I n d e p t h    A n a l y s i s
Election government in the making

Kathmandu: King Gyanendra’s nineteen-month long exercise to form a national government representative of all political forces in order to tackle the national situation remains illusive for the same reasons that contributed to the national crisis itself.

After two governments in which both Lokendra Bahadur Chand and Surya Bahadur Thapa were flipped on the evident agreement of the Congress and the UML in the absence of accord among themselves, this third attempt by the King has merely demonstrated the increased discord among and within the major parties that restrains them from meeting the King itself.

Having restrained their resources to put cadre in violent demonstrations against the King who in their say represents "regression", they remain at odds with themselves on the essential roadmap that would be the alternative that they must represent the King in their meeting with him and so they have checkmated to prevent the meeting itself.

As now exposed forerunner, Sher Bahadur Deuba was given the nod by the UML but the commander of the five party agitations Girija Prasad Koirala prevents the UML acknowledgement from functioning to give the coveted Prime Minister’s seat to Deuba. In the absence of public UML accord, Deuba’s appointment too is now unlikely because of the possibility of its lame-duck nature that will allow the five-party agitation to continue.

The UML on the other hand restrains Girija Prasad Koirala from acknowledging an alternative to Deuba publicly keeping the five-party option in limbo.

In fact senior UML workers have coalesced to corner Madhav Nepal into an untenable position where any seeming compromise will be portrayed as failure of the leadership. On the other hand, cornered Madhav Nepal must tug Girija Koirala’s shirttail in order to restrain him from going his separate ways in vociferous opposition to a possible Deuba appointment. The glaring impasse has left the street-agitation talking tall but without direction and the five party move must now either be radicalized to shun the Palace talks or be softened to accommodate the meeting itself.

In case both do not emanate, the King must either ask Thapa to continue or must look for an election government that must hope to bend the belligerent parties by sheer strength of public participation. In all likelihood, this will be the new meeting point around which election strategies will be drawn.

Koirala can’t digest Deuba being elevated to PM post

Kathmandu: Nepal’s stagnant politics has suddenly taken a turn. To which side the politics will turn, for good or for the worse, the impending political events will have determined its fate.

King Gyanendra’s consultations with political leaders has begun but then yet real talks with the major real political parties is yet to commence.

It is not that the King has not invited them. He has. However, the leaders of the major parliamentary parties have put forth certain preconditions which apparently has come as a real hindrance for a meeting between the leaders and the monarch.

The King has set out his own terms. Likewise, the parliamentary parties currently in agitation against regression too have their own preconditions prior to the meeting with the King. It is these two already declared preconditions from both the sides that have been creating problems for the meeting.

King Gyanendra’s conditions contained in the much publicized seven point agenda are apparently to bind the leaders from exceeding their political limits and abide by the norms of the system now in place. He also wishes that the country be provided with good governance wherein corrupt practices do not occur. In sum, the King’s intention is to see a Ram Rajya in Nepal which is simply impossible in the given context of political culture which we the Nepalese people, including the political leaders, have adopted of late.

On the other hand, the conditions set by the major political parties to the King’s perusal are equally disturbing for the monarch to concede. If he does so, though chances appear remote, he will turn out to be a titular head of the Kingdom whose hands will have been tied by the stipulations led in the changed scheme of things. At best the King will not listen to their harsh conditions simply to invite troubles for himself.

The conditions are, among others, army be under the parliament; the title of the Royalty be limited to only three top personalities in the palace and the likes.

Presuming the King’s present mood, it is unlikely that the King will willingly invite the agitating political leaders to meet him and discuss the curtailment of the rights which he and his family have been enjoying as members of the Royalty.

However, high placed sources claim that the King is ready to patch-up his differences with the political parties on his terms and that too at the earliest.

One more condition is troubling the meeting with the King. The leaders prefer not to go it alone this time for fear of being seduced by the King in private at time of the meeting. The King in the process has met several leaders, albeit of lesser significance, and has yet to see the main political leaders in agitation en masse.

The issue is whether the leaders should see the King and bargain on a collective basis or do it alone as preferred by the monarch?

Statements and clarifications apart, practically most of the leaders now in agitation appear more than pleased to see the King in private for their own unexplained political reasons. However, what comes into their way is the joint reiteration that they will now see the King collectively. This joint commitment is what is troubling the leaders individually.

Nevertheless, the temptation of the agitating leaders to seduce the King while meeting in private is increasingly becoming evident.

To put it straight, it was nonelessthan the Commander of the ongoing movement, Girija Prasad Koirala was all set to see the King Monday afternoon which however could not materialize.

Koirala had indicated the Palace that he was ready to see the King provided his movement friends languishing in custody under State Offence charges be released unconditionally and that the government lifted its ban that declared the inner Kathmandu as Conflict Prone Areas.

To the utter dismay of Koirala, the government only could comply to his first demand and the second appeal remained as it is and hence the rumor that Koirala too changed his minds at the last minute.

Though interpretations differed from head to head on Koirala’s changed stance towards the King and his sudden desire to see the King and that too in private, however, informed sources told us that Koirala’s wish to see the King had a meaning and that too a political one.

The fact is that when Koirala observed for himself that his archrival Deuba was summoned by the King and the former appeared more than pleased, Koirala could have concluded that he should see the King at any cost in order to damage the prospects of his detractor being elevated to the ranks of the prime Minister. However, things did not happen Koirala’s way. He is yet to be invited or is yet to provide green signal to the Palace that he too possessed a strong desire to see the King in private.

Koirala knows it better that he would never be awarded the prime ministerial post by King Gyanendra under the existing circumstances. However, what he understands that he could damage Deuba’s chances by convincing the King in his own fashion.

It is altogether a different matter as to how the King will take upon Koirala’s appeal even if the latter told the King not to favor Deuba at all.

Local political pundits go to the extent that Koirala could even suggest the King to continue with Surya Bahadur Thapa if he knew that King was all set to correct his constitutional aberrations from the point from where it originated and that being the sacking of an elected prime minister. This logic gets support when one looked into Koirala’s stoic silence acquire over the demand for the resignation of Thapa and his government. Koirala has not demanded Thapa’s resignation while his friends in the coalition have demanded it time and again. Here lies the significance and the crux of Koirala’s politics. After all what restricts Koirala in demanding Thapa’s resignation? Internal or some exclusive extra-territorial factor?

Koirala can face any political ordeal but can’t digest his detractor, a non-entity for him in effect, being elevated to a post, which he loved most.

Though the consultations are on, the politics continues to remain fragile. Until and unless a meeting is held in between the major political parties and the King, things will not budge.

Nepali politics going Madhav Nepal’s way

Kathmandu: The one political player that is heavy on the rest of the others is surely Madhav Kumar Nepal, the strongman of the UML.

While on the one hand Koirala is a political creature who knows no hanky-panky and is a straightforward personality, on the other, his archrival Sher Bahadur too is a known lame-duck sort of political animal who could well be cheated or misled by his colleagues even on minor political issue.

The one who is now left with is Madhav Kumar Nepal having communist credentials. He is a shrewd political leader whose manoeuvrability remains par excellence.

He is with Girija Prasad Koirala in the agitation. He is not with him at all. He is with Sher Bahadur Deuba, not included in the agitation. He is not with him because Deuba is not in the agitation.

Madhav for his own unexplained reasons supports Deuba’s agitation against regression. But equally true is the fact that he is not with Deuba’s agitation for fear of facing Koirala’s wrath.

He is with the King and prefers a solution that is acceptable to all including the King. He is not with the King for he is currently one of the major constituent that is up against the King through the agitation.

If Madhav is so, then what he is in effect?

Undoubtedly, he is playing politics with such a finesse that each of the constituents in the five-party agitation believe that Madhav and his party were with them.

The presumption of the rest of the four-party alliance against regression could be wrong should the UML is provided a political chance to rule the country.

That Madhav Nepal is playing his cards with the rest of the members of the coalition against regression came to the fore when his two strong political "aides" bluntly declared that their party, the UML, would not mind even if Deuba were elevated to the post of the next prime minister.

Later clarifications emanated from the UML quarters that the very special "two" leaders spoke on their own and favoured Deuba’s candidature and that the party not necessarily agreed to what they spoke off-the-cuff.

Politics never goes straight, it is said in the discipline of political science.

If politics is not obliged to move straight, then why should Madhav Nepal and his party be tied and not allowed to explore other available options to their benefit?

The fact is that Madhav Nepal got irritated when some Congress stalwarts declared that the Communist leader once upon a time was their consensus leader and he was not at the moment. Ram Chandra Poudel, Shailaja and Chakra Bastola were the ones who dismissed the prospects of Madhav Nepal being elevated to the ranks of the country’s next prime minister.

A highly irritated Madhav Nepal apparently could have concluded that if he is not the Prime Minister then none in the coalition deserve the right to become the prime minister. He then appears to have pushed the name of Sher Bahadur Deuba with whom he continues to enjoy comfortable "working relations". Madhav Nepal ventilated his inner feelings that he and his party would not mind if Deuba is the man the King wanted through the kind courtesy of his two exclusive friends, Ishwar Pokhrel and Jhal Nath Khanal.

The clarifications that were issued later denying this possibility were done so in order to calm down Koirala. It was and is a ploy of the UML, maintain analysts. Logic also suggests that Mr. Pokhrel and Khanal could not dare to speak such sensitive matters unless they were told to do so. The two were seasoned leaders of the UML and were in no way political-fools, as one would consider them.

The idea of the UML could be that if the party’s leader is denied the lucrative post, then still the party could accrue political benefits by sending its men in the second rank of the would-be cabinet and face the elections.

Koirala presumably sensed UML secret alliance with Deuba and appears to have hinted the UML that the party had been drifting from its earlier commitments.

The fact is also that Koirala, the commander of the agitation against the King, will tolerate neither Deuba’s elevation to the Prime Ministerial chair nor he will provide his nod in Madhav’s favor. If Koirala is not the recipient of the post, he will not allow others to occupy the post so easily. Rather, he would in that case favor his own chums like Chakra Bastola or Shailaja or even Poudel for the post of the prime minister.

To provide a tit-for-tat to Koirala’s impending moves, Madhav Nepal too has been sending signals that if Shahana Pradhan or K.P.Woli are made the consensus candidate, he would remain grateful to the rest of the coalition partners.

Lost in the process is the India factor.

Neither Koirala nor Madhav Nepal have taken this factor into account. It was not for nothing that former Indian Ambassador K.V.Rajan made a secret trip to Nepal only recently. Certainly he would have not been here if the country were not in the threshold of a change.

What the other side of the border prefers will have to be watched. Keep fingers crossed.

Can use of Article 127 unknot regression?
Deuba hopeful of reinstatement

Kathmandu: Sher Bahadur Deuba, the sacked prime minister, is the one who has been the victim of his own suggestions made to the King. A rare political event indeed.

Deuba presumably had not even imagined that the King would use the same article to sack him which he himself pushed to the King’s perusal to un-knot the tangle that had engulfed the constitution.

The fact was that the controversial article 127 which he hoped would save him from the already obtained constitutional crisis, did away with his post with a tag attached of being an "incompetent" prime minister which, say experts, he was not.

Deuba’s logic that if the King were to correct his past political blunders, he could do so by beginning from the point from where it did originate.

In Deuba’s opinion, the King can correct his past mistakes by reinstating his sacked government. If he does so, things will automatically fall in places.

Intriguing as it may appear, but the fact is that the five parties against regression do agree that the day Deuba was sacked amounted to regression. However, what they don’t agree is that Deuba’s reinstatement could be a means to correct regression and in the process do not even recognise Deuba and his party as a fully "democratic party".

For Koirala, Deuba’s archrival and president of Cong-G, Deuba’s political conglomerate was not even a political entity but simply a breakaway splinter of the party what he leads at the moment.

All said and done. Political analysts maintain that if Deuba’s logic prevailed in the Palace, how the King could oblige Deuba?

Would it be a "new appointment" of Deuba or the "reinstatement" of Deuba, the sacked prime minister?

If it is a new appointment, then it would fall in the lines of Lokendra and Surya Bahadur which apparently even Deuba would not prefer. If it is the other way then, could the use of the same controversial article 127 "reinstate" Deuba’s government and bring the derailed constitution to its original place?

New appointment or for that matter the reinstatement of Deuba’s government, analysts opine that the King will use or will have to use the same article 127 in the absence of the parliament. Does this mean that both ways, the King’s action would amount to a continuation of regression in the words of the agitating political parties?

However, Deuba’s own contention has been that if his government is reinstated, things will fall in places. Others disagree to Deuba’s explanations. Constitutional experts maintain that any government formed in the country will attain full legitimacy only after parliamentary elections are held and a new government comes to office.

In their opinion, new appointment or even the reinstatement of the sacked government will not correct regression, if it were that.

The other question: if every thing went smoothly in between the King and the agitating parties, which way could be best in correcting the acts of regression?

Is it that if Madhav or Koirala were made prime minister they would not mind being elevated to the ranks even if the same article were used? If so then, should this mean that the use of 127 amounted to an act of regression for Chand and Thapa only and not for others if those being elevated belonged to the agitating parties?

Whether to oblige Deuba or even Madhav or Koirala, the King will use 127 in any case. How that will be interpreted will have to be carefully watched.

Deuba’s judgment sounds logical that if the King wishes to correct his mistakes he could do so by honouring him again as Prime minister.

What Deuba prefers: a newly appointed prime minister or a reinstated prime minister? The million-dollar question is: Will he be allowed to become the prime minister by his declared detractors?

Thapa favours restoration of parliament!

Kathmandu: At a time when most of the agitating political parties have been demanding an outright resignation of Prime Minister Surya Bahadur Thapa, the latter is taking those demands very lightly.

Equally interesting is the fact that except Girija Prasad Koirala, the rest of the coalition partners in the agitation against regression have been demanding Thapa’s resignation to facilitate their meetings with the King.

This is interesting indeed.

Rumours are being circulated that if Thapa is pushed to the wall by the monarch for his resignation, Thapa might retaliate by demanding from the King the restoration of the now dissolved parliament through a cabinet decision.

If he does so will definitely embarrass the King who neither can oblige Thapa on technical grounds nor can summarily ignore the cabinet decision. Yet another constitutional crisis will have gripped the nation in that case.

In such an event, an annoyed Thapa can push his cabinet decision to the perusal of the King by forwarding the claim that since he enjoyed full executive powers and hence the monarch as per the constitution was obliged to act as per the cabinet’s decisions.

The ground reality is that the apex court has upheld the dissolution of the House some eighteen months ago and that the full five-year term of the now dissolved house expired only recently.

In such circumstances, the likelihood of which is fifty-fifty, how the King will proceed to tackle the emerging scenario still in its embryonic and imaginary stage will have to be watched.

Strong rumours have it that this conspiracy is the brain-child of president Koirala who enjoys comfortable relations with the latter. Perhaps it is this conspiracy that brings Thapa and Koirala even more closer.

Others say that Thapa has already communicated to the King that if his resignation brings in a conducive atmosphere in the country, he was ready to resign.

But will he resign so easily as he promises? Not so many people digest Thapa’s avowals.

Question thus arises as to whether Thapa as nation’s prime minister can appeal the King for the restoration of a parliament whose real tenure too has expired?

Opinion | Dateline | National |  5 Question  | Editorial | Letter | 2nd Impression | Views | International | Past