In principle, the five ruling parties have agreed to forge an electoral alliance for the May 13 local elections. In recent weeks, top leaders of these parties have been meeting almost daily to agree on the alliance’s modus operandi. But nothing has come of it so far. 

The intra- and inter-party dynamics are constraining top leaders’ wishes to cement the alliance. The rival Nepali Congress faction led by Shekhar Koirala is dead against any kind of electoral partnership with the left forces, putting the party leadership in a fix.

Similarly, there are strong sentiments in the Congress rank and file against such an alliance. They reckon that allying with the left forces could weaken the party’s base in the long-run. 

Already, party members have warned leadership against a poll alliance with left forces in Chitwan. 

In the 2017 elections, the NC had supported Maoist candidate Renu Dahal (daughter of Maoist Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal) for the post of mayor of Bharatpur Metropolitan City, Chitwan, much to the chagrin of party cadres.

The Maoist party again wants to ally with the Congress in Bharatpur, but the party’s Chitwan district chapter has decided to field its own candidate. They say they will this time not be forced into supporting a candidate from other parties. 

It remains to be seen how the Congress leadership will assuage its cadres in Bharatpur and other local units across the country.

Congress President and Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba knows forging an alliance with the left parties is going to be complicated, but he wants to do it anyway. 

If the ruling coalition partners are not offered an olive branch, he fears, they could band together with the main opposition, CPN-UML, which could reduce Congress votes in the national elections.

At this point, Ram Chandra Poudel, former rival of Deuba for party president, is the only top Congress leader who whole-heartedly supports the idea of poll alliance.

The potential alliance has also been hindered by the fact that the CPN (Maoist Center) and CPN (Unified Socialist) are finding it hard to gauge their local-level strength to bargain for seats with the main ruling party. 

In the 2017 local elections, of 753 local units, the Maoist party had won in 106 through alliances with different parties.

At the time, there was no discussion of a national-level electoral alliance, unlike this time.  

Meanwhile, the Unified Socialist is a new party formed after a split in the UML. Around 10 percent of the UML elected representatives have joined the Unified Socialist and its local strength remains a mystery.

A senior Maoist leader says despite marathon talks at the top level, there has been no progress on the modality of poll alliance, nor has there been any agreement on seat-allocation. “I am not hopeful of a formal alliance,” says the leader, who didn’t wish to be named.  

He speaks of the difficulty of working with the Congress at the local level as the ideology, orientation and thinking of the two parties are polar opposite. 

“We are not sure the Congress supporter will vote for Maoists candidates, or vice-versa,” he says.

Maoist leader Dev Gurung says second-rung leaders will work on the modality of alliance when top leaders reach an agreement.

One option ruling parties are discussing is forging an alliance based on the 2017 poll results. The Maoists and Unified Socialist are of the view that in the case of six metropolitan cities and 11 sub-metropolitan cities, the decision on alliance should be taken from the central level. In other municipalities, they suggest, local leadership can decide.  

To facilitate the electoral partnership, the five-party alliance on April 5 formed a cross-party panel, led by senior Congress leader Poudel. To manage resistance at the local level, the Congress is encouraging its leaders in provinces and districts to explore the possibility of alliance through consultations with other parties. 

The five parties have decided to forge an alliance in more than two-dozen districts. As they are still talking, the Congress has instructed its local level leadership to delay the process of finalization of candidates. 

In 2017, the central leadership had not fixed such alliances, even though there were some partnerships at the local level. The Maoist party had allied with the UML, NC, and Madhes-based parties. 

Of 753 local units, the UML had won in 292, the Congress in 263, and the Maoists in 106.  

After the 2017 local poll results were publicized, UML forged an alliance with the Maoists in the parliamentary elections to beat the NC. The two left forces then went on to merge to form the Nepal Communist Party (NCP). The party broke down a little after a year, which not only revived the erstwhile UML and Maoist Center but also gave birth to a third offshoot, Unified Socialist, led by Madhav Kumar Nepal. 

Political analyst Krishna Khanal says the Maoists and Unified Socialist are seeking electoral alliance because they feel insecure about their electoral prospects. “The two parties are facing an existential crisis and are desperate to forge an electoral alliance,” he says. 

Despite its alliance in the previous elections, the Maoist party didn’t fare well, and the Unified Socialist is facing elections for the first time.

It is not just the Maoists and Unified Socialist who are desperate for an electoral alliance though. In truth, the NC also needs these parties’ support to beat its main rival UML.

If the communist forces were to come together, it would be difficult for Congress to even replicate the results of 2017; there was no left alliance at the time of the last local elections.

Deuba is trying to cajole his party leaders and cadres into a poll alliance, reminding them of the defeat Congress faced in the 2017 parliamentary elections due to the left alliance.

But some observers say it is better for the parties’ long-term prospects to fight elections separately.

“An electoral alliance may benefit some parties in the short-term, but it would be detrimental to the long-term party-building process,” says Puranjan Acharya, a political analyst.

Political experts reckon a high number of political parties is encouraging the culture of electoral alliances. They say each political force views elections through its own narrow prism.

“We have more parties than we can sustain. We have to bring down their number, which in turn will be a departure point for political stability,” says Bhojraj Pokharel, former chief election commissioner. 

Nepal’s electoral alliances are not based on similarities in ideology, conviction and belief, he says.

“Rather, they are purely driven by the intent of getting good electoral outcomes. Forging such electoral alliances does not guarantee their longevity,” Pokharel says. “Alliance among like-minded political parties is natural but among opposite forces is not.”