Though Kumaratunga refrained from listing conditions, the Government has said in the past, that for any negotiations, the LTTE should agree to give up the demand for a separate state and surrender arms.

``We must go into negotiations without pre-conditions,'' UNP spokesman Karunasena Kodituwakku was quoted here as saying. ``The talks could continue without interrupting the ongoing military operations against the LTTE,'' he said. The UNP had so far avoided extending support to the Government's package of proposals granting provincial autonomy.

However, it deftly avoided repeated Government assertions that talks would be meaningful only if the Government and theOpposition agreed on certain basic parameters on the extent of powers to be devolved to the provinces, especially the Tamil-dominated North and East.

``It is the chicken and egg scenario'', said sources in the ruling Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP). Any negotiations with the LTTE would not carry substance unless the SLFP and UNP reached a broad understanding on the extent of powers that could be devolved to the Tamil province, they said.

The LTTE too, on its part, demanded a negotiated settlement with the Government on its own terms.

In its letter to South African President Nelson Mandela on the eve of the Non-Aligned Movement summit at Durban, it said, ``We call upon you to use your good offices to impress upon the Government of Sri Lanka to abandon its aggressive military policy and seek a negotiated settlement based on the principles enunciated at Thimpu talks.''

The Thimpu talks were the first round of negotiations between Sri Lankan officials, Tamil parties and groups, including the LTTE, at theBhutanese capital under the auspices of the Indian Government in 1985, where Tamil parties said the Tamils constituted a nation by themselves and should be given the right of self-determination.

But despite the divergent stands taken by the Government, the UNP and the LTTE on conditionalities, the interest of the three parties to commence a dialogue was evident from their statements, said the leader of a moderate Tamil party. ``They are the key players and it is good to know that they want to talk,'' he said.

The demand for a dialogue through a facilitator also evoked a positive response from parties like the British Government and the International Committee of Red Cross (ICRC).

Reacting to the statements from Kumaratunga and other parties, a spokesman of the British High Commission here said his Government would be willing to play intermediary if both the Sri Lankan Government and the LTTE asked for it. ``But as of now we have not been approached by either of them,'' he said.

The ICRC, which was oneof the few international relief organisations permitted by both the Government and the LTTE to operate in the rebel-held northern Vanni region, too said it was ready to play the role of neutral intermediary if approached by both parties.

The ICRC had acted as facilitator for the talks between the Government and the LTTE in 1994 following Kumaratunga's landslide victory. The LTTE walked out of the talks after eight-month long parleys in Northern Jaffna.

Any possible role for India in bringing the two parties together was marginalised by its ban on the LTTE and the pending arrest warrant against its chief V Prabhakaran for his alleged role in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination.

While ruling out any direct role for New Delhi in the quest for a negotiated settlement, Sri Lankan Minister for Justice and Constitutional Affairs, Professor G L Peiris, told reporters in Chennai early this week that Colombo hoped for moral support from India on the issue.

But despite the positive indications about the need for adialogue, neither party made any direct move to begin negotiations. ``The situation at the moment is very fluid. We are still hoping for a settlement with the UNP in the coming weeks, before commencing a formal dialogue with the LTTE,'' said an important SLFP functionary.