Submit your Article

The political document presented by CPN (Maoist Center) Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal at the party’s eighth national convention packs in some familiar communist tropes: the street as the ultimate venue of ‘struggle’, the US as a war-mongering global hegemon that must be resisted, and the dangerous designs of national and national reactionaries and anti-revolutionaries who are trying to undo the revolutionary changes the Maoists helped usher in. The document says the MCC compact will be approved only after amendments and only on the basis of broad political consensus.

All this was expected. But therein is also an admission that the post-2006 achievements are under threat largely due to the mother Maoist party’s own weaknesses, chief among them lack of political and ideological clarity, and ‘divisions and anarchy’ in the party organization. The document, prepared by Dahal, is bang on. But if this analysis is correct, then Dahal, who has been at the party’s top position for nearly three decades, must shoulder the bulk of the blame for the steady decline in his party’s popularity.

Also read: Editorial: End House obstruction 

If KP Sharma Oli has a near complete hold over CPN-UML, then Dahal’s monopoly over CPN (Maoist Center) is stronger still. Following the voluntary ouster from the party of Baburam Bhattarai, no one comes remotely close to challenging his leadership of CPN (Maoist Center). This is deliberate. With his keen nose for power, Dahal has over the years systematically dismantled any opposition to his leadership. Fed up by Dahal’s lack of ideological clarity and his tendency to impose his persona on the party, one after another of his comrades, from Bhattarai to Mohan Baidya, left his side. Dahal’s ideological incoherence and his tendency to promise everything to everyone have backfired; the once ‘fierce one’ has become just another political leader.

Sadly, Nepali politics has come to be dominated by individuals—KP Oli, Sher Bahadur Deuba, Dahal himself. The cult of personality is especially strong in Nepali communist parties, and no more so than in the Maoist party. What they put in their official documents is really meaningless. 

The main opposition CPN-UML’s continued obstruction of the federal lower house is unseemly. UML has been holding the house hostage since September, accusing Speaker Agni Sapkota of bias. UML has been demanding that Sapkota take action against its 14 renegade MPs who split to form CPN (Unified Socialist)—or resign. But Sapkota refused to do so after the Election Commission registered the new party, thus validating the split. Moreover, the case is sub judice in the Supreme Court.

Surely, UML lawmakers are aware that the house cannot take up a sub judice case. But that is a technical matter. More importantly, as representatives of one of the two oldest running democratic parties in the country, it is hard to believe they don’t understand the parliament’s sanctity. That disrupting this place for deliberation of vital national issues for months on end hampers governance and slows development works.

UML Chairman KP Sharma Oli is smarting from his ouster as prime minister back in July, when the Supreme Court invalidated his decision to dissolve parliament and ruled that Nepali Congress President Sher Bahadur Deuba takes his place as prime minister. He wants to exact revenge on the ex-UML MPs whose support now underpins the Deuba government. It is sad to see a national leader of his stature get so petty, and impede deliberations in ‘people’s chamber’ for what is a personal agenda.

Also read: Editorial: What to expect of Deuba? 

Oli says he wants elections at the earliest and voters will vindicate his decision to dissolve the house and call for a fresh vote. If so, why are he and his party so hung up on settling personal scores through the parliament? Why don’t they rather help the government clear all hurdles to timely polls? The federal government, after all, is bound to hold all three levels of election within a year.

This suggests Oli is unsure of his electoral prospects. Or he would not try so desperately to besmirch the image of his opponents to make himself look good. To reclaim power, Oli and his party should be busy finalizing their electoral agenda rather than resorting to such undemocratic shenanigans.  

Sher Bahadur Deuba’s failings as a national and party leader are well-known. He is notorious for all kinds of wheeling and dealing to remain in power. But as a five-time prime minister and a repeat Nepali Congress president, this might also be the right time to revisit his signature strengths: his unmatched organization prowess, his keen sense of the shifting sands of power, and his ability to get the right people to back him at the right time. Having secured a thumping victory in the race for party presidency, the 75-year-old seems to be at his politicking best. 

But what next? Can Deuba improve on Nepali Congress’s performance in the previous elections? If the 2017 provisional and federal elections are any guide, his public appeal seems to be shrinking and, frankly, he hasn’t done much in the past four years to make them rethink. The Congress party could have done with a new leader, just as there is a desperate need for churning at the top of the CPN-UML and CPN (Maoist Center). But now that the party and the country is stuck with Deuba, what can we expect of him?

Also read: Editorial: The Nepali Congress tamasha 

One good aspect of Deuba’s leadership is his ability to hold the loosest of coalitions, something he has done during all of his five tenures as prime minister. The presence of such an accommodating figure at the top of national politics bodes well for the otherwise fissiparous polity. Also, we should not forget Deuba’s role in successfully holding the 2017 elections, even if the results didn’t go his party’s way. Arguably, Deuba is more of a conciliator than KP Sharma Oli or Pushpa Kamal Dahal, the country’s two other top leaders.

If Deuba can again preside over timely and free and fair elections, he will have played a vital role. That is a very low bar to clear for the country’s executive head and the chief of its oldest and traditionally most powerful political party. But then Deuba is only a reflection of the state of our broader polity and society. Transformation in Nepal is a slow process.  

Nepali Congress, the party that has led every major political change in the country in the past seven decades, now appears to be a shell of its former self.  Perhaps for the first time in the party’s history, going into its General Convention, there has been zero debate on its future ideological course or the country’s burning issues. All the debates rather seem centered on which of the many candidates vying for leadership, largely based on their ability to dispense patronage, will prevail. Things couldn’t be more dispiriting.

Right now, the country is mired in some bitter ideological questions, regarding the future of its federal and republican structure, the judiciary’s independence, a long-running pandemic that is still not under control, a sinking economy and growing inequality—and all that the party traditionally at the vanguard of the Nepali democratic process is concerned about is choosing a new leader. That would not be such a bad thing if the top NC leaders were contesting based on their ideological differences and differing visions for the party and the country. No, all they seem concerned about is getting elected in any which way possible.

Also read: Editorial: Exclusionary UML 

Whosoever becomes the next Nepali Congress head, he—and it will be a ‘he’—will fail to inspire broader confidence. All the candidates in the fray are old faces, and people, more than anything else, would like to see a fresh face at the top. Also, the weakening of the political parties across the board could translate into another fractured mandate in the next set of elections, with all its attendant problems.

The election of Rajendra Lingden as the RPP chief is, in this way, a breath of fresh air, for he is both a new generation leader and has a solid ideological footing. Yet he leads a political party that wants to take the country back decades by reviving monarchy and Hindu state. It is ironic that the RPP should be teaching our more mature democratic parties the way to elect a new leader.