Dissecting Post-Poll Pessimism and Optimism

A journey towards building a new Nepal is likely to hit many stumbling blocks. The first and foremost, forming a coalition government might not be as easy as expected. Nepali Congress and UML, two largest mainstream parties of Nepal, have a widespread feeling that the CA election was stolen by the Maoists through intimidation and atrocities.

By Dr Angaraj Timilsina

Nepal currently seems to have been caught up in a wave of nostalgia. After the historic constituent assembly (CA) election, both deep pessimism and high optimism are running high in Nepal.

Although experiencing a perilous ascent through a tumultuous peace process, Nepal has many good reasons to cheer. The largely peaceful CA election is a great step forward. With the Maoists legitimately mainstreamed in the political system, Nepal now has a real chance to sustain peace. The new constitution, if written by people’s representatives with a broad-based political consensus, could serve as a foundation for both political and economic transformations.

From the perspective of institutionalising internal democracy in political parties, this is a historic moment in Nepal. The change in the power structure among political parties as reflected in the election results provides a promising opportunity to have a new start for Nepal with a political will not to have corruption but to have a clear direction and a strategy that reflects the importance of vision, transparency and participation. The Maoists now apparently enjoy what critics for years have said they lack the popular support. The Maoists now have a real opportunity to transform themselves and truly establish as a mainstream political power. Other major political parties, namely Nepali Congress and the UML, are willing to evaluate their performance and are promising to produce qualified and capable leadership by strengthening internal party democracy.

However, despite the chorus of pious hope, the following questions provide enough reasons to be pessimistic as well. Given that the Maoists have not been convincingly matched their deeds with their words, can the Maoist victory really catalyze the progress towards peace and prosperity? With dogmatic Maoist ideology still an important motivational force for the rank and file, can the Maoists transform themselves to a pragmatic party? Given the background of continued atrocities and extortion, will the Maoists, when they lead the government, not try to manipulate the political economy in their own interests? Given that the culture of coalition has not been well developed in Nepal, can the Maoists and other political parties, if motivated by a nobler vision, be able to continue their alliance to build a new Nepal and reverse the negative consequences of the previous democratic decade?

A journey towards building a new Nepal is likely to hit many stumbling blocks. The first and foremost, forming a coalition government might not be as easy as expected. Nepali Congress and UML, two largest mainstream parties of Nepal, have a widespread feeling that the CA election was stolen by the Maoists through intimidation and atrocities. Many leaders from these parties hold the view that joining the next government would be counterproductive if the Maoists do not correct their behaviour including immediately dissolving the YCL, returning the seized land and property and implementing the past accords reached with the government and the seven political parties. Bringing these two parties on board under the Maoists leadership will not be easy unless these parties are given some significant concessions. On the other hand, Madheshi Janadhikar Forum (MJF), a newly emerged power in Nepal’s politics, used to be blamed by the Maoists a force created by the royalists to obstruct the election.

How the Maoists will restructure Nepal Army and integrate the Maoists combatants in it is also likely to shape the political future of Nepal. Given the open disagreement of Nepal Army’s leadership and reluctance in Nepali Congress and UML in unifying the Maoists in Nepal Army, the aggressive plan for reforming Nepal Army could easily provoke the situation if the if the plan does not have a buy-in from the majority of the military generals. It should be noted that the reintegration of two military forces recruited with two different, if not totally divergent, doctrines will not be easy, especially given the fact that Nepal Army still commands a strong influence and power in Nepal. Experiences from many countries show that political will is not just enough because restructuring and transformation of military requires a careful planning and implementation processes.

The other likely scenario for political deadlock is whether the major political parties of Nepal could build a consensus on the provision of new constitution. Whether the successful conclusion of CA election will lead to a more stable political environment will depends very much on how long it will take to draft a new constitution. It should be noted that the Maoists has won election on the platform of new Nepal based on their manifesto of strong presidential system, whereas Nepali Congress and UML had gone to the election with their respective party’s consensus in favor of a ceremonial president and a strong prime minister elected by the parliament.

The Interim constitution of Nepal clearly mentions that for the Preamble and any Articles of the Bill relating to Constitution, if unanimous decision could not be reached, if at least two-thirds of the total membership of the Constituent Assembly existing for the time being were presented in the meeting, and out of them if at least two-third majority of the members voted in favour, it shall be deemed to have passed such Preamble or Article. Given this provision, if Nepali Congress and UML boycott the meeting, a political deadlock is most likely to emerge and Nepal could easily enter a period of prolonged uncertainty and instability.

Experiences from many countries including Kenya’s and Zimbabe’s recent elections show that a successful conclusion of election does not guarantee the post-election stability. Thus, perceiving constituent assembly as panacea of all problems and an exit strategy for Nepal’s peace process is wrong if not a dangerous proposition. Studies show that even clean elections do not guarantee of strong democratic society. Although elections are often touted as the linchpin of governance reform efforts around the world, long-term benefits offered by elections are often undermined by political deadlocks and post-election instability.

Moreover, coupled with political deadlock, economic stagnation and sluggish growth may further escalate the situation. It should be noted that legacy of a civil war is another war. Studies show that nearly half of the peace settlements end within the first decades after the end of the conflict. Factors, such as widespread poverty, sluggish economic growth, misgovernance, and high unemployment, make peacebuilding extraordinarily difficult. The peace-building prospective clearly indicate that Nepal’s peace process though unique did not follow some of the important lessons learned from the experiences of many other peace processes. Although political settlement and economic reconstruction are recognized as twin-pillar of peace-building, too much focus on politics and too little focus on rehabilitation, reconstruction and development seems to have added to the complexity in Nepal’s problem.

However, challenges for building a new are surmountable, so do the opportunities. Here are some suggestions as to how the Maoists may avoid being caught up in a political deadlock and stir country towards sustainable peace. The Maoists will be able to boost international and national legitimacy of the new government if they are able to bring both Nepali Congress and UML in the government. However, keeping the coalition under the Maoists leadership until the next election under new constitution will requires a significant sacrifice from the part of the Maoists. The Maoists should cope with the coalition culture by ending the culture of violence and intimidation especially at the grassroots level and by reaching out to other political parties and making significant concessions to Nepali Congress and UML while forming a new coalition government.

Second, the Maoist should build a broad-based political consensus on how to reform Nepal Army and integrate their combatants. A detailed study on security challenges and appropriate structure, doctrine and size of new Army is required before implementing any reform plan. Thus, taking help of technical experts from the United Nations would help to design a politically sound and technically feasible reform plan.

Third, Nepal’s peace process so far has witnessed to much focus on political settlement and too little focus on reconstruction and development. Without any improvement in livelihoods of the majority of Nepali people, exhilarating political developments alone will not enough to sustain peace. Thus, the Maoists should forge a consensus with other political parties to design and implement a coherent and well-designed reconstruction and development plan.

Finally, the Maoists are given enough mandate of change to the Maoists through the CA election; however, Nepali people will not forever be fooled by empty promises. People will tolerate neither corrupt nor oppressive behaviour from any quarters – whether it be the Maoists or other political parties. Thus, the Maoists should immediately embark into a transformation from the overtly rigid dogmatism of Maoism to political and economic pragmatism.

(This article first appeared in the Kathmnadu Post. The author can be reached at anga34@hotmail.com)

(Editor’s Note: Nepalis, wherever they live, as well as friends of Nepal around the globe are requested to contribute their views/opinions/recollections etc. on issues concerning present day Nepal to the Guest Column of Nepalnews. Length of the article should not be more than 1,000 words and may be edited for the purpose of clarity and space. Relevant photos as well as photo of the author may also be sent along with the article. Please send your write-ups to editors@mos.com.np)

Have your say ! (Registration required)