Nepali version of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde

The desire to ease the anxiety of the nation is one thing, preparing the background for that is different and wining over the nasty designs of the villains against the tension easing process is altogether a separate matter. The tension easing process becomes all the more difficult and awkward when some one apparently very grudging person prefers to create problems for the man who ventures to ease the tension. The process takes a different repulsive form when the former utters words and makes noises all aimed at presumably disturb the entire process presumably leading to 'entente'.

If we have rightly perceived what the former Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala said in Biratnagar immediately after his quitting the Prime Ministerial furniture regarding the Maoists insurgency, their leaders and the subsequent controversial clarion call of Koirala to his youth cadres to take up the arms to counter the insurgency and that too under his command forces us to ponder over his new political overtures that he has kept apparently under his sleeve for obvious reasons.

Firstly, Koirala's blunt assertion that he knows the leaders' of the insurgency is simply surprising. One would wish to ask Koirala as to why he exhibited his disinclination in exposing the very leader during his Prime Ministership? The people long to know the face that is leading the insurgency. The people would have saluted Koirala hundred times in having dared to do so. He however, did not do so and hence his fresh statement regarding the yet undisclosed chief of the insurgency the lay men would prefer to throw into the dustbin.

Secondly, his call to his cadres to take up the arms against the insurgents violent attacks under his command explicitly explains the "militant" mind set of the former Prime Minister which in essence he possesses from the very beginning of his political career. To recall, the NC as a party has already taken up to the arms and ammunitions in the past and that way the Nepali Congress is definitely a senior party comparatively speaking than the Maoists insurgency. The NC could take pride in this hard fact that the insurgents took up the arms almost five decade later that the NC as a political party. Nevertheless, a personality of Girija's stature should have refrained from making such dangerous statements as it contains the seeds of a civil war should the things go out of the hands of the NC as a party and that too being the ruling party. In effect, the former Prime Minister should have told his Biratnagar men that Deuba be allowed some time so that the latter's peace-initiatives at least proceeds in the right direction. He however, did not do so reflecting apparently his inner mood that he was not at all happy with Deuba bagging success, if any, in the whole affair related to the Maoists issue. And Koirala jolted his cadres at a time when the entire developed West congratulated Deuba for his new political offers to the insurgents who have already hinted that they will join the talks with the government. For example, US dignitary Ms. Rocca had some words of praise for Deuba in this regard who concluded her visit to this country only last week. It is this set of developed West which sided with Koirala all along when the UML wished summarily his voluntary resignation. The West is thus advised to tell Koirala in plain terms not to disturb the peace process initiated by Deuba regime, which enjoys the backing of the entire national population and hopefully all peace loving population in the world.

Most pleasingly, Koirala the other day brought about a change in his militant speech made earlier and has "instructed" his men not to "disturb" the peace process initiated by Deuba.

Should Koirala be taken as the Nepali version of Stevenson's Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde?

It is time that Koirala acted like a real guardian of the Congress and as a senior political citizen of the nation. We believe if he so desired, he can do so.

Reading Ms. Shailaja's satirical comments!

Ms. Shailaja Acharya, one of the prominent lady-leader of the ruling Nepali Congress is known for her passing on satirical comments against her party colleagues. Why she does so is beyond our imagination. However, looking at her statements made at critical junctures of Nepal's political developments clearly indicates her inferiority complex, which she apparently possesses in abundance.

A close analysis of her two fresh comments coming as it did from her interviews granted to two different newspapers within a short span of two weeks suggests firstly that she is finding it too difficult to digest Deuba becoming the nation's Prime Minister. In the first interview she says that Deuba is the one who is accepted by both the Maoists and the Nepal's Military. Definitely it is not a word of praise for Deuba but instead a blunt satire all aimed at "exposing" Deuba of his possible, real or unreal, linkages with the two powerful institutions.

Secondly, she that is Ms. Acharya now prefers to expose yet another old time colleague and relative, Mr. Sushil Koirala for whom she has these words: "In essence, Deuba and Mr. Koirala ( Sushil) were the two faces of the same coin".

Going deep into her blunt comments on Koirala one could summarize that in Ms. Acharya's eyes the two different personalities albeit both belonging to her own party could well be guided by one single powerful force and that there could be little difference as to who steers the nation: Deuba or Koirala?

One wonders how Deuba and Junior Koirala could be the two faces of the same coin? To the best of our knowledge, junior Koirala represents the hard line posture in the party that is very close to senior Koirala's well established line and Deuba is considered to be among the liberals in the congress set up.

Albeit Deuba is close to the Nepali Royalty because of his matrimonial relations. On the other hand, junior Koirala is yet unmarried, we have been told.

So how junior Koirala could be equated with Deuba? If Ms. Acharya has some clues that prove the two being the faces of the same coin would be a most welcome move. Or else it could only be considered to be her simple outbursts of frustrations against her two colleagues who have clearly superseded her position in the party and in the political spectrum of today's Nepalese politics.

Nevertheless, Ms. Acharya's comments deserve deep analysis by the political pundits of the country.

Headline | National | 5 Question  | 2nd Impression | International | Past