. Caretaker governments are generally made up of well-meaning and unassuming eminences who want nothing more than to serve their country peacefully for three months and to go back to the quiet life when it is all over.

No caretaker government will want to put itself on the line and order tough measures to maintain law and order, so I am not sure if the government's plan to stack the caretaker government with allies who will do its bidding will work.

This might act as incentive for the government side to consider being a little more accommodating when it comes to the reform dialogue. But the bottom line is that the government, with its popularity plummeting, has no reason to welcome the judgment of the voters at the polls and every reason to wish to keep the AL on the side-lines.

The alliance government would clearly prefer to take its chances with its own hand-picked caretaker government than with a caretaker that wishes to operate on the basis of consensus. Whether this augers well for the nation as a whole is another question.

But what about the AL? There may be popular consensus behind its proposals for election reform, and it may feel that it has the better of the argument as to whether Justice Hasan is the right man to be the head of the caretaker, but an uncompromising negotiating stance is also not without risks for the AL.

For the AL, it seems, much hinges on whether they are strong enough to bring the caretaker government to a standstill if their demands are not accommodated. This they may well be able to do, but this might lead to an alternative problem.

If the caretaker acts to accommodate the AL and its allies, then it will have to deal with the BNP cadres who will take to the streets in response. This is a high risk proposition for the AL, and there is no guarantee that it will prevail in such a show-down or that the caretaker government will be able to maintain law and order in such a situation.

As in any chess game, there is the possibility that things will end in stalemate. What if neither side can maneuver itself into position for a decisive victory? It is a question that both sides should be asking themselves as they sit down to talk.

Zafar Sobhan is Assistant Editor, The Daily Star.