I n d e p t h    A n a l y s i s
Where are the People?

Kathmandu: It has been months since the major political parties in the country have taken to the streets. They demanded firstly, the appointment of Madhav Kumar Nepal as Prime Minister. Secondly, they have been asking for the restoration of the dissolved parliament. The Congress-Deuba demanded Deuba’s appointment as Prime Minister. These demands, it is said by the agitators, are to prevent "regression". Regression is being defined in whichever way as the assertion of the Monarchy.

It is this definition of regression that seems to be contradictory. The partisan media hides the fact that the agitating parties are asking that the Monarchy assert on their behalf. The constitution, it is untold, leaves no room for the monarchy to assert. In other words, what the parties are saying is for the monarchy to take another "unconstitutional" measures that benefit the parties.

At the public level, this contradiction is exposed. Moreover, what is in no case hidden is that the agitating parties retained the monopoly of politics under the constitution and it is these principal actors and not the monarchy that contributed to the current constitutional crunch. Moreover, the anarchy of the past some years has made obvious that the King must seek a solution that will in no case add to the problems the agitating parties have created and the parties are seeking merely to perpetuate their monopoly in politics which is the "problem". At another level, the fact that the Maoists entered the ceasefire so soon after the King’s sole became predominant is not lost upon the people who are aware that the agitators contribute more to disrupting the talks than in helping a solution.

It is this that keeps the people away from the agitation. Despite threats of disciplinary action against absentee cadre, both the Congress and the UML are finding it difficult to perpetuate their agitation. This makes it a compulsion for the agitating leadership to raise the pitch against the monarchy and woo radical commitments. This radicalism is likely to scare liberals further away from participation. The parties clearly have boxed themselves into an uncomfortable corner where any compromise would ridicule the leadership. This, of course, the leadership doesn’t want.

Prime Minister Surya Bahadur Thapa is aware of this. He has thus decided to let the agitation take its own course. His offer of participation remains. Since the leadership of the agitators will not take the bet,. Thapa finds the moment opportune to strengthen his own politically disturbed organization within the RPP from the position of government. In other words, the problem he is supposed to address may be conveniently left dangling on the excuse of unresponsiveness on part of the agitators. The problems will however, mount. Left to its own course, the unresponsiveness of the agitators and the political use of Thapa’s office in government will reflect on the Monarchy. The people are expectant and demand a decisive and directional resolution of the mounting national problems.

One major problem if left to take its own course, the Maoists problem, is likely to be explosive. It’s impact on the affected population at this juncture is likely to be negative. And, so, again, it is the people and the State that will be affected.

Clearly thus, what is being seen is that response to the people’s expectations is overly due much as the people may keep away from the agitation that will not be allowed to do so if the effort is merely to maintain a status quo that can ultimately mean merely a return to the chaos experienced a year ago. For this, Prime Minister Thapa will have to do more than merely use the King’s authority to serve his politics. In so many ways the people are already asking the meaning to themselves of HM King Gyanendra’s October initiatives. So far the establishment has been taking comfort in the lack of popular participation in the agitation. The fact is that there is little step yet at arousing public participation in support of the Royal initiative as well. It is this participation that must be mobilized in order to prevent the agitation from growing. Until then the question "Where are the People?" will remain.

Will Shailaja’s crusade bring about a change in congress stance?

Kathmandu: She is unbending. She is one of the most vocal among the crowds of many in the Nepali congress political paraphernalia led by Shri Girija Prasad Koirala.

She happens to be one of the closest relatives of President Koirala but yet at times sharply differs with her own nephew. She has also paid the price for her differences with president Koirala either on core and ethical political matters or purely administrative matters.

She was sacked, to recall, by her nephew Prime Minister Koirala long time back when she right being a member of the Koirala cabinet "revealed" that the ministry she was heading was a total mess and that only corruption prevailed in the ministry from tip to toe.

She is Ms. Shailja Acharya—the former vice chairman of the party and a deputy Prime Minister.

Not surprising therefore that she denounces the involvement of her party in the ongoing agitation on accounts of according to her were as follows: firstly, the congress by engaging itself in the current agitation of the big-5 has become a tail to the communists; secondly; that there had been no need of any sort of agitation against the King when the monarch has already vested the executive powers on the Thapa cabinet; thirdly; that the agitation launched by the big-5 were shadowing the countless issues confronting the nation that warranted immediate solutions from a consensus of all the political forces of the nation; fourthly; that the party should not make any hurried decisions on matters that have grave political bearing in the country but instead decisions should be arrived at by studying its wider implications in the given fragile politics of the nation; fifthly; what the neutral observers would say of an agitation which has lost already its meaning and content and the likes.

A close analysis of Shailaja’s expressions does reveal that she differs with her party’s decisions very sharply to the extent that she prefers to call the ongoing agitation as meaningless. What is also clear from her statement is that Shailaja appears confident that since the executive powers had already come to the cabinet, there remained no need to pressurize the King further. She also appears not happy with her party’s becoming a political tail of the communists in the ongoing agitation.

" How can a party that has always taken a middle line supporting constitutional monarchy could afford to remain associated with political parties who day in day our advocate republican slogans", bursts Shailaja.

In an expression of warning to her fellow party stalwarts, she bluntly says that if the agitation continues for long meaninglessly and the country remains embroiled in a host of problems as it stands today, Nepal would soon be dubbed as a Failed State.

A courageous Shailaja then challenges those who prefer a sort of disciplinary action against her for her anti-agitation remarks that she has been making of late by saying that "there is none to challenge my authority in the party save the party president.

This means that Shailaja is experiencing threats from her own party activists for her off-the-cuff remarks which the party stalwarts interpret as "anti-party" rhetoric and demand stern actions against her.

The other personality who is supporting her views is Speaker Tara Nath Ranabhat is also in the list of those to be penalized for their anti-party statements.

Sources in the congress say that president Koirala is in a fix. Firstly, he doesn’t want to lose a dedicated congress personality of Shailaja’s stature by penalising her for her "erratic" utterances; secondly, he also thinks of the relation that binds them; thirdly; president Koirala poses that he would abide by the voices of the majority in the party which unfortunately or fortunately is against Shailaja. And most importantly, president Koirala is a man who can’t bypass the decisions of his half-brother Sushil Koirala who is said to be a bete noir of Shailaja.

However, some in the congress party also hint that president Koirala wishes the expulsion of Ms. Shailaja Acharya to be replaced by his own daughter-Sujata Jost (Koirala), a German national in effect.

Koirala could be playing double but yet the president will have to think twice when it comes to penalise Ms. Acharya. Nevertheless, Koirala would very much like to see his daughter at the helm of affairs of the congress party. After all, South Asia has maintained this tradition since long. Blood is thicker than water!

What is interesting to note here is that Ms. Acharya for the first time has disclosed that her party in the beginning had kept soft corner for Chand’s government and in the same vein she assumes that many a congress stalwarts appear to have olive branch for Prime Minister Thapa and his government.

All put together, what comes to the fore is that if there is already a rift in and among the congress party members on how to view the Thapa government. By the same token, what is also clear is that time permitting the party led by Girija prasad with have given birth to personalities like Shailaja and Ranabhat who would clearly differ with the party’s decision on so many counts.

Does this mean that the agitation will fizzle out? Will Koirala back out from the agitation if Shailaja’s dictum prevailed in the majority of the party? Does this mean that some time later Girija congress will join the cabinet? Will the congress men accept Thapa as their prime minister? Should this also mean that Shailaja possesses kind heart for the monarch?

Is she the next Prime Minister under the same Article 127 should Thapa fail and the agitation continues unabated?

Is that possible? The intellectuals are invited to ponder over this possibility even if it were a remote one.

Woli and Bamdev being pushed to the wall

Kathmandu: UML strongman, Madhav Kumar Nepal is unlucky politically speaking.

He was a consensus candidate of the big-5 now in agitation. He enjoyed unconditional backing from his own party activists. But yet the King denied him the prestigious post of the prime minister for unknown reasons. This means that the King is angry with him. A hypothetical assumption indeed.

Poor Madhav Nepal after receiving a big political shock from the Royal Palace is now experiencing a sort of revolt from among his own party comrades.

His declared political rivals in the party are Comrade K.P.Woli and yet another firebrand communist—Bam Dev Gautam.

The other day, these two high-profile communist leaders boycotted the party central committee meeting retaliating against what they call party’s grave mistakes that have cornered the two stalwarts, especially Mr. Woli.

To recall, Woli some time back had ventilated his feelings regarding the on going movement which was interpreted by his colleagues as to have been deliberately made to weaken the so-called movement now being waged by the five agitating parties including the UML.

"The movement is not only directionless but agendaless as well", so said Woli of the agitation. This apparently infuriated his comrade-in-arms to the extent that some in the party pushed the idea that Woli be punished for his erratic expressions.

The Monday party meeting tried to extract explanations from Woli for his negative expressions with a hope that the accused would apologize, but what happened inside the meeting was a surprising one.

Woli boycotted the rest of the proceeding stating that until and unless the men who issues warnings to him on behalf of the party had to retract from their statements made against him.

Understandably, those who accused Woli did not do so as per Woli’s wishes which made Woli angry to the extent that he wished to quit the meeting in an angry mood.

Woli’s men see the invisible hands of party general secretary, Madhav Nepal, in making the former a target for declared reasons which apparently emerged instantly after the party’s seventh general convention which elevated the ranks of Madhav Nepal by cutting down the size of his known detractor-Woli through the use of foul political plays.

To recall, after the Janakpur convention, Madhav and Woli differ sharply and both criticise each other as and when they are provided political platforms. The Nepali media have become a handy-tool for both the arch-rivals.

If Madhav Nepal is behind defaming Woli, then what is for sure is that the former is slowly losing his trusted and dedicated friends in the party. Woli, by all available party standards, is a competent communist authority at par to Madhav Nepal. Should Woli be pressed further, he would have no other options left than to quit the party much the same way his friend Bamdev did some five years back.

The Madhav Nepal camp rejects the allegations that their camp was hell bent on demoralising Woli. But instead what they admit is that they were doing so in order to maintain party discipline and strengthen unity among the party activists.

While it is becoming clear as to why Woli is keeping a comfortable distance with his party GS, what is yet uncertain as to why Bamdev is not that happy either with Madhav Nepal?

To recall, it was Madhav Nepal who seduced Bamdev to join the mainstream party so that Woli could be brought down to his size. And Bamdev entered the UML with a hope that Madhav Nepal will honor him what was due to him. However, that was not forthcoming.

As the luck would have it, Woli and Bamdev appear to have formed a joint front to damage the prospects of their common rival—Madhav Nepal.

All in all, Madhav Nepal is losing his friends in the party he heads now. A combined effort of Bamdev and Woli against Madhav Nepal could easily bring about a total rift in the party with a chance of yet another split.

Add to this, some vocal members in the congress apparently had objected their own party from forwarding the name of a communist leader for the post of the nation’s prime minister.

If this is so then what could be concluded is that Madhav Nepal has already become an object of controversy within and without.

Analysts say that it was time that Madhav Nepal kept his house in order first and then embark upon a road that is too profound in size and dimension, politically speaking.

Maoist leaders’ wish to have a chat with King Gyanendra!

Kathmandu: The unnecessary delay seen in the resumption of the talks between the "old regime" under Thapa and the "new regime" under Comrade Prachanda is causing panic among the peaceloving population of the country.

The men belonging to the new regime have been ventilating that their counterparts in the old regime could be playing foul against them and hence suspect the very hidden motives of the government side in delaying the talks.

Surprising though it may appear, the Maoists of late have been targeting the Royal Nepali Army and the United States of America for dilly-dallying the talks for reasons best known to the accusers only.

The fact is that the Maoists consider the RNA to have their number one enemy for understandable reasons. The RNA of late has been visiting remote parts of the country and providing free medical services to the needy one which is being taken as an act of "spying" by the Maoists. Such acts of the RNA have met with fierce resistance by the Maoists causing sporadic tussles in between the two guns.

The RNA, however, denies the Maoists allegations and maintains that they were there out in the villages as part of their social duties. But then the fact is that the RNA is mainly concentrating their medical services in areas where the Maoists rule the roost and claim that those area fall under their "political sovereignty". The government in Kathmandu has taken a silent posture to these sporadic skirmishes perhaps thinking that any retaliation to the Maoists overtures might dampen the prospects of talks.

Unconfirmed reports have it that the Maoists continue to collect arms and ammunitions from their original sources to meet any eventualities should the talks fail unfortunately.

On ground, the Maoists have never told that they would abandon the talks if they were invited for the third round.

In the process, the government, the State in its truest sense of the term, is also accumulating arms to face the threats of the Maoists should the talks go to the dogs.

While the Maoists suspect the US hand in the delay of the talks and opine that the US—the lone super power on earth—has been spreading its tentacles in Nepal which, according to them, could pose a security threat to Nepal’s immediate neighbors—China and India.

This is the first time that the Maoists have spelt out the name of China for unknown reasons or else they used to see the US presence in Nepal as a threat to India only.

Is it that they wish now to seduce China for their own strategic reasons? Or is it that they have altered their stance considering the changing Sino-Indian relations?

The Maoists have to yet spell out as to how the US could dampen the talks? They have also to convince the people at large as to what political benefits the US will bag by interfering into the existing scheme of political things in this country?

Or is it that the insurgents have been expressing their reservations on a list released by the US side which possesses no good words for the insurgency?

Be that as it may, Mr. Ram Bahadur Thapa alias Badal has expressed that as yet their insurgency does not consider the King’s moves as an act of regression. This should come as a solace to the monarch indeed.

However, what is interesting is that comrade Badal has hinted that they would very much wish to see the King face to face in order to get the mind of the King regarding the existing political situation of the country and of the now stalled peace talks as well. This is news because it is some thing very exclusive coming as it does from a "military commander" of the "new regime".

Whether the King complies with their request or takes some more time to understand the insurgency better will have to be watched. But then what is the harm if the King meets the leaders of the insurgency? After all, the rumor is that it was the monarch who seduced the insurgents to come to the talks.

Nepali politics is definitely taking interesting twists.

Deuba’s prediction regarding peace-talks

Kathmandu. The president of the Deuba congress—Sher Bahadur Deuba has predicted that the government-Maoist talks would fail.

This he said at a program organised here by his party a week ago.

" How could a King who does not wish to honor the proposals of the parliamentary parties would oblige the Maoists"?, questioned Deuba.

He further asked as to how things in this country would improve when the ground reality is that the King wishes to rule the country for long; the parliamentary parties prefer to proceed right with the 1990 constitution itself; and the Maoists have been demanding constituent assembly if not a republicanism for the moment?

These diametrically opposing demands said Deuba, forces him to conclude that the talks with the Maoists will go to the dogs.

He however, in a satirical vein maintained that the peace talks could have a positive landing if the much-publicised "Prachand-Path"-the Prachanda way, converged with "Gyanendra-Path"-the King Gyanendra way.

Former Prime Minister Deuba , however, criticised the Maoists insurgency by stating that if the Maoists could roam around villages equipped with arms, why can’t the RNA do the same?

According to Deuba, the insurgents were still active in the districts and the villages despite the agreements reached prior to the resumption of the talks in February.

In a sarcastic remark against the King, Deuba said that had the King been competent enough he should have conducted elections already but has failed so far. Drawing a meaning from the King’s inability to conduct the elections, Deuba hinted that it meant that the King wished to rule the country directly for some more time to come.

Does this mean that Deuba’s relations with the Palace were still far from satisfactory?

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