I n d e p t h    A n a l y s i s
Will Premier Deuba's dare matter?

Kathmandu: The race is on to win over the organization in the Nepali Congress between the now expelled Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba and Chairman Girija Prasad Koirala. The Central Committee of the party, of course, retains its Koirala support and so made the expulsion possible. Koirala may get a majority from the convening of party district chairmen. Deuba is gambling on support from general convention members who are the actual grassroots of the Nepali Congress. For a while, thus, attention will remain focused on the longstanding power struggle in the congress that has for too long exposed the country's largest political party as a "conglomerate" of "power-hungry" people obsessed with nurturing their organization through State Corruption and the distribution of spoils.

Unless Deuba breaks out of this stereotype the current power struggle will mean nothing to the people. There is meaning behind the immediate Girija response of unholy coalitions behind the Deuba dare. The Congress under Girija as also the UML will attempt to capitalize from the perpetual scare of threat to democracy on which a sizeable political section have already launched a debate.

It is lost in this debate that Deuba had no option constitutionally other thn to dissolve the parliament and call for general elections prior to his anticipated expulsion from the leadership of the parliamentary party. What is lost also is the fact that the parliamentary parties appeared to be blind to the desperate calls for the retention of emergency among the people who seemed more aware of the actual political situations. If any thing, Deuba has gained from sticking to his guns at the obvious threat to his power. He will now have to demonstrate that the purpose of this power is for the people and not for himself or his organization alone. In doing so he will be proving the actual distance between himself and the rest of the politicians who appear to have exhausted their trust among the people.

If he doesn't then the exercise will merely be yet another power grab. In which case the watching people will then turn their eyes away from the elections which, when it happens, will merely be considered an exercise to legitimize his power grab.

So skeptical is the Nepali population today that it is virtually indifferent to the major happenings in the political sector which the media can't help but cover. For the lay man the difference is merely between twiddle dee and twiddle dum. Unless of course, there is a change in politics and that is what matters.

Deuba kills two birds with one stone!

Kathmandu: A Prime Minister's ability is known by the company of advisor he keeps around him.

Clearly, Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba's declaration made at the airport the day he returned Nepal from his week long visit to the US and the UK that the state of emergency might not be extended could have been wisely avoided by his advisors had they been clever enough. The prime minister could have told the questioner that "I will have to consult the cabinet and the party and then I will make any decision on that matter".

However, Deuba explicitly mentioned that he was not in favor of the extension of the emergency but then the very next day he changed his decision.

This in essence created suspicion in the minds of the congress and the rest of the political parties regarding the very "motive and the intentions" of the prime minister in having the emergency extended.

A frustrated president Girija Prasad Koirala suddenly summoned the meeting of his "Yes-Men" and pressed Deuba to the wall and instructed the latter to take back the decision.

An annoyed Deuba when pressed very hard wished to use his constitutional prerogative and after "convincing" the constitutional monarch managed the dissolution of the House that was yet to begin and declared elections on November 13.

The preliminary story ran like that. However, today's situation in the congress is more than devastating. An outraged president Koirala under the instigation of his notorious coterie "expelled" his own party-prime minister from the party for three years. At the moment Prime minister Deuba possesses not even the primary membership of the party but yet he is the prime minister. The first stage of the constitutional crisis indeed.

The congress under Koirala and the congress Deuba have come to the open ground and have started "mudslinging" over each other.

In the process, an excessively infuriated Koirala even told his activists Monday that "it was not Deuba who wished the emergency extended but instead it was the army behind the curtain which forced him to declare so".

To rebuff Koirala designs, the Deuba camp has decided to convene the highest organ of the party, the General Assembly, which this camp hopes that it will bring reinstate his membership. Deuba's men are already on the move. In doing so this camp believes that the Assembly will put a sort of pressure on president Koirala who would be then forced to take back his ruling against Deuba. If the president doesn't yield, the Deuba camp is all set to move a motion of no-confidence against president Girija.

Fast moving developments of the sorts of the mentioned above apparently have worked.

"I wish to lead the party in an united manner", said a changed Koirala after the Deuba camp propagated that a no-confidence motion against Koirala was in the offing.

Now question arises as to who is Sher Bahadur Deuba at the moment?

Is he the nation's prime minister? Is he the caretaker prime minister? Is he the interim prime minister? Questions galore indeed.

The fact is that Sher Bahadur Deuba is the nation's prime minister but since his primary membership has been stripped off by the party which made him the prime minister then what is his status in the congress and what constitution says about his present credentials?

A section says forget the internal nitty-gritty's of the constitution. It is His Majesty's Government which is again a hard fact.

Let the constitutional experts debate on this matter but then is this not an awkward situation constitutionally speaking?

Indeed it is.

These constitutional nitty-gritty's apart, political undercurrents have become suddenly high in the country which is all set to embrace the elections on November 27 if that happens at all.

Genuine questions are being raised in the informed circles questioning the ability of the Deuba government in conducting the elections on scheduled date. Critics say that a government which could not conduct the village level elections for fear of the Maoists insurgency, how could the same entity accomplish the Himalayan job?

Critics raising such questions are not misplaced. The fact is that grassroot level elections were differed on count of the insurgency.

Should this mean that the ongoing insurgency will not cause any panic in the villages and districts at time of the general elections? Or is it that Deuba prior to declaring the elections sent signals to the leaders of the insurgency not to disturb the elections? Or is it that the government is all set to resume the process of dialogue with the Maoists in order to ease the situation at time of the elections?

Our own analysis has been that Deuba is on the move for the resumption of the now suspended dialogues with the insurgents. If one were to closely analyze the Deuba speech made in Lumbini on Lord Buddha's day wherein he hinted the rebels to come to the talks. Albeit his conditions for the talks remain the same and that being laying down of the arms prior to the talks.

But yet, the hidden politics contained in the modest and the polite speech inviting the rebels for talks can't be dismissed summarily.

In doing so, Deuba killed two birds with one stone. Firstly, he signaled that he was in favor of talks which is what Comrade Prachanda too has admitted in his last Saturday's press release. Secondly, Deuba sent clear signals to his arch rival that he need not take pain of convincing the rebels for talks and he was himself capable to do so.

It was considered here that in the recent days Koirala's hob-nob with Prachanda had suddenly increased. It could be that Deuba's Lumbini speech were deliberately made to widen the distance in between Koirala and Prachanda. Who knows Nepali politics? It is indeed deep as Pacific Ocean.

Be that as it may, the war of words in between Koirala and Deuba will continue through their trusted "'Yes Men" who would definitely entertain the nation and the international community as well.

What would have been the fate of this country had there been the absence of congress party? The lay men would have been denied entertainment and that too free of cost.

Deuba's changed stance vis-à-vis the Maoists?

Kathmandu: A fresh press release issued by the Maoists insurgency sated last Saturday does hint that they were ready for talks.

Elaborating it more further, the statement well signed by Prachanda says that the doors for the talks were open yesterday, today and will remain open even for tomorrow.

This means that if suitable arrangement and conducive environment were made the Maoists leaders' would very much wish to attend the now abruptly stalled talks.

However, the press statement also makes it clear is that there should be the arrangement of the formation of an interim sort of government. Nepal's 1990 constitution apparently has no such provisions in it.

This when analyzed brings to the fore the hidden desire of the rebels to join the mainstream provided some of their conditions were met with.

But the statement not has only the carrots but sticks too for the government.

It says, among others, that the extension of the emergency and the sudden dissolution of the parliament was a regressive move of the state.

Be that as it may, we give credit to the hint of talks. Coinciding with this statement Prime Minister Deuba's Lumbini speech must be carefully analyzed as it is the first speech since long wherein Deuba apparently has changed his strong postures against the Maoists.

"If you were all the sons of the same soil wherein Lord Buddha was born, I hereby appeal to you to shun violence and come to the table. However, lay down the arms", Deuba declared in Lumbini the otherday.

This means that though Nepal's prime minister is well equipped with the needed and required international support and also in the meantime has strengthened Nepali army's ability and capability  through that support but yet apparently hints the other camp to shun violence and stop killings as we all were the sons of the same soil.

Deuba's changed stance vis-à-vis the insurgency is meaningful indeed.

But then why suddenly a very powerful Deuba appealed for talks? Was it simply to send a message to the world community that the government would not say no to the talks provided they laid down their arms?

Or in reality he prefers talks with the rebels for he too has come to his senses that such two way long-stretched fighting were in essence not only pushing the country to abyss but also causing panic among the national population. Or it could even be that the international community supporting unconditionally the present set of Nepali government suggested the latter to keep open the doors for talks?

Be that as it may, the offer of talks have come fortunately from both the warring camps. It would be in the fitness of the things that the government and the Maoists insurgency both prepare the grounds for talks to materialize through the use of the good offices of the HR activists and other "credible" humanitarian organizations.

If this opportunity is not exploited at this juncture would mean the government inviting problems at times of the elections. By the same token, the Maoists too would feel the brunt of an army that is soon to be equipped with sophisticated war materials.

We wish no sons of this soil is killed. It is time that responsible citizens pick up the hidden message of Prachanda's Saturday's statement and that of Deuba's Lumbini signal and initiate the needed actions to bring the two to the negotiating table.

UML exploits congress' fight-to-finish tussle

Kathmandu: Whether one liked it or not but the fact that the UML's political maneuverability is in essence superb.

The UML as a communist paraphernalia from the very beginning wished its main political rival, the Nepali Congress, to remain as a broken, weakened and disorganized political entity.

The congress at the moment is more than what had been expected by the UML in the beginning.

Whatever the UML has done in the past and would be doing in the coming days and months to further weaken an already badly battered congress is perhaps fair in love and war plus in politics as well.

The congress has to take preliminary lessons of "politics" from the UML which is comparatively speaking a better organized, fairly coordinated and a well disciplined political party vis-à-vis the congress in particular and other political entities in general.

Look how in the recent months and years the UML played politics with the congress.

Consider the 19 th session of the parliament. It was this winter session that was not allowed even to move an inch all along the more or less fifty days of the session. The target was then Koirala-the then prime minister. The UML brought heaven down the earth until Koirala was forced to resign on count of the fairly notorious Lauda Air scam.

A clever UML later forgot the matter that Koirala was allegedly a party to the said scam. Its main objective was to defame Koirala to the extent that his own party members began suspecting Koirala motives and credentials. In the process it pushed Deuba and became successful in creating a "stable and fairly permanent" rift in between the two e.g. Koirala and Deuba.

In the meantime, the UML exhibited its political acumen by its "reunification" with the ML led by Bam Dev Gautam. To recall, this unification materialized at a time when the congress already had become a sinking horse.

As the luck would have it, the UML yet again wished to break the vertebral column of the congress and began engineering schemes to manage the ouster of Deuba. President Koirala came as a support to the UML for obvious reasons.

Koirala opposition to Deuba was two fold: firstly, Koirala was envious of his friend in the Singh Durbar chair and his growing links with the powerful countries of the globe and the successes he bagged through those links; and secondly, Koirala took in a very bad taste his opponents' growing linkages with the nation's army. Koirala could have felt that he had reasons to be unhappy with the army because it was the same force which rejected to get itself mobilized when he was the prime minister.

The March 27 speech of the COAS Rana was utilised by the UML to the hilt and here again the UML fired guns against Deuba using the shoulders of president Koirala.

The congress destiny today is clear to us all.

However, a clever UML has apparently left Koirala in the lurch in the current politics of hotch-potch.

Clearly, the UML is all set to fight the impending elections and has started moves to secure majority in the poll fray and has visibly left Koirala in the cold.

The UML has abandoned Koirala at a time when the latter needed their support most. But the fact is that while the congress has to settle so many battles within the party itself, the UML is gearing up its activities for elections.

The UML as a party considers Deuba's recent moves as the natural outcome of the congress's ongoing never ending fighting.

The UML neither has blamed Deuba in having been influenced by the army for extending the period of emergency nor has taken in bad taste the calling for the elections by Deuba.

The fact is that the UML shares Koirala's views but yet has kept silence because what they wished to reiterate, Koirala is doing on their behalf.

Equally interesting is UML leader Madhav Nepal's assertion that the talks with the Maoists could only take place after a new government is in place in the country after the elections. This implies that the UML is afraid of the possibility of the talks which if fortunately arrived at an amicable solution would mean cutting of its solid votes should the Maoists leaders decide to fight the elections. Surely, if the Maoists fight the elections, the communists votes will be divided which would mean UML securing lesser number of seats for itself.

Unconfirmed reports have it that the UML has already approached Deuba for some seats in the would be reshuffle in the present cabinet.

What if the SC reinstate the parliament?

Kathmandu: A writ petition has been filed by some enthusiasts at Nepal's apex court pleading the court to dismiss the dissolution of the parliament and calling for the elections by Deuba last week.

The writ petition says that the court's precedence has been that should there remain options in the parliament for arriving at a solution to the problem in question, the parliament can't and shouldn't be dissolved.

The petition claims that Deuba had options left with him and could have found some alternatives to his concern from within the parliament and hence the court revert Deuba's decision and reinstall the parliament.

The SC has already invited Amicus Curie from among the advocates to initiate a debate on whether Deuba's decision were correct or otherwise.

The SC has stated that immediately after the debate by the members of the Amicus Curie, it would provide its final verdict on the petition.

Question now arises what if the SC reinstates the parliament? In that case how Deuba will face the parliament? What about the endorsement by the parliament of the extension of the emergency? What if the parliament decided otherwise?

Definitely, if the SC reverts government's decision would bring yet another serious crisis in the country. But then what the court decides should be binding on all.

Former Justice B.N.Upadhyaya some years back had reinstated the dissolved parliament. It was a time when communists were in power.

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