Discrepancy in Rhetoric and Actions
By Yuba Nath Lamsal
The consensus is a buzz word in the present day politics of Nepal. The political parties—big or small—are talking tall of consensus and cooperation every now and then. However, the consensus seems to be elusive, despite rhetoric of the parties. This is so because of the arrogance and partisan interest of the political parties themselves.
The fact-sheet of the Constituent Assembly, which has the twin responsibilities of writing a new constitution and also working as a parliament, requires the parties to work together and to cooperate with one another to accomplish both these responsibilities. No political party has the mandate to form and run the government on its own strength. Although the Maoists are in the position of the largest party, they still do not have the required number of seats in the Constituent Assembly to form the government. It must acquire support of at least one of the major parties. However, it is even more difficult for other parties to run the government. They must take along at least a dozen parties if they want to lead the government. This is the case with the present government as it is the coalition of 22 parties. But given the present political equation and the nature of the job that the government has to accomplish, the consensus is a must.
More difficult and complicated is the process of the constitution writing. Unless the three major parties collaborate, the constitution cannot be written and promulgated. The Interim Constitution explicitly states that a two-third majority is required to pass any provision of the constitution that is being written. No single party has that strength. Even if all parties other than the Maoists unite, they will not have a two-third majority in the Constituent Assembly. That means the participation of the Maoists and their active and meaningful support is a must to pass the constitution. Without the Maoist support, the constitution cannot be written and peace process cannot be concluded.
But there are efforts from certain quarters both at home and abroad to isolate and corner the Maoists in this process. At home, the rightist and reactionary forces are acting at the behest of certain external anti-communist powers to keep the Maoists away from the political process. This would not be in the interest of the country. Any political move without the Maoist participation may not be successful in the present political scenario and that would be a disaster for the country. It must be taken into note that the Constituent Assembly and the republican set up are the Maoist agenda. The country would not have been republic without the Maoist support. The Maoists are, thus, the powerful agent for the present political change. Thus, isolating them from the political process would be detrimental to the democratization process in the country.
The Maoists are no doubt are communists and believe that ‘power comes out of the barrel of gun’. But one thing we must not forget is that it was the Maoists support and participation was crucial in bringing about political change three years ago. When the now deposed king had taken over power, marginalized the political parties and suppressed the democratic rights of the people, the parties were desperate as their street protest against the king had not gained any momentum. People were very reluctant to extend support to the parties and come to the street in support of the parties. This was because the parties had betrayed the people in the past and failed to keep their pledges made in the past. In the beginning political parties were against joining hand with the Maoists for any political activities. But circumstances compelled the parties to align with all anti-king forces so that their movement for restoration of democracy would succeed. It is against this background, the 12 point agreement was reached between the then seven political parties and the insurgent Maoist party. The election to the Constituent Assembly, writing a new constitution and republican system were the Maoist agenda which were accepted by the seven parties. This made the joint movement against the king possible which not only restored democracy but also abolished the monarchy ultimately.
Until the constituent Assembly election, the unity among the parties worked. Soon after the election results were out which placed the Maoist on the largest position, the problem started. The election results were shocking as no political party and even election watchers and analysts had not expected that result. What was more shocking was the poorer performance of the Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML. The Maoists who were in supporting role had been cooperating with other parties. But when the Maoists emerged in a leading position and other parties were reduced to supporting role, the strategy of the Congress and the UML changed. Right from the beginning, they adopted the strategy of keeping the Maoists out of power. It is under this design that the formation of the new government was not allowed even four months after the election. But finally, other parties could not prove their majority and the Maoists were allowed to form the government.
But the political conspiracy continued even after the formation of the Maoist-led government. The Nepali Congress chose to remain out of power simply because its conditions were not accepted by the Maoists. The Congress right from the beginning was trying to topple the Maoist-led government. The CPN-UML, too, was not happy with the Maoists. The strategy of CPN-UML was to weaken the Maoists because the CPN-UML cannot regain as long as the Maoist are strong. The opportune moment arrived when the Maoists took unilateral decision to sack the then army chief. It provided the UML an excuse to walk out of the government.
The Maoists, too, are responsible for their failure. Although the issue of civilian supremacy they have been raising is logical, their inner motive is something different. It was definitely a failure of the Maoists not to take the coalition partners into confidence and convince them on the rationale and necessity of sacking the army chief. They should have waited three more months just to let Rookmangud Katwal to retire under regular process. If the Maoists had waited three more months, they would have been in the government even today. The Maoists are, thus, responsible for their departure from power.
The blame game has intensified and political of confrontation has replaced the politics of consensus. This would only delay and derail the constitution writing and peace process. Although it is the responsibility of all political parties to complete the constitution writing and peace process, it is the question who should lead role in this historic process. The parties in the government have to take the responsibility of leading this process. But the government must win the confidence of all parties in successfully writing the constitution and completing the peace process. But the government has not shown its ability to win the trust of all including the Maoists.
It seems that political parties are less concerned over the timely writing of the constitution and early conclusion of the ongoing peace process. Had they been serious on their promises and pledges, they would not have played the blame game and resort to the politics of confrontation. The Maoists are currently protesting both in parliament and on the streets. But a little has been done to address the concerns of the Maoists and end the political deadlock.
Given the political deadlock and the parties’ adamant posture, it looks that the political parties are more problem creators rather than solution seekers. Most of the problems that we are facing are created by the political parties and politicians. They are the major hurdle on the path of resolving the country’s pressing problems and completing the ongoing political and peace process. Under these circumstances, parties and leaders are need to rectify their mistakes and demonstrate little more sacrifice and flexibility to facilitate the political and constitution writing process. Otherwise, there is a chance of the country again sliding into the quagmire of conflict.
The consensus is a buzz word in the present day politics of Nepal. The political parties—big or small—are talking tall of consensus and cooperation every now and then. However, the consensus seems to be elusive, despite rhetoric of the parties. This is so because of the arrogance and partisan interest of the political parties themselves.
The fact-sheet of the Constituent Assembly, which has the twin responsibilities of writing a new constitution and also working as a parliament, requires the parties to work together and to cooperate with one another to accomplish both these responsibilities. No political party has the mandate to form and run the government on its own strength. Although the Maoists are in the position of the largest party, they still do not have the required number of seats in the Constituent Assembly to form the government. It must acquire support of at least one of the major parties. However, it is even more difficult for other parties to run the government. They must take along at least a dozen parties if they want to lead the government. This is the case with the present government as it is the coalition of 22 parties. But given the present political equation and the nature of the job that the government has to accomplish, the consensus is a must.
More difficult and complicated is the process of the constitution writing. Unless the three major parties collaborate, the constitution cannot be written and promulgated. The Interim Constitution explicitly states that a two-third majority is required to pass any provision of the constitution that is being written. No single party has that strength. Even if all parties other than the Maoists unite, they will not have a two-third majority in the Constituent Assembly. That means the participation of the Maoists and their active and meaningful support is a must to pass the constitution. Without the Maoist support, the constitution cannot be written and peace process cannot be concluded.
But there are efforts from certain quarters both at home and abroad to isolate and corner the Maoists in this process. At home, the rightist and reactionary forces are acting at the behest of certain external anti-communist powers to keep the Maoists away from the political process. This would not be in the interest of the country. Any political move without the Maoist participation may not be successful in the present political scenario and that would be a disaster for the country. It must be taken into note that the Constituent Assembly and the republican set up are the Maoist agenda. The country would not have been republic without the Maoist support. The Maoists are, thus, the powerful agent for the present political change. Thus, isolating them from the political process would be detrimental to the democratization process in the country.
The Maoists are no doubt are communists and believe that ‘power comes out of the barrel of gun’. But one thing we must not forget is that it was the Maoists support and participation was crucial in bringing about political change three years ago. When the now deposed king had taken over power, marginalized the political parties and suppressed the democratic rights of the people, the parties were desperate as their street protest against the king had not gained any momentum. People were very reluctant to extend support to the parties and come to the street in support of the parties. This was because the parties had betrayed the people in the past and failed to keep their pledges made in the past. In the beginning political parties were against joining hand with the Maoists for any political activities. But circumstances compelled the parties to align with all anti-king forces so that their movement for restoration of democracy would succeed. It is against this background, the 12 point agreement was reached between the then seven political parties and the insurgent Maoist party. The election to the Constituent Assembly, writing a new constitution and republican system were the Maoist agenda which were accepted by the seven parties. This made the joint movement against the king possible which not only restored democracy but also abolished the monarchy ultimately.
Until the constituent Assembly election, the unity among the parties worked. Soon after the election results were out which placed the Maoist on the largest position, the problem started. The election results were shocking as no political party and even election watchers and analysts had not expected that result. What was more shocking was the poorer performance of the Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML. The Maoists who were in supporting role had been cooperating with other parties. But when the Maoists emerged in a leading position and other parties were reduced to supporting role, the strategy of the Congress and the UML changed. Right from the beginning, they adopted the strategy of keeping the Maoists out of power. It is under this design that the formation of the new government was not allowed even four months after the election. But finally, other parties could not prove their majority and the Maoists were allowed to form the government.
But the political conspiracy continued even after the formation of the Maoist-led government. The Nepali Congress chose to remain out of power simply because its conditions were not accepted by the Maoists. The Congress right from the beginning was trying to topple the Maoist-led government. The CPN-UML, too, was not happy with the Maoists. The strategy of CPN-UML was to weaken the Maoists because the CPN-UML cannot regain as long as the Maoist are strong. The opportune moment arrived when the Maoists took unilateral decision to sack the then army chief. It provided the UML an excuse to walk out of the government.
The Maoists, too, are responsible for their failure. Although the issue of civilian supremacy they have been raising is logical, their inner motive is something different. It was definitely a failure of the Maoists not to take the coalition partners into confidence and convince them on the rationale and necessity of sacking the army chief. They should have waited three more months just to let Rookmangud Katwal to retire under regular process. If the Maoists had waited three more months, they would have been in the government even today. The Maoists are, thus, responsible for their departure from power.
The blame game has intensified and political of confrontation has replaced the politics of consensus. This would only delay and derail the constitution writing and peace process. Although it is the responsibility of all political parties to complete the constitution writing and peace process, it is the question who should lead role in this historic process. The parties in the government have to take the responsibility of leading this process. But the government must win the confidence of all parties in successfully writing the constitution and completing the peace process. But the government has not shown its ability to win the trust of all including the Maoists.
It seems that political parties are less concerned over the timely writing of the constitution and early conclusion of the ongoing peace process. Had they been serious on their promises and pledges, they would not have played the blame game and resort to the politics of confrontation. The Maoists are currently protesting both in parliament and on the streets. But a little has been done to address the concerns of the Maoists and end the political deadlock.
Given the political deadlock and the parties’ adamant posture, it looks that the political parties are more problem creators rather than solution seekers. Most of the problems that we are facing are created by the political parties and politicians. They are the major hurdle on the path of resolving the country’s pressing problems and completing the ongoing political and peace process. Under these circumstances, parties and leaders are need to rectify their mistakes and demonstrate little more sacrifice and flexibility to facilitate the political and constitution writing process. Otherwise, there is a chance of the country again sliding into the quagmire of conflict.
Comments
Post a Comment