Politics: Nepal Under Perpetual Crisis

Yuba Nath Lamsal

With the fourth extension of the term of the Constituent Assembly (CA), the political parties have averted an immediate crisis in the country. Now the parties will have more leeway to push and pull in the national politics for another six months. If we are to abide by the verdict of the Supreme Court, the parties must complete all remaining tasks concerning constitution writing and the peace process within the extended life of the CA. Otherwise, the parties should go for a fresh poll or national referendum to decide the next course of our politics.

Doubt

Despite Supreme Court verdict and parties’ own commitment, there is still doubt over the intention and ability of the parties to give a country a new constitution and conclude the peace process even in the extended period of the Constituent Assembly. This question has come up more frequently ever since the life of the Constituent Assembly was first extended one and a half year ago. The doubt crept into the mind of the people not because they distrusted the parties and their leaders but because the leaders themselves failed in their duty to complete the job within the timeframe they had promised. The political parties, however, have not been able to dispel this doubt from the mind of the people.

Although the parties have failed to give the country a new constitution in three and a half years and still there is no guarantee that they would be able to accomplish it in the next six months, we have no option but to trust the parties. The country is now without any better option. We have already experienced several political models, several regimes and several alternatives in the past. But none of them could deliver goods. We experienced family oligarchy of Ranas and Shahs, multi-party regimes under constitutional monarchy and now multi-party republican system. Now there is no force left in the country to be tested. We also tested Panchas, Nepali Congress, communists, Madhesi parties and others. But there is no alternative to the parties and the world history as well as our own history has shown that seeking alternative to political parties has always proved to be disastrous.

But the parties have repeatedly been making mistakes and betrayed the people. The Nepali Congress betrayed frequently as this party remained in power for the longest period after the change of 1990. People both at home and abroad had high hopes and expectation from the first Girija Prasad-led Nepali Congress government that came to the mantle of power after general election held in 1991. Despite having comfortable majority in the parliament, the Koirala-led government failed because of Koirala’s failure to handle and manage the rift within his party. Unable to calm and control the detractors within his party, Koirala opted for a fresh election in which it lost to the CPN-UML. This was the beginning of instability and political crisis in Nepal. The result of the 1994 elections in which Congress was reduced to second force was popular response and reaction to its neglect to the people, which was a good lesson for the Congress.

When Congress failed to deliver, the people saw the CPN-UML a better alternative and they voted this party to power in 1994. Until that time the CPN-UML was a militant and disciplined force and it was viewed by all as a force capable and committed to bring about better change in the country. Perversions crept into CPN-UML once it went to power. The CPN-UML went to power several times. This party joined the government as a junior partner most of the times except the one when it led a minority government headed by late Man Mohan Adhikari for a brief period of nine months in 1994-95. The performance of the CPN-UML minority government is by far the best after the 1990 political change. However, the CPN-UML, too, followed corrupt path and betrayed the people ultimately losing public faith. Both CPN-UML and the Nepali Congress were totally got bogged down in dirty game of grabbing and retaining power by hook or crook grossly ignoring people’s fundamental interests. As power became the sole goal of the Congress and the CPN-UML, Nepal’s sovereignty came under direct threat as these two mainstream parties and some other fringe ones, too, exchanged Nepal’s national interest with power, position and perks. This created height of apathy among the people who started looking for a new alternative political force.

The monarchy was looking for an opportune time to strike back and regain its power lost in the 1990 political change. The monarchists thought that the growing public apathy on the performance of the parties could be used in favour of monarchy. However, people who had once seen the ugly days of absolute monarchy never supported any kind of move to restore power of the king. People had already tasted freedom and liberty, though limited, after the 1990 political change and they did not want to lose the hard earned freedom and liberty under any pretext. It is this reason why people did not support Gyanendra Shah’s regressive and reactionary move of taking over power and impose his absolute regime even though they were not satisfied with performance of the parties. When the king again intervened in politics, people ultimately joined hand to totally abolish monarchy.

People always searched for an alternative not from the feudal, monarchists and reactionaries but from the people and people’s force. History is witness that the rightists, reactionaries, feudalists and monarchists always resorted to conspiracy and brutal force to take over power which was resiliently resisted by the people. Monarchy could and can never be an alternative to the Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML. Although policies and programmes of the Nepali Congress, too, have rightist orientation, this is more progressive than the feudal force represented by monarchy. Nepali Congress champions capitalist democracy, which, is definitely better than feudalism because it provides more choices in politics and also helps build national capital. The CPN-UML was at one time a revolutionary communist party that believed in the Mao’s principle of ‘power comes out of the barrel of gun’. In course of time, UML changed its policies to adopt multi-party political system and liberal socialist economic policy, which was formalized under the banner of ‘People’s Multi-Party Democracy, thanks to UML’s charismatic leader late Madan Bhandari. The PMPD is the guiding principle of the CPN-UML thus transforming the UML into a social democratic party.

But the sheer neglect to people’s causes mainly on the issue concerning national interest alienated the Congress and the UML from the people, which was reflected in the Constituent Assembly election. Out of the vacuum, emerged the UCPN-Maoist (originally CPN-Maoist) with revolutionary and radical agenda. The UCPN-Maoist is a revolutionary party that still believes in Marxism, Leninism and Maoism, on the basis of which it launched a decade long insurgency in Nepal. The Maoists, thus, emerged as a clear alternative political force. People overwhelmingly supported in the Constituent Assembly election. Its revolutionary programmes were established so deeply in the mind of the people that other parties namely the Congress and UML, which were earlier opposed to revolutionary ideas, had to ultimately accept the Maoist agenda mainly under popular pressure. This was formalized in the name of 12-point agreement and Comprehensive Peace Treaty (CPA). With the signing of the CPA, the insurgency came to an end and peace process began.

Two-line Struggle

After the peace process began, UCPN-Maoist seems to have changed its tactical course focusing more on peaceful approach to achieve its long-term goal. The UCPN-Maoist seems to be in the process of transformation in a way the CPN-UML did in the 1990s decade. Now UCPN-Maoist in the very difficult juncture and great debate is going on within the party whether it should continue its earlier position of advancing revolutionary agenda and tactics or change to become a liberal communist party in the same fashion Euro-communists had once propagated. The two-line struggle in the UCPN-Maoist is heading towards its zenith, which would decide the course of action and direction, in the changed national and international situation. The fate of Nepali revolution and ongoing political process has hinged on how the Maoists’ manage their two-line struggle.

We have initiated political transformation in the country. We have made some gains in this process and a lot is yet to be done. Now it remains to be seen how the parties handle the situation and manage their intra-party imbroglio and inter-party differences on issues pertaining to political and peace process. If they manage the differences in a matured and wise manner taking the national interest above the partisan agenda, solution would be definitely found averting the political crisis permanently. Otherwise, the country would continue to remain mired in perpetual political crisis and quagmire for which the political parties and their leaders would be condemned by the history as well as our future generation.