CPN-UML correcting course

Yuba Nath Lamsal

Politics is supposed to be a power to empower the people—mostly the powerless and voiceless. That is what democratic polity should strive for and that should be the fundamental principle of democracy. Unfortunately though, this is not the case in the contemporary democratic politics of Nepal. So Nepal’s politics is most unpredictable. Morale, values and principles hardly matter in Nepali politics and what matters is power.

It is, thus, said ‘politics makes strange bedfellow’. This is what exactly has happened in the internal politics of the CPN-UML—the second largest party in the Constituent Assembly. In the newer twist of events in the internal politics of CPN-UML, the arch rivals have become bosom friends, whereas friends have turned foes. What made these two arch rivals come together and form an alliance? Is this their own making or some external factors, too, are behind this? Will Oli-Bamdev alliance will go be permanent arrangement that will go a long way or this is just a temporary truce to be broken anytime? These are some of the questions that remain unanswered. Perhaps the future events and developments alone will unravel the reality.

To understand the real nature of equation and behavior of the UML leaders, one needs to go little back to its history. The CPN-UML is an offshoot of the mainstream Communist Party of Nepal founded by late Puspalal Shrestha way back in 1949. Within the short period of its founding, the party suffered factionalism and personality clash, which ultimately split the party and disintegrated the communist movement in Nepal. On the surface, it was the ideological orientation and political line that led the leaders to break the party but the real motive of the split was personal rivalry among senior leaders in which external factors too played role. In course of time, the party was disintegrated into different factions, while at the same time, some efforts were made to bring different splintered groups into one umbrella and create a strong revolutionary party. The CPN-UML was formed and reorganized due to this process made by some enthusiastic youth revolutionary leaders.

A violent peasant movement broke out in 1971 in Jhapa of eastern Nepal led and supported by revolutionary communist youths, in which some landlords were assassinated. This was the foundation of the reorganization of a new revolutionary communist party in the name of Communist Party of Nepal (Marxist-Leninist), which was later renamed as the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist and Leninist).

The formation of the CPN-ML was a process of reunifying and re-organizing the disintegrated communist movement in Nepal. The CPN-ML was formed in 1978 by bringing together some splinter communist groups especially working in east Nepal, thanks largely to the initiative taken by Chandra Prakash Mainali or CP Mainali, who also became its first general secretary.  Right after the formation, this party made tremendous efforts in consolidating the organizational base nationwide and become a mainstream party. The unification process continued and major shift in its organizational life witnessed in 1990 when yet another unification process took place. This unification was between the Communist Party of Nepal (Marxist) led by Manmohan Adhikari and the CPN-ML led by Madan Bhandari and the new party’s name was given the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist and Leninist) or CPN-UML, which is one of the dominant parliamentary communist parties at present.

After this unification the CPN-UML went through a major shift in ideological standing so was its leadership and factional rivalry. The then general secretary Madan Bhandari introduced People’s Multi-Party Democracy or PMPD as its political line clearly departing from new democracy and it was adopted by the party in its fifth national congress. This also marked the shift in its guiding principle from Marxism-Leninism-Mao Zedong Thought to Marxism-Leninism.

Since the fifth national congress, the party has seen much up and down in its organizational structure, popular base, political journey and internal power equation but the PMDP has continued to remain the guiding political philosophy.  But party’s principal leadership has gone to the hands of those who were opposed to the PMPD. When the party adopted PMPD as its guiding political philosophy in the fifth congress, Man Mohan Adhikari was chosen as its chief or chairman, who was critical of the PMPD right from the beginning. Adhikari continued to remain the party chief until his demise and the position of party chairperson was kept suspended until the ninth national congress. When the position of party chairperson was revived in the ninth congress, another critic of the PMPD Jhala Nath Khanal was quick to grab the post, which could not have been more ironic than this. The irony is: party’s political line is PMPD whereas its principal leadership has always been someone who has opposed the political line including Jhalanath Khanal.

This irony and discrepancy in the political line and principal leadership is the fundamental reason behind factional fighting and split in the party. As CPN-UML abandoned Mao Thought as its guiding political philosophy, the CPN-Maoist was quick to cash in on this situation and adopted Maoism as its principal political principle based on which it launched a decade long insurgency. The contradiction in the political line and the principal leadership led the CPN-UML to split in which a major section of the leaders and cadres including Bamdev Gautam quit the party. Although Bamdev Gautam returned to the party again majority of the leaders and cadres did not follow Gautam instead they either joined the UCPN-Maoist or remained inactive.

The CPN-UML is a party with different factions and groups fighting one another. If we look at the present power equation in the party, there seem to be two large factions and several other sub-factions within these two factions. The two large factions include: KP Oli-Bamdev Gautam faction and Jhalanath Khanal-Madhav Nepal faction. There are four factions within Oli-Bamdev factions, which include Oli group, Bamdev group, Ishwar Pokhrel group and Bishnu Poudel group. In the Khanal-Nepal faction too, two groups exist and function. They are Nepal faction and Khanal group. These factions and sub factions do not trust one another and are always at loggerheads to have upper hand in power and underestimate and weaken the other group.

This is the new power equation in the CPN-UML at present. But it constantly keeps on changing. It was different until a few weeks and a few months ago and it may change in future as well. Until a few months ago, a different kind of equation had existed in the CPN-UML, which has now taken a completely U-turn.  During the eighth national congress of the party held in Butwal, senior leaders like Jhalanath Khanal, Bamdev Gautam, Ishwar Pokhrel alike were together. Madhav Nepal chose to remain virtually indifferent. In the fierce fight for the post of chairperson of the party, Oli challenged Khanal but was defeated.

There were several factors behind Khanal’s victory and Oli’s defeat. Firstly, Khanal was the only senior leader who had won the election for Constituent Assembly and majority representatives saw Khanal as a possible savior of the party. Secondly, Madhav Nepal, who had earlier resigned from the post of general secretary on moral ground after the party lost the election, opted not to side with any of the two contenders. The third and important was Ishwar Pokhrel factor, whose presence and influence in the CPN-UML’s organizational base is strong. Pokhrel is known in the CPN-UML circle as the shrewd strategist and whichever camp he sides with becomes strong. Pokhrel supported Khanal for party chief.

After the eight congress, Nepal and Oli came together to build an alliance against Khanal faction.  But Khanal faction remained relatively stronger despite OLI-Nepal alliance. The power equation changed in the CPN-UML once Ishwar Pokhrel changed his loyalty and joined Oli camp detracting Khanal. At the same time, Madhav Nepal too changed his camp and developed close relations with Khanal and he kept distance from Oli. But this new alliance had not made much difference in earlier power equation in the CPN-UML. Khanal had still been maintaining slightly upper hand in the party. It changed once Bamdev Gautam changed camp that made Oli faction more influential and powerful. This was visible in the recently held election of UML parliamentary party election in which KP Oli comfortably won over Khanal with 23 votes out of 173.

As Oli appears to be stronger in the party, he is likely to be elected as the chairman of the CPN-UML in the ninth national congress to be held in a few months. Once Oli takes the helms of party’s leadership, the earlier discrepancy and contradiction will be over. Be it good or bad, party’s leadership should be given to one whose political line is adopted. This is a general practice in any party and more so in the communist party. Since PMPD is the guiding principle of the party, its leadership also should be given to its advocate and supporters but not its critics. KP Oli and Bamdev are the vocal advocate of the PMPD and Oli is, therefore, would be right choice for the CPN-UML.