The Kamal Thapa-led Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) just completed a nationwide campaign to garner public support for their pet agendas of reinstating the Hindu state and monarchy. Of late senior RPP leaders have been speaking confidently about the prospect of restoring the Hindu state and monarchy, even though doing so would be unconstitutional. What explains their newfound confidence? Shashwat Acharya and Kamal Dev Bhattarai met RPP chairman Thapa for some insights.
We should honor public sentiment and declare the country a Hindu state
The Kamal Thapa-led Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) just completed a nationwide campaign to garner public support for their pet agendas of reinstating the Hindu state and monarchy. Of late senior RPP leaders have been speaking confidently about the prospect of restoring the Hindu state and monarchy, even though doing so would be unconstitutional. What explains their newfound confidence? Shashwat Acharya and Kamal Dev Bhattarai met RPP chairman Thapa for some insights.
Your party suddenly seems very upbeat about the revival of the monarchy and Hindu state. Why?
Since the very beginning, the RPP has spoken of the utility of the monarchy and democracy for a country like Nepal, and of a Hindu state with complete religious freedom. We have been campaigning on these issues since the party’s establishment. In the past couple of years, because of the growing crisis in the country, people have started showing greater interest in and even support for our agenda. Naturally, when there is a surge in popular support, we are encouraged by the prospect of restoring the monarchy and Hindu state.
Your party just concluded a nation-wide campaign in favor of a Hindu state. What was the response?
Wherever we went, we were greeted by huge crowds—both in Pahad and Madhes and regardless of people’s faith and caste—and they explicitly expressed their support for our agenda. We found people are unhappy with the current dispensation, and are looking for an alternative. Since our agendas differ not only from those of the current government but also from the political ideologies of our major political parties, people are naturally coming out strongly in our support.
If your agendas have such public support, what explains the RPP’s electoral drubbing in 2017?
Those elections were not referendums on the monarchy or a Hindu state, but a competition between various political parties with different political agendas. We do not think the last election reflects people’s support for or opposition to the monarchy and a Hindu state. Our experience of the past 12 years has also proved that the roadmap the country has followed after the 2006 political change has failed. It has failed to deliver, and people have not been able to feel substantive changes in their living standards. So they are looking for an alternative.
What is wrong with the current political system?
People had expected that after the promulgation of the constitution in 2015 and the elections in 2017, political stability, peace and economic development would be a priority. Unfortunately, even after the three-tier elections, people have not experienced fundamental changes in their lives. Moreover, although the government has a two-third majority in the parliament, that strength has not been translated into concrete action, and public trust has been betrayed. In my opinion, this represents the failure not just of Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli or of this particular government. In fact, there are serious flaws in the roadmap we followed after the 2006 political change.
If the 2017 elections were poor indicators of people’s opinion on a Hindu state and the monarchy, what do you propose we do to gauge true public opinion?
During the time of constitution-drafting in 2015, there was overwhelming public support for a Hindu state. When we sought people’s suggestions on the draft constitution, an overwhelming majority were in favor of a Hindu state. But their sentiments were not honored.
As far as federalism is concerned, people still struggle to understand the concept. We are in the phase of implementing the federal formula and we can already see contradictions. The best way out would be a referendum on federalism.
We know a big section of the population is in favor of a republic. We cannot give them short shrift and impose monarchy. Rather we have to arrive at a compromise, which in our view means democracy with a ceremonial monarch. When we talk about the monarchy, we should not forget the geopolitical realities of Nepal. We cannot simply ignore the limitations imposed by geography.
What is the link between monarchy and Nepali geopolitics?
Nepal is situated between two giant neighbors that have completely different political systems. Both aspire to become a global power. It is natural for them to have interests in the neighborhood, including in Nepal. When those interests clash, Nepal runs the risk of disintegration. As a last custodian of sovereignty and national independence, we need an institution which can remain above party politics and issue a clarion call at a time of emergency. We are not talking about going back. It is impossible to have the kind of monarchial system we had before 2006. Considering people’s aspirations, we must give some space to traditional forces. The best solution to the present-day crisis is a blend of revolutionary and traditional forces. That is what we are trying to explain to the people.
Are you confident that if a referendum is held, people will vote in favor of your party?
Let me make it clear that we are not asking for multiple referendums. We are asking for a referendum only on federalism. Religion is an extremely sensitive issue and there should be no polarization in its name. We can directly address the issue of the restoration of a Hindu state without resorting to a referendum. As I said, in our signature campaign across the country, regardless of their caste, faith and party affiliation, people came out in big numbers and expressed their support for a Hindu state. Since such an overwhelming majority are in favor of a Hindu state, we can honor their sentiment and simply declare the country a Hindu state.
On monarchy, we have proposed a roundtable conference, one that includes former king Gyanendra, Biplab Maoists and other political parties. Such a conference could produce a widely-acceptable solution. In the past also, Maoist leader Prachanda had floated the idea of a roundtable, but it could not be realized for various reasons. Now the time has come to seriously consider this option. We cannot hope for lasting peace and stability by neglecting important political forces.
There are reports of your growing proximity with Prime Minister KP Oli and a section of the Nepal Congress on the agenda of a Hindu state.
We are a responsible political party. Although we have fundamental differences on major constitutional issues, we have accepted the charter with certain reservations and are operating within its framework. So we have excellent relations with all political parties. I have good personal relations with all their top leaders. But after the last election, we have not had extensive discussions on the country’s problems and how we should go about solving them.
How is your relationship with former King Gyanendra? Do you have his backing?
There is an ideological relationship with the former king but there is no financial backing of any kind. We run our party on our own and make decisions independently. Before 2006, all major political parties worked with the palace, and maintained relations with the king. But after 2006, they abandoned this relationship and ditched the monarch. We, on the other hand, continued our relationship and ideological links with the king. I meet former King Gyanendra time and again. We exchange ideas and opinions. At the same time, we are cautious because a single party cannot own the monarchy. It has to be neutral. If it leans toward a particular party, its role will be damaged. We do not want to drag the king into our day-to-day affairs.
How do you think the upcoming Indian elections will affect Nepali politics, if at all?
I am following Indian politics with keen interest. The upcoming elections are going to be very competitive. India is the largest democracy in the world, and has supported democratic movements the world over, including in Nepal. We want to see a stable, peaceful India and the upcoming elections will help in that direction. So far as Nepal-India relations are concerned, my experience says India has always been consistent in its neighborhood policy. So regardless of which party comes in power, I do not expect a major shift in Nepal-India relations. Individual priority and working style will have some impact, but so far Indian policy is concerned, I do not expect any major changes.
When the BJP came to power in 2014, there was a perception that it would support the agenda of a Hindu state in Nepal.
My party firmly believes the political, economic and social system of Nepal should be decided by the people of Nepal. Though I have an excellent relationship with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and other BJP leaders, we have never discussed Nepal’s internal politics. There are some misconceptions. People think that during the Madhes agitation, I had some understanding with Indian leaders on certain domestic issues. But I only briefed them on the happenings in Nepal when they asked me. Otherwise there was no mention of domestic affairs, including the agenda of a Hindu state.
Comments