 |
|||
|
|||
UML-ML REUNION |
|
|||
|
|||
UML-ML REUNION |
Building Camaraderie The comrades decide to
"cross the Mahakali river" to reunite, but will the patch-up endure? By SANJAYA DHAKAL What kind of re-unification leaves behind
the core issue of difference? The comrades of Unified Marxist-Leninist (UML) and
Marxist-Leninist (ML), in a desperate bid to reunite, have decide to keep the core of
their differences ó the ratification of the Mahakali treaty with India ó on sidelines,
for now. After the ML general secretary Bamdev
Gautam floated a strange idea of reuniting with the mother party UML by keeping close to
his heart the raging difference over the ratification of Mahakali treaty, the UML decided
to pave the way for the reunion.
The UML party decided to adopt a
flexible attitude towards demands from ML, including the one allowing them to maintain
different opinions on Mahakali treaty and "re-organize and not merge" the
parties. It, however, rejected ML's proposal of calling the forthcoming seventh convention
of the party as "unity convention". "We continue to harbor different
opinions on Mahakali treaty, which we still call a mistake. But we do not want to pose
this issue as an obstacle towards party reunion," Gautam had said. The mellowing down of hostilities between
the comrades of the two parties has raised many eyebrows. The flexibility shown by the UML
in embracing its earlier political foe indicates the desperation within the party. The
sudden moves towards reunion against the background of the emergency and the growth of
ultra-leftists point to interesting timing. In the aftermath of the split, the leaders
of the two parties were not even on speaking terms. They regularly hurled allegations
against each other. The UML even publicly declared Gautam as Nepal's No. 1 corrupt
politician, which it later feebly retracted. Four years ago, the same differences over
the Mahakali treaty had forced a belligerent Gautam to split the party in bitter
circumstances. During the party's sixth convention, Gautam had raised his "different
opinion" and walked away from UML with almost half of its parliamentarians and
central members to form splinter ML party. But four years and a shattered election
outcome later, Gautam is now making repeated attempts to merge with the party —
although the core differences remain. "It is good that the two parties have
decided to reunite. But the reunion should not leave any issues outstanding that could
later haunt it," said a political analyst. The analyst predicted that any union with
such gaping holes could turn out to be unfeasible in the long term. Besides, a section of
ML led by former minister Chandra Prakash Mainali is still against the idea of reunion.
"I have not stopped any ML leader or party worker from entering UML. But I myself
will not be a part of reunion with the party," said Mainali, indicating that the
reunion was becoming a close possibility. "Everybody associated with the
country's politics know that the title of ML has become irrelevant. Nevertheless, the
leaders and workers of that party are essential for UML. This necessity has two basic
facets. First, to replace the past horror of party split with the reunion. Second, to
provide a new and creative base to the honest and active leaders/workers of ML,"
wrote Narayan Dhakal, UML leader and leftist thinker on his weekly opinion in vernacular
Drishti, a weekly close to UML party. Dhakal was one of the UML leaders who had
sided with Gautam during the split. Later, he switched his loyalties back to the UML. With the two biggest communist parties of
the national mainstream on the verge of reunion, the burning questions are whether it
would be sustainable and how it would affect Nepal's communist politics. |
Send your feedback to the
editor: spotligh@mos.com.np |
