I n d e p t h    A n a l y s i s
Deuba opponents to fail elections!

Kathmandu: By most accounts, Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba's congress organization is gaining at the grassroots. Rival Girija Koirala's congress is reeling under the slide of district level workers towards the government. The desertion from the Koirala camp of Koirala's trusted youth organization is merely the tip of the iceberg. Reports from the districts suggest that the split is more than vertical in most places. In most places the split favors Deuba.

Unfortunately, the lopsided coverage of the official media has been unable to underscore this simply because it has chosen to blackout any news of the other congress. This outstanding lapse of un-professionalism suits the private media well since it can capitalize much by highlighting Girija activities. As much as can be gleaned from these media activities, Girija presence dominates the media sector. It is this that remains a set-back to Deuba.

Add to this the presence of a UML and Left media and favorable coverage of Deuba is amiss in the media. And so critical questions remain predominant challenging the Deuba legitimacy. Court discussions favoring Koirala predominate. Tilted coverage advocating Koirala's claim to the TREE and the FLAG symbols of the congress continue. Perhaps the more significant is the preeminence of questions regarding the propriety of general elections.

It is probably this that is the more significant. The active diplomatic community in Nepal has evidently taken up this issue well. Whether elections can at all take place accompany questions regarding the fairness of elections if they do take place. Missing in their questions is the realization that the Maoists insurgency problem can only be tackled by civil society democratically if and when the political sector seek the break the seeming Maoists monopoly by sheer physical presence in the affected areas. Unless this happens, the only evident check to Maoists is through the barrel of a gun which is hardly a democratic solution preferred presumably by the democratic diplomatic community. Indeed, if any thing, the new doubts being raised at times suggest pressures on the West from the immediate neighbors to distance themselves from offering support to quelch the Maoists. This is evidently a dangerous trend if true.

Deuba evidently has been put between the frying pan and fire. He alone is aware of the mounting security threats in the country that provoked him to dissolve the parliament. He is unable to speak of the sources of the threat that had fostered an alliance between the Girija congress and the UML to do away with the emergency; form government and provide concessions to the Maoists insurgency facing severe handicaps at the hands of the emergency. It is Deuba alone who is aware of the actual political risks taken to dissolve parliament. It is evident that the constitution is clear that any dissolution of parliament must be followed by general elections within six months.

The persistence of questions regarding the elections thus carry meaning. The elections must take place. Deuba is compelled to do it.

It appears now that his opponents must fail this effort for their politics to succeed.

What if Deuba is forced to resign or does so voluntarily?

Kathmandu: Congress(K) president Girija Prasad Koirala yet possesses cards under his sleeve.

UML General Secretary, Madhav Kumar too has a card under his sleeve but his card could toe in toto the line acquired by his present day mentor, Girija Prasad Koirala for understandable reasons.

Koirala wished to test his political acumen the other day when he suddenly approached Deuba's mentor, K.P.Bhattarai and divulged that if Deuba resigned from the present post the divided congress could yet again be reunited.

Two things become clear from Koirala's meeting with K.P.Bhattarai.

Firstly that Koirala is much concerned with Deuba continuing in that lucrative post and secondly, the unity efforts were of secondary nature for president Koirala. By implication it also becomes clear that Koirala's ire neither is against the dissolution of the House nor for the country's dwindling politics seen after the said dissolution but is for the post that Deuba has been occupying since long much to the irritation of Koirala.

Reports have it that Bhattarai took the side of Deuba and bluntly told that Deuba would not resign.

Upon return from Bhattarai's house in Lalitpur, Koirala and his coterie men apparently have decided to chart strategies that would put pressure on Deuba to resign.

The strategies to be brought into action were, for example, convincing the other opposition parties that Deuba's current moves were aimed at destroying democracy and that the elections could not be held on time as declared by Deuba and finally even if the elections were held, it would be of a Musarraf style.

The UML which is rather interested in facing the elections for it considers that if the elections were held on time, the next government was theirs. Sensing the election-mood of the UML, the Koirala congress is clandestinely convincing the party that the elections might not be in favor as expected by the party because Deuba is bent on rigging the elections in order to emerge out with flying colors. In the process the congress(K) has been thus partially been able to convince the UML that the elections will not be a free and fair one.

The UML as a party sees point in Koirala's conclusions and apparently has hinted the latter that if the former pushed the demand for Deuba's resignation the latter would endorse the move.

This means that the Koirala congress and the UML both are now further inclined to destabilize the country's already fragile political situation.

Now the question arises what if the Prime Minister resigns under pressure?

In effect Deuba at the moment is a care taker prime minister or at best he could be called as an election-prime minister whose duty terminates the day the election results are declared. If he resigns or is forced to resign, a sort of fierce constitutional crisis will immediately grip the nation. There is no mention in the 1990 constitution regarding the provision of the resigning of an already caretaker prime minister of the sort of Deuba given the parliament is not in session and that the general elections have already been declared. More so Deuba's own credentials have changed because he is not with the party which elevated him to this post. More over, Deuba is a different personality and is at the moment president of a congress party which the other camp led by Koirala claims to be illegal. Add to this there is no provision in the constitution for the formation of an all-party government to conduct the elections as demanded by Deuba's rivals.

In these circumstances the country will definitely invite a sort of chaos which is what apparently the Koirala congress and the UML wish knowingly or unknowingly.

Let's suppose Deuba resigns. What next?

The only personality who could carry the sinking boat to the bank is the constitutional monarch.

Article 127 allows the King to "unknot" the constitutional crisis arising thereafter. But what the King will do then? Will he take over the charge of the country till the elections are held or even beyond? Will he invite all parties and order them to find a suitable prime minister till the elections? Or will he himself appoint Chief Justice to run the country till the elections?

These are the questions related with prime minister's resignation either he resigns by force or even willingly.

Deuba's rivals should now decide which way would be the best for the political health of the nation and for the system as well.

Now to come to the point, Deuba sources say that if the Prime Minister is pushed to the wall by his rivals and opponents he might think on resigning on his own in order to punish the men in the other camp. Deuba might resign, say independent political thinkers, if he senses that the apex court's verdict on the dissolution of the parliament and the election commission's ruling on awarding the status of real mainstream congress were not going his way. If he does so would mean that both Deuba and his Opponents were immature political animals who neither were interested in the continuation of the system nor were concerned for the political health of the nation.

Bhutanese monarch throws ball in Nepali Court

Kathmandu: Nepal's lame-duck establishment under Sher Bahadur Deuba has received yet another diplomatic jolt from the Bhutanese side in the recent days.

The jolt has come at a time when the Nepali politics is in a state of total disarray and that Nepali leaders were engaged in a sort of never ending inter or even intra-party tussle.

The fresh jolt from Bhutan has also coincided with the fresh trip of the Ambassadors of some powerful European Union nations based in Kathmandu to the Bhutanese refugees' camp situated in eastern part of this Himalayan Kingdom.

The EU heads of mission based in Nepal, to recall, went to Morang and Jhapa only last Wednesday to see for themselves the plight of the Bhutanese refugees languishing in Nepal since twelve year plus and upon return they jointly issued a statement wherein they have said, firstly that they were there "with a view to getting a first hand impression of the atmosphere in the camps and the aspirations of the refugees"; secondly the EU mission was there as a " fact-finding mission" which took place "against the background of the standstill in the process of negotiations between the Bhutanese and Nepalese authorities following the completion of the joint verification of the refugees in the Khudunabari camp in December 2001".

And thirdly but very importantly, the EU mission says that the " Mission did not fail to notice the serious increase in the level of frustration among the refugees – especially youths – caused by the lack of progress in the whole process after 12 years of confinement in the refugee camps".

Finally the EU mission assures all aggrieved ones asserting that the Mission share(s) the concern expressed by the refugees and their organizations and will convey to their respective capitals the urgent need to reach a durable solution to the refugee situation".

The diplomatic jolt to Nepal has come from His Majesty the King of Bhutan himself who sumarrily rejects that his country was dilly-dallying the bilateral talks in this regard.

The Bhutanese monarch recently said that "Nepal appears reluctant in bringing into effect the already arrived at arrangements for the settlement of the refugee imbroglio".

In doing so, the Bhutanese monarch has very cleverly thrown the ball into Nepal's court.

And when he says so he is not that incorrect for Nepal is currently bogged-down in such a chaotic state that its easy come back from that state appears very difficult if not impossible.

However, what is interesting is that the Bhutanese King made these revelations when the EU team visited the refugee camps and upon return made "sympathetic" gestures that definitely favors the refugees concerns and their repatriation back to their own motherland.

King Jigme Singe-Wangchuk is reported to have made these observations while addressing the 80th National Assembly of Bhutan.

Surprising is the fact that the EU team visits refugee camps last Wednesday and the King of Bhutan speaks out his mind regarding the refugees immediately after the EU mission returns Kathmandu and issues a joint statement. This is not a sheer coincidence. If it is a coincidence then one has to admire the Bhutanese side which is closely watching each and every event in Nepal that is pertaining to the refugees.

A close look at the Bhutanese monarch's fresh remarks against Nepal, what could be concluded fairly is that Bhutan will linger the issue in question ad infinitum and that it will not take into account any measures or for that matter any initiatives taken on this count even by powerful countries of the developed West come what may.

Most surprising is the revelation of the Bhutanese side who now assertively claim that Madhav Kumar Nepal too now considers that "not all languishing in the Nepali camps were Bhutanese nationals". To recall, UML leader Nepal recently visited Bhutan. The authorities there now openly say that Madhav Nepal now is a changed person.

It is Madhav Nepal's turn to react to the claims of the Bhutanese side. If he does not react to the Bhutanese claims then one is forced to conclude that his Thimpu sojourn washed his brains.

All said and done, how the EU members collectively or even individually react to the Bhutanese monarch's claim will have to be carefully watched. Similarly, how the Nepali establishment takes King Jigme's remarks will also have to be followed.

To recall, Bhutan continues to be a "protectorate" of neighboring India as per Article 2 of the 1949 Bhutan-India Treaty. On foreign policy issues, Bhutan is yet obliged to "consult" India prior to arriving at any decisions as per the provisions of the said Treaty.

Perhaps this should explain every thing.

Deuba political future hangs in balance

Kathmandu: Deuba is in trouble. It is more a mental tension than a trouble in strictest sense of the term.

His anxieties circle around two prime concerns: what if the Supreme Court gives a new lease of life to the now dissolved parliament and in that case what will be his status in the changed scheme of national politics?; secondly his concern is equally for what would happen if the election commission denies his party the real Tree and the Flag?

Associated with the first probability is the instant political maneuvering from his rival Koirala camp for his ouster from the prime ministerial post. Attached with it is what would be the status of his new party and more important would be his own status in the completely changed political environment: will he represent the whole congress as was prior to the split? Will he be the leader of the parliamentary party which made him the nation's prime minister? Will he be able to take out 40% of the NC lawmakers and form a new party?

The second possibility is associated with the question as to what would happen to his party if the EC denied him the party flag and tree? In this case most of the Deuba men now in his party will desert him for good. Deuba will be left alone. Deuba must take into account that his being in power too has contributed a lot in the whole affair. Had he been not in power his fate would have been entirely different. It is not his charisma but the charisma of the power.

Kathmandu's political watchers opine that if the SC revives the parliament then in that case Deuba has only two options left with him: either to apologize or face the ouster. However, there is yet another option left for him but that would be very difficult for him to get through. The option with him is only to seduce 40% of the parliamentarians and form yet another party and fight the elections.

However, there is one technical difficulty in it. Reports have it that his chameleon friend minister Khum Bahadur Khadka is in constant touch with Koirala and has been suggesting the latter that he might quit the Deuba camp should Koirala elevate Ram Chandra Pudel to the post of party president. This means that Deuba is surrounded with friends who could leave him in the cold should the other camp listened and complied to their demands. To recall, minister Khadka only the other day returned from his New Delhi pilgrimage. This is no less a mystery indeed.

Reports have it that Mr. Poudel had joined the Koirala camp hoping that one fine morning Koirala will elevate his ranks in the party. Koirala has said a big no to Poudel in the recent days.

But then yet pressures are mounting on president Koirala to quit the presidency and allow either Poudel or Shailaja Acharya to take up his current post.

"Poudel's choice is not that bad but so far as Shailaja is concerned for the post of president, it would be really unfortunate if the latter is appointed party president", said an insider of the Koirala congress.

"Shailaja is a sinking horse now. She at best could be an advisor to the party but her selection as party president would be a disaster for the party", added the same source.

This means that Shailaja is a lost case in the congress camp under Koirala. But then yet Koirala would wish to elevate his half-brother Sushil Koirala to the post of the president. But to do so will also invite wrath from party workers as many party activists do take Sushil as a dedicated worker of the party but would not prefer to see him in the post of the president.

"Sushil is honest indeed but he lacks vision and hence some one other than Sushil has got to be searched"', said another Koirala camp activist.

Our own analysis is that President Koirala will never quit party presidency come what may.

The fact is also that Koirala is a good organizer and could work hard comparatively speaking.

Mature political analysts predict that even if the SC revives the parliament, the nation instead of taking a definite stable course would yet again plunge in a sort of different crisis which will ultimately pave the way for yet another constitutional crisis.

The case being subjudice, it would not be wise to comment on that any more.

But yet, the SC and the EC have consumed much time in furnishing their verdict which is causing panic not only among the political parties but also among the lay men who wish the country restores normalcy.

The apex court must remain sensitive to the people's wishes.

EU press statement on Bhutanese refugees'

On 3 July, 2002 the European Union Heads of Mission visited Bhutanese refugee camps in the districts of Morang and Jhapa with a view to getting a first hand impression of the atmosphere in the camps and the aspirations of the refugees.

The fact-finding mission took place against the background of the standstill in the process of negotiations between the Bhutanese and Nepalese authorities following the completion of the joint verification of the refugees in the Khudunabari camp in December 2001.

The EU Heads of Mission recognized the high quality work of the UN agencies and other organizations – including the refugees own organizations - involved in the management of the camps.

However, the EU Heads of Mission did not fail to notice the serious increase in the level of frustration among the refugees – especially youths – caused by the lack of progress in the whole process after 12 years of confinement in the refugee camps.

The EU Heads of Mission share the concern expressed by the refugees and their organizations and will convey to their respective capitals the urgent need to reach a durable solution to the refugee situation.

Israeli books to TU library

Kathmandu: The Ambassador of the State of Israel in Kathmandu, Avraham Nir, Monday handed over
a set of Israeli books mostly on literature to the Tribhuvan University Central Library.

On the occasion, the Israeli envoy recited the poems in his mother tongue, Hebrew.

Nepali litterateur Dr Abhi Subedi spoke on the tradition and trends of literature of Israel. He said, " Israel represents the meeting point of the East and the West." Dr Triratna Manandhar, Dean of the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences who received the books on behalf od the TU Central Library thanked Ambassador Nir for his generous contribution.

Sabina Subba, Suman Subba, Shristi Thapa and Anisha Thapa and Prabhakar Shrestha recited various Israeli poems and bagged accolades from the attending participants of the function.

Nir handed over altogether 39 books to the Central Library.

To recall, Ambassador Nir last year presented Israeli books to Mahendra Morang Campus and Purbanchal University library.

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