‘The people do not agree on all matters all the time but there are certain matters we can agree’
- DR. TULSI GIRI
The senior vice-chairman of the Council of Ministers, DR. TULSI GIRI, is better known as an outspoken politician than as a medical doctor. At the age of 30, the former general secretary of Nepali Congress became foreign minister under the first democratically elected government led by prime minister B.P. Koirala. His offer, then, to mediate between the Asian rivals, India and China, sparked off a major controversy. Briefly detained after king Mahendra took over, he later switched loyalty and went on to hold powerful positions in Royalist government between1961-1965. Ten years later, he became the prime minister. Having assumed influential offices under the direct rule of the king after the present monarch’s father, Mahendra, dismissed the first democratically elected government in 1960, the 80-year-old went into self-exile in the neighboring India and Sri Lanka about 20 years ago. He resumed the second innings after yet another royal take-over earlier this year. The colorfully controversial personality has been a witness to many historical events of Nepal. This week, he spoke to KESHAB POUDEL at his rented Baluwatar residence for more than an hour. Excerpts:
Your arguments sound very forceful but they fail to convince people even of your own political fold. Why?
(Laughs) I don't control anybody's mind. But whether they share my views or not they continue to be my colleagues and friends.
Don't you feel that you are lonely, then?
It may seem so, but I don't think I am a lonely person. There are many who share my views but every body is not as vocal as I am. I am hundred percent sure there are many people - who share my views. In due course of time, it will be manifest publicly.
Without an organization and enthusiastic workers behind you, how can you expect to persuade or influence the King?
Although those who agree with me they are not organised, they have strong commitments towards my faith.
You are always picked up at a crucial and critical period of time. Whose favorite you have always been at such critical times of the country?
These are coincidences like this time around. I did not come here when there was a crisis. Actually, when I came here, everything was normal. After two days of my arrival, a political change occurred which was in line with how the King acted few years before what it is commonly known as Ashoj 18 or (October 4, 2002). The only difference was that this time, he did not appoint a prime minister. So, there was not much of a crisis. It was only a hue and cry of politicians who had lost the privileges of being a prime minister or minister. They are trying to create the confusion. So that was not a crisis the king wanted to create. He wanted to resolve terrorism and see the democratic process move smoothly. The king also made commitments on return of democratic process within three years. No body had forced him to make such commitments. He wants to see the democratic process reenergized and a genuine democratic institution established.
My question is whose favorite you have always been?
I am coming to your point. Incidentally, I was here this time and His Majesty was kind enough to ask me whether I could be of any service in the process of solving of the country's problem. I thought it was my privilege to serve the King because I know that the monarchy has an extremely important role to play in the country since that is the only stable force in this country.
Since your appointment, you have been talking about the need to find out point of agreement between the two conflicting political forces - King and political parties. How do you see the possibility of brining them together?
Political leaders, I think, are also responsible citizens of this country. Some individuals might talk about their vested interests for some time but one cannot talk about the political vested interest all the time. People who are responsible and accountable to the parties through the mechanisms of the political parties have to think about the interest of the nation as well as the people. I am hundred percent sure that good sense will prevail on them and that they will come to negotiations for a mutually agreeable solution. The people do not agree on all matters all the time but there are certain matters we can agree on. So, I have been always emphasizing on solutions based upon the points of agreements. When you work to explore the areas of agreement, the areas of disagreement either disappear or we try to resolve them later. So it is always good to have a good beginning by working together with His Majesty in finding out area of agreement to resolve the national problems and move ahead with the democratic process.
You held very powerful political positions in the 1960s. You are back in power again – in the 2000s. Based on your experiences, how do you see Nepal’s geo-strategic importance vis-à-vis the two big neighbors and other world power?
Well, the scenario of the world is changing. The political situations vis-à-vis the neighbors have completely changed since the 1960s But we have to find out the natural basis of the friendship with them. Our big neighbors as well as we need to understand the natural relationship that will bring peace and stability in this small country.
How important Nepal's stability and peace is to our two neighbors?
Our peace and stability is extremely important to them. Because we have always been a soft point between the two big neighbors, we are important to the both. If there is instability or chaos in Nepal, both will be affected. And that is not good for Nepal. In that event, other forces might take advantage. We have to be very careful to see to it that our relationship with both the neighbors and the relationships of both the neighbors are good and harmonious.
Having closely worked with King Mahendra and B.P. Koirala at a crucial phase of Nepal's political history? Don't you have a plan to write a memoir?
(Laughs.) Many of my well wishers want me to write a memoir. I may well write it, although I am not a good writer.
You seem to be different from your image as projected in the public. Why?
Well, I don’t care about how I have been projected in the public. I have every right to express my views like any other person. But one should not try to twist the views of a person whom you disagree. In a recent interview to Bijaya Kumar on Kantipur television, I said that the sovereignty is vested in the people but the people do not exercise that sovereignty itself. That sovereignty is manifested or transferred or exercised by means of a mechanism. If it is in the parliamentary form, people’s sovereignty is transferred to the institution of parliament. In the form of monarchy, the sovereignty is transferred to the institution called monarchy. It is a question of modus operandi or how the sovereignty operates that is all and that's all what I had said. Now it is up to the people to decide. Left to me I would like to see that monarchy should have a strong role to play in the country because that is a stable institution. That is my view. Others may not agree. If they think that is not correct, then the people will decide which is right and which is wrong.
There are so many commonalities between the King and the political parties in their objectives such as the strengthening of the democratic process, good governance, elections and restoration of law and order. Why do they fail to come together?
I don't know. I cannot speak on behalf of the political parties. What I find is that they have been just reacting too much. Political parties are not acting but they are reacting. That does not help. Reactions for sometime is alright. But if you act on the basis of reactions all the time, then you don't come to any conclusion. What I have suggested is that this is high time for political parties to act. When you want to act, you have to find out the basis for that action. For reactions, you don't have to find any basis. You react in anything you want to react. For action, you need to think how all of us can put together our heads and find out a solution that will bring peace and harmony and ensure the smooth functioning of democratic institutions in the country.
Having a long political experience, how do you see the future of Nepalese political process?
As it is today, things don't seem to be well and optimistic. But, people have to live in hope. Personally I do not lose hope irrespective of what the people say about me. I feel that we all have interest of the people of Nepal in our mind. Nepal should exist as a sovereign and independent country. The people of this country should be able to live in peace and get freedom to express their views like any democratic societies in the world. That hope I still have in my mind. I hope it will be fulfilled sooner than later.
If that was the case what was the need to impose emergency, suspend civil liberties and jail political leaders, when the king took over?
They were nothing more than temporary measures to restore the law and order. We lifted the emergency and eased the restrictions as soon as the country moved towards normalcy.
