Submit your Article

The Pushpa Kamal Dahal-led government has completed its 100 days in office. While the government has come up with a long-list of accomplishments, experts and observers rate its performance as dismal. In this context, Kamal Dev Bhattarai  of ApEx sat down with  Bimalendra Nidhi, senior leader of Nepali Congress, a key coalition partner, to talk about the performance of the government, future of the coalition government, and its foreign policy orientation. Excerpts: How do you assess the performance of this government in its first 100 days? I have taken the government's 100-day performance in a normal and comfortable way. While talking about a government’s performance, we have to consider the popular mandate given through elections, as it determines the strength of parties represented in Parliament. This strength has a bearing on the formation of a government. At this point, government formation is an important development. This does not mean that the government has failed to perform well. Usually, experts review the performance of the government after the completion of its 100 days, but we have to accept the reality that we had to invest our time and energy to form the government itself. So, the government’s performance should be viewed from this perspective. There are already questions regarding the future of this coalition. Do you think it will sustain for a full-five-year term? This coalition will remain intact for a full five-year term. There will be changes in the government leadership but the parliament won’t be dissolved before it completes its full term. In our context, we have to accept a slightly different definition of political stability. Parliamentary stability should be the yardstick of political stability, instead of government’s. This is because previously, there was the provision of parliament dissolution before its full term, and such a provision still exists in many countries. But we have adopted a new provision that doesn’t allow the prime minister to dissolve the parliament. I want to assure everyone that this parliament will remain for five years. The current coalition will also remain intact. It’s only that the country will get three prime ministers in the next five years. Incumbent Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal will step down after 2.5 years to hand over the reins to CPN (Unified Socialist) Chairman Madhav Kumar Nepal, who will in turn cede the office to Nepali Congress President Sher Bahadur Deuba. The Deuba government will be in charge when the country heads for next general elections. This is a tentative agreement among coalition partners. What about the foreign policy priorities of this coalition government? Nepal’s foreign policy is not constant because there has always been some disparities and mistakes when a new government is formed. I want to say firmly that Nepal has two neighbors—India and China—and our relationship with India is a special one due to various factors such as language, culture, civilizational linkages, and open borders. These factors make our relationship with India entirely different than that of China. If we compare our relationship with two neighbors, it is obvious, we have to give more importance to India. Why is the relationship with India different from that of China? India has adopted “neighborhood first” policy but what does it really entail?  India should demonstrate this policy in practice. I do not know how this policy was coined but let me put some opinion on how neighbors are taken in our society. In Nepali, neighbor means ‘chhimeki’. With chhimeki, we have both bitter and cordial relationships but we do not take this bitter relationship to the point of enmity.  Relationships among chhimeki are not only about formal meetings and engagements. Informal engagement is equally important, and we engage in personal-level relationships with our chhimeki. On the one hand, there will be a respectful and formal relationship, on the other an informal, open and loose network. But our relationship with neighbors is going to become like a regimented barracks, which is not helpful for both countries. Indian leaders and people have always stood by our side in all our democratic movements. Similarly, Nepali leaders have supported the independence movement of India. We should not take open and frank discussions between Nepal and India as a dispute, or interference in internal affairs. When it comes to our relationship with China, there are cultural, linguistic and other disparities. China is a communist country, Nepal is a democratic country, and so is India. Cordial ties between two democracies are normal, just as China maintains good ties with other communist countries of the world. But since Nepal is not a communist country and is unlikely to become one, China should not conduct its foreign policy with the motive of bringing a communist regime in Kathmandu. It seems that India and China are competing to exert their influence in Kathmandu. What is your view on this?   There should not be competition between India and China in Kathmandu. Veteran Nepali Congress leaders Krishna Prasad Bhattarai, Ganesh Man Singh and Mahendra Naryan Nidhi used to say, “Chinese leaders are ready to provide us economic and other assistance but that is always lesser than what India is providing us.” There was a time when Chinese leaders used to advise our leaders to maintain a cordial relationship with India. I have personally experienced the spirit of such goodwill from senior Chinese leaders during my trip to Beijing in the past. They used to advise us to give due priority to our relationship with India. I can only hope that the Chinese leaders maintain that same spirit of friendship and cordiality today.

Pokhara, a scenic city in western Nepal, is one of the major tourism centers in the country. However, the tourism industry in the city is mired in crisis. It was the Covid-19 pandemic that devastated the tourism sector followed by the liquidity crunch and skyrocketing borrowing rates that added to the difficulties of tourism businesses. In a conversation with Smita Adhikari of ApEx, Pom Narayan Shrestha, President of the Pokhara Tourism Council talks about the problems surrounding Pokhara tourism and the kind of support entrepreneurs are seeking from the government. Excerpts: Official data show a significant increase in tourist arrivals in the country lately. What is the real situation of tourism in Pokhara? Tourism in Pokhara is facing its worst period. The situation is even worse than during the Covid-19 pandemic. It is because almost 80 percent of tourism entrepreneurs here in Pokhara are in great difficulty in terms of repaying the loans they availed to recover from the losses of the pandemic. We have been looking for the government's support. If the government fails to bail us out immediately, the tourism industry in Pokhara will sink further. Why does the tourism industry in Pokhara and tourism entrepreneurs require prompt intervention from the government? We had held high hopes from Visit Nepal 2020 which the government launched in early 2020. However, the breakout of the Covid-19 pandemic in March 2020 hit us hard. The tourism entrepreneurs had undertaken special projects and borrowed a huge amount of money for business expansion in view of the tourism campaign. All those investments and expansions have turned into a liability due to the pandemic which forced us to shut down our hotel/restaurant properties for months. When the flow of tourists stopped suddenly after the global health emergency was announced, these investments remained unproductive. Almost 70 percent of tourism entrepreneurs have a high burden of loans at present. The government must take us out of this precarious situation. Has the tourism industry returned to the pre-pandemic level? Tourism in Pokhara is yet to come out from the impact of the pandemic. The arrival of tourists has not recovered to the pre-pandemic level. The Yeti Airlines aircraft crash further hit Pokhara tourism when it was trying to come out from the impact of the pandemic. The hotels in Pokhara experienced a lot of cancellations following the crash. How many people and organizations here in Pokhara depend on the tourism sector? How have they contributed to development? There are almost 1,300 hotels running in and around Pokhara. Among them, five percent are star hotel properties. Almost 60 percent of hotels in Pokhara have been providing high-standard services, especially targeting foreign tourists. Similarly, there are almost 200 trekking and travel agencies operating here. Hotels are actually the most influential taxpayers of Pokhara. Why should there be more focus on Pokhara to make it convenient for tourism? Pokhara has more resources than other cities in Nepal.  Pokhara is the entry point of world-renowned trekking routes like Annapurna and Mardi Trek. Almost half a dozen mountains over 8,000 meters such as Annapurna, Machhapuchhre, Manaslu, Dhawalagiri are located in this region. On the other hand, a number of wetlands and green hills along with scenic lakes have added value to Pokhara's tourism. The onus lies on the government to prioritize resource allocation for further improving tourism infrastructure and transforming Pokhara into an international tourism center in the true sense. Are you saying that Pokhara has been marginalized in regard to resource allocation? Yes, to some extent. It is because the government and the central bank have not brought programs and policies to support the tourism sector despite knowing the plight of this sector after the pandemic. We have frequently gone to various government agencies asking for a rescue but they did not hear us. Similarly,  Nepal Tourism Board is not working in productive ways as a huge amount of its budget has been frozen. The government also hasn't shown interest in cooperating with us while developing tourism infrastructures here. The Pokhara Regional International Airport is one example in this regard. What do tourism entrepreneurs want from the government which would help tourism in Pokhara regain its previous glory? We are looking for an extension of the time to repay the loans. We should be given an additional two years time to complete the loan repayment. However, banks and financial institutions have been knocking at our doors, pressing us to pay the loans immediately. We also want single-digit interest rates on our loans till the flow of tourists returns to the pre-pandemic levels.

As the CPN (Maoist Center) supported Nepali Congress over CPN-UML in the presidential poll, UML left the government and Congress joined the Pushpa Kamal Dahal-led cabinet. Pratik Ghimire of ApEx talked to UML leader Pradeep Gyawali about the evolving political situation after the poll.

How do you see the current coalition led by Dahal? Will it sustain for five years?

This coalition is unnatural to the core. The coalition partners are together only for petty interests. If they were sensitive toward national interest, why would they drift apart after the presidential poll? And there is no chance of this coalition lasting five years. It will break apart soon and the erstwhile partners will start fighting for their own interests.

Why do you think Dahal betrayed UML?

Consider these three factors. The first one is the fact that Dahal is well-known for his opportunist and volatile behavior. He has done this to every political party and no one knows this better than UML. Yet, we gave him the benefit of the doubt. The second thing is his fear psychosis. He thought his interest couldn’t be served while being with UML as we had a mechanism where the government had to come clean on its wrong moves at coalition partner meetings.

We talked about service delivery, good governance and national interest, which Dahal didn’t want to follow. The involvement of international powers is the third factor. We saw the officials of foreign nations manipulating the government to serve their national interests. If we were in the government, we would not have let such things happen. As for Dahal, he wanted to serve international interests.

How will UML play the role of the main opposition?

As the main opposition, we will have two major roles to play. For us, this is the right time to reorganize the party. For a long time, we were in the government and unable to build the party properly. We will utilize this time to rebuild the party from the grassroots. We have already started campaigns to make the UML a strong national force. We will raise people’s voices from the parliament and from the streets, if necessary. We will not let the public suffer. We will do everything to make the government accountable.

Is there any possibility of an NC-UML coalition?

After the Nov 20 poll results came out, the Congress and the UML should have collaborated to form a government in the national interest because the people had given us—not the small parties—the mandate. We formally proposed the Congress for a coalition, but they ignored us. Amid public frustration, such a government had become necessary for democracy and stability of the political system. But then the Congress had other plans. The scenario has changed and there’s no chance of an NC-UML coalition, for now. But if the Congress wants to form a coalition with us in the national interest, we are open for discussion.

As a former foreign minister, what do you have to say on this government’s foreign policy?

I don’t have much expectations from this government. I hope that they don’t make things worse. None of the neighbors trusts us. We have lost international credibility. We were not invited to the Raisina Dialogue. We were invited to the Boao Forum, but the prime minister shunned it. We are in a difficult situation. Even with the US, the Maoist party, as a partner in the then coalition government, made the MCC Compact controversial by signing on it, then protesting against it and finally playing a role in its endorsement through the parliament. Why would the international community believe us?

And recently, the way Dahal canceled the visit of the incumbent foreign minister to the Human Rights Council’s conference and sent an unauthorized person to the event has made our foreign policy and presence immature. That conference was very important for us as we could have shared so many things with the international community regarding our progress and achievements on the human rights front.  

Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) pulled out its support from the Maoist-led government as soon as Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal decided to change the coalition. The pro-Hindu and pro-unitary party seemed out of place when it was in the government. Now, in the opposition role, the party is planning to raise its demands for reinstatement of Hindu state, monarchy and unitary government both in Parliament and from streets. A party delegation even met former king Gyanendra Shah recently. In this context, Pratik Ghimire of ApEx talked to RPP lawmaker and leader Dhawal Shamsher Rana.

Why did your party leave the government?

We didn’t want to involve our party in the dirty politics of Dahal and other coalition partners. It had not even  been 45 days since we joined the government, and the prime minister collaborated with the Nepali Congress to fulfill his personal interests. We didn’t like this attitude. When we were in the government, our goal was to make it more dynamic and public-centric. But we later realized that Dahal was not interested in it.

What kind of role will RPP play as an opposition?

We will support and protest the government by analyzing the work it does. We don’t want to let the people suffer for no reason. The RPP will protest from the House as well as on the streets. 

What kind of protest is the party planning to stage?

We will hit the streets with the support of the public who are against federalism and the republic system. We will demand for a constitutional monarchy and Hindu state. 

Do you think people will trust and support your movement?

They will for sure. Is there any significant progress these republicans have done for the public to support them? No. The public is frustrated, and we will help bring back the leadership and guardianship of the king. 

What did you discuss with the former king?

It was a good conversation. We discussed contemporary political and social issues. He is frustrated about the condition of Nepalis. As we are supporting him being the head of our proposed constitutional monarchy, we discussed how we can help and support each other.