NEPALI CONGRESS POLITICS

Koirala Makes His Move

As usual the internal dispute in the ruling Nepali Congress is temporarily settled. The perodical political battle is not new in Nepali politics. What it hurts is much requried political stability

By KESHAB POUDEL

The uneasy silence in the Congress party got broken on the morning of December 15 1999 when former prime minister Girija Prasad Koirala called on Prime Minister Krishna Prasad Bhattarai at the latter's official residence.

The six- month-long political stability in the country was blown to pieces as soon as former prime minister and ruling party President demanded resignation of the Prime Minister.

Koirala also informed his long time friend that majority of the Congress members of the parliament wanted to see change in the leadership of the government. Bhattarai flatly rejected the suggestion by Koirala and claimed that he would rather choose facing the NC's parliamentary party instead.

The fresh crisis within the ruling Nepali Congress over the alleged non-performance of the government may have grabbed headlines in the Nepali newspapers, but no keen watchers of Nepali politics were surprised at the most recent attempt to rock the chair of the Prime Minister. The only element of surprise in the whole episode was the manner Koirala allowed himself to be pushed into the tussle for power against the prime minister.

In his last innings as the executive chief less than seven months ago, Koirala had repeatedly told the press to take note of the fact that no prime minsiter in Nepal's mdoern history since the establishment of democracy in 1951 did last his full term. He would attribute this to different forces of destablization. Pressed hard to name such "forces," Koirala would refuse to do so, but in private, he would speak up his mind.

Soon after Koirala returned from the prime ministerial residence at Baluwatar, more than half of the 137-member Congress parliamentary party said that they would go for a change in the leadership.

Late B.P. Koirala (front center) with Nepali Congress leaders : Old days unity

The news jolted the entire spectrum of political, economic and other sectors of national life. Even the importance of special session of the House of Represntatives was sidelined (See: A Separate Story). The main opposition, Unified Marxist-Leninist party, called an urgent informal meeting of its Members of Parliament to discuss possible political consequences of battle royale within the ruling party.

Bhattarai is not the first who faced such crisis in the first six months of occupying the hot seat. It can hardly be a sheer coincidence that none of the 15 prime ministers after the 1951, revolution has been able to complete his full term. From the interim Prime Minister Mohan Shumsher Rana to the first popularly elected Prime minsiter B. P. Koirala, all of them led short-lived governments.

Even during the absolute rule of the King under the 30-year-long Panchayat regime, the situaion did not change. From hard-liner Tulsi Giri to liberal Surya Bahadur Thapa and from royalist Kirti Nidhi Bista to commoner Marich Man Singh, all headed their short-lived governments. The post-1990 democratic governments were no diferent.

Said an anlyst," To have a broader look, the current drama being played on the Nepali political stage should be seen in this perspective."

The temperature of Congress politics has cooled down temporarily thanks to a patch-up between the two Congress leaders. Both the leaders assured their party workeres that they will sort out the problem soon. "It is only Koiralaji and myself in entire Asian politics who have stood together in the same party for over five decades," said a serious-looking Bhattarai to his party's legislators at the Congress parliamentary party meeting on Sunday.

"I will not split the party on personal ground. Rather I would look for a solution through negotiation," said Bhattarai.

Although Bhattarai and Koirala are trying to convince their followers that their intention is not to break the party, Congress sympathziers are still uncertain.

Koirala also expresed similar statments urging party workers for party nity. "I cannot encourage activities that will divide the Nepali Congress," asserted Koirala.

It was, therefore quite surprising that a knowledgeable and experienced leader like Koirala would leave his vast experince behind to become a player in, what he himself used to describe as, a grand design of destabilization.

Congress is not the only party that has been facing such intenrnal dissension as all major political parties have the history of such perodical crisis. After the restoration of democracy, two major political parties, Rastriya Prajatantra Party and CPN-UML have already undergone splits.

It seemed that the present political crisis was a calculated one. The crisis within the ruling party came close on the heels after rumours about the possible coup by the Royal Nepalese Army and the King. Fortunately, these responsible institutions have not given any hints of uneasiness with democrtic process in the country.

Bhattarai and Koirala : We are the leaders in the N.C.

By the same token, few would disagree with dissident Congress lawmakers that prime minsiter Bhattarai has failed to deliver. Worse, he has not even been able to inspire anyone over the past six months. The performance of no post democracy government was as unimpressive as that of the majority government led by Bhattarai.

Unlike other poltical parties, Nepali Congress has certain advantages like homogeneous leadership and a long tradition of seeking consensus at the time of crisis. Although it seems undemocratic, this quality has helped the Congress party to overcome the crises.

In the past too, the crisis within the Congress was settled by the intervention of the two septuagenarian leaders as the business of Congress is run by them. Due to their long political history, they have established an undisputed leadership in the party.

Of course, the jocular captain has not been able to steer the ship as efficiently as had been expected. But this can hardly be a valid reason to rock and sink the ship. The captain may have lacked, or lost the direction but it should not mean that the party must be split.

"Will that not lead the ship to yet another round of direction-less voyage," asked a professor of political science at the Tribhuvan University. "As was seen in the earely nineties, the then Congress supremo Ganesh Man Singh had launched a campaign against the then Koirala government with covert backing of Bhattarai within the first 100 days of government?" This eventually led to the fall-down of the three and half year old Nepali Congress government in 1994 pushing the country toward mid-term polls.

If a grand design was there at that time, the designers must be around this time too. That Bhattarai could not deliver the goods is only a convenient excuse to cover that design. Any independent analyst would bet Koiralas' performance was much better than Bhattarai's. But Koirala was made to undergo the same agony that Bhattarai is currently going through.

"Koirala and Bhattarai are the problems of the party and they themselves are the solution," said a youth congress leader on condition of anonimity. " Nobody can go against them when these old leaders have a congenial leaderhsip."

Although it claims as a champion of democracy, the party still functions in an undemocratic way. The party does not have strong internal institution to elect its leadership and resolve internal conflict.

Bhattarai became prime minister through an informal announcement of Koirala weeks before the country went to polls in May this year. No official body in the party questioned Koirala's announcement. Even after elections, the very MPs that are expressing their dissent now unanimously elected Bhatarai as their parliamentary party leader.

The so-called second generation leaders within the Nepali Congress do not have courage to challenge this tradition as they also want their blessing to establish their acceptability.

"The problem with our party is that we haven't exercised or honored the constitution of the party. If this tradition is not begun during the life time of these two leaders, after them there will be no one to follow the party's constitution" said Sushil Koirala, general secretary of Nepali Congress.

Congres internal disesnsion, political analysts argue, is not purely an internal problem. "It is a matter of serious aprehension that Nepal is passing through a process of political destabilization," said an analyst. "There are external factors that have played their role in creating dissension within the ruling party."

As the country is transforming from a feudalistic to democratic society, such crises are inevitable. "This is a sign of peak hour exercise toward democrtaic behavior but it is now up to the political leaders whether they will be able to manage it or not.

The present dispute does not have strong backing inside the party as it is carried out by third generation activists like Congress lawmaker J. P. Anand Gupta who is yet to prove his leadership role within the party.

It is not only prime minister Bhattarai's detractors but his supoters and sympahtizers also are frustrated at the style of his functioning and taking things lightly. But at least the Nepali Congres deputies and senior leaders should allow the septuagenerian leadeer to lead them and the nation on the eve of the new millenium. Having made a decision and wanting to reverse it within six months does not behove a person of Girija Prasad Koriala's stature.

He may have anger against Bhattarai who betrayed him but Gupta alone does not have the stature to split the party. If Bhattarai has many foes, he has some friends also. Moreover, the Nepali Congress culture does not permit easy splits.

At a time when some forces are trying to patch up the differences, extreme followers of prime minister Bhattarai and Koirala are busy in widening the gap.

"Even leaders like Chiranjibi Wagle can not think of breaking the party as he knows how difficult it will be to face next elections as a splinter group," said a political analyst.

Thoughhe may not have the support of adequate number of MPs to retain his post, Bhattarai now seems to be more powerful than Koirala. Former prime minister Sher Bahadur Deuba is openly backing prime minister Krishna Prasad Bhattarai. Deuba defended Bhattarai's performance on the ground that a period of six months was not adequate to judge the performance of the government.

Although prime minister Bhattarai has failed to bring positive impact during his six months rule, the only good aspect of this government is that it has generated a sense of stability.

As everything was going on peacefully, though for below expectation, no body knows what prompted leaders to start a fresh donflict. As both leaders have their own group of coteries, long-standing relationship betwen them always prevails at the time of internal crisis.

"The personel association and emotional relations between the two leaders may be a psychological factor of understanding. I don't think that they will go for a cut-throat politics as seen in a Communist party," said another political anlyst.

Some see the Enron deal may be the reason behind the crisis pointing at the fall of Sher Bahadur Deuba gvoernment soon after inviting the US multi-national.

As political uncertainty loomed in the Congress, some even predicted split in the party. One Congress functionary, who coordinates between the party and government, however, claimed that both leaders are in no mood to continue the present dispute. He cited the example of last dispute between the two leaders which they themselves settled through a compromise now popularly known as the Godavari Negotiation.

Although internal squabble within the ruling party may increase in the future, both camps have now agreed to withdraw their counter moves in view of special session convened as per the UML's demand.

"Nepali Congress has a long history of blowing its internal dispute to the public as if it does not have any solution," said Narahari Acharya, spokesman of Nepali Congress. "Although this practice seems very bad, it helps to settle the dispute."

The rebels who raised some genuine grievances against prime minsiter Bhattarai know that their campaign will fizzle out as soon as two leaders agree to sort out their differences.

The prolongation of the present political dispute is also anticipated as it was the outcome of calculated negligence on part of prime minister Bhattarai to isolate Girija Prasad Koirala right from the first day he assumed office.

"Prime minister Bhattarai is surrouned by a small but dubious coterie," said Congress MP on condition of annonimity. "Perhaps, he is not getting the right kind of advice."

Bhattarai's relationship with his private secretary also has raised eyebrows as he has allegedly imparted her the status of an extra-cosntitutuional authority.

With rebel MPs in determined mood, Prime Minister Bhattarai has little choice either to give more concession to them or to face a probable vote of no-confidence.

"If prime minister Bhattarai had listened to the genuine concerns of the MPs, the situation would not have been as worse as it is now," said J. P. Ananda, one of the leaders of dissident MPs. "We have already presented our demands and it is now up to the leadership to decide what they have to do."

In the last six months, Bhattarai has not only irritated the MPs but also humiliated party president Koirala. In the last week of November Koirala recomended eight party workers for appointment in the National Land Sqatters Problems Resolution Commission. Instead of taking it seriously, Bhattarai rejected all those names and appointed his cronies.

Is it simply a personality clash or there is anything else. Like in the early days, the fend in Nepali Congress is the fend to establish leadership. As prime minister Bhattarai is the legitimate leader in the parliament, he can be gradually assertive. Party president Koirala does not have such mandate though he is elected by the party workers.

Koirala faced similar situation in 1991 when then partry president Krishna Prasad Bhattarai and then late supremo Ganesh Man Singh tried to infringe upon the constitutional role of the prime minister.

Amidst the speculation of the split, the two leaders shared the meeting of the CWC next day and listened to divided views of central committee members.

The outburst also activated the so-called second gernation leaders Sher Bahadur Deuba, Ram Chandra Poudel and Shailaja Acharya who initiated the joint actions.

The concerns of Koirala and Congress MPs are genuine as prime minister Bhattarai has overlooked all the complaints made by the MPs including the party President. Koirala issued a written statment demanding action against controversial minister Bal Bahadur K. C. when Bhattarai was out of the country. Upon his return, Bhattarai not only ignored Koirala's demand, he said publicly that there was no evidence to prove K.C.'s alleged crime.

Instead of showing any accomodation, Bhattarai appointed die-hard anti-Koirala workers in the party to almost all major positions. Though they preach themselves as democrats their behavior and character remains doubtful. If democracy is the way of life, one must show it in practice.

Only last month when 25 Congress MPs met prime minister Bhattarai in Baluwatar and expressed their grievances against the law and order situation, price hike and other matters, Bhattarai, however, flatly rejected their charge and instead asked them to hand over a memorandum to him with their signatures on it.

This is what prompted MPs to start a signature campiagn against prime minister Bhattarai. Koirala, too, was humilated a number of times.

The first and second generation leaders in Nepali Congress have spent almost all their lives for democratic struggle. Their background, training and experinces are based on agitation. But they have yet to develop an attitude of constructive criticism. It is a question related to managment, accomodation, orientaion and tolerance.

"In a multi party democracy, the prime minister is a genuine leader of the country and the party president does not have legitimacy," said a political analyst.

As the two leaders have established their leadership through their acceptability in the party rank and file so they do not care much to the internal democratic process. Although they claim to be leaders of a democratic party, feudalistic attitude still pervades their thinking.

Bhattarai : Is he a parasite ?

Girija Prasad Koirala tolerated every humilating act of prime minister Bhattarai for nearly six months. The period of toleration ended last Wendesday when he met prime minister Bhattarai and asked him to step down.

Rattled by rumours that he is unfit to rule, prime minister Bhattarai vowed to show his strength in the parliamentary party. Of course, technically Bhattarai is still the leader of the Congress parliamentary party but he has not yet proved his majority in the party.

"All we want is that he who can prove his majority should be the leader of our parliamentary party," said Binay Dhoj Chand, a dissident Congress MP.

Whoever the leader of the parliamentary party may be, Nepali Congress will continue to confront with perodical political squabbles.

It is likely that Koirala might have some compulsions to turn a blind eye to the realities that he had himself been a witness to, and a victim of, in the past. Otherwise, a changed Koirala as many felt during his second stint as prime misniter last year, would not have been in a hurry to dislodge his oldest colleague from the chief executive's chair.

`Election Is The Best Way To Settle Such Issues'

- NARAHARI ACHARYA

Nepali Congress spokesman NARAHARI ACHARYA has had a long innings in Nepali politics. Former member of National Assembly and former Minister for Parliamentary Affairs, the academic-turned politician spoke to SPOTLIGHT on issues related to Congress politics. Excerpts:

How do you see the present crisis within the Nepali Congress?

The present crisis is nothing more than a failure of the system. Although Nepali Congress is the oldest democratic party in the country, it is yet to accept the democratic practices. Perodic dissension in Nepali Congress is caused by lack of democratization in party orgrnization. Although our party is making efforts toward democratization, it does not follow the democratic process in settling the issues. Due to lack of democratization in party management, we face perodic crisis in the party. We need to have a process to settle such issues. If we had such a mechanism, we wouldn't have to face such crisis. Crisis is a regular phenomenon in political parties, societies and organizations. Our party organizaion is based on both modern and tradional values. We ussually settle our crisis through mutual understanding. In a democratic party, we need to have a democratic mechanism to settle the issues. In our party, we see election as a process of permanent division and always try to avert the crisis through a concensus approach.

Some see the present disssension would lead to split in the ruling party. Do you agree?

I don't think such dissension will lead to division in our party. Nepali Congress has a long history and it has been able to avert the split. Prime minister Krishna Prasad Bhattarai and party president Girija Prasad Koirala have already assured that they will not tolerate division in the party. In a democratic party, differences are invitable. What is required is a way to settle the problem.

What is the solution to the prsent crisis?

If you can see the present crisi through a democratic paradigm, there is nothing to worry. One group of MPs have demanded the change in leadership of their parliamentary party. If we follow the process of democratization, we can find out the solution. But the question is again: majority of the party workers see elections as a means to sow divisions in the party. At a time when all concerned agree that the case of leadership should be settled in the parliamentary party, some of our colleagues still see the consensus as a best way to avert it. It is really a hard job to develop consensus.