Your search keywords:

The coalition conundrum

The coalition conundrum

Nepal has been experiencing chronic political instability for years, primarily due to disputes between major political parties over power-sharing arrangements. Internal strife and petty fights within and among the parties for power have brought frequent changes in government formed as a result of compromise between major parties and fringe parties, especially after the adoption of a federal democratic republic polity, disappointing a people aspiring for stability, progress and prosperity for long. Ruling coalitions, formed to seize or hold onto power, have long been a feature of Nepal's political landscape. Although this coalition-based system occasionally promotes cooperative government, it frequently results in conflicts and instability.

The clash

In Nepal, coalition administrations are the result of partnerships between several parties. More often than not, practical realities and not shared ideologies are behind ruling coalitions involving major parties like the Nepali Congress, the CPN-UML and the CPN (Maoist Center) and their junior partners. Due to a proportional representation system, which guarantees even smallest parties a place in the legislature, coalition-building becomes necessary. Although this system stipulated in the Constitution encourages diversity and representation, it also results in fragmented mandates, which necessitate ruling coalitions. In such alliances, conflicts often emerge around the assignment of ministerial responsibilities. Junior coalition partners feel left behind and charge the bigger parties with controlling important positions. Policy goals differ significantly, especially when it comes to foreign policy, federalism and economic changes.

Implications

A decade-long war has caused paralysis in governance. National development initiatives and economic recovery have suffered due to delays in crucial legislative and policy choices. Political unrest discourages foreign investment and has an impact on tourism, hitting the national economy hard. Business confidence has also decreased because of prolonged uncertainty. Frequent conflicts among ruling coalitions for power and prolonged instability have reduced public confidence in the democratic system. 

Way forward

Political observers predict that communication and compromise will be necessary to end disputes involving coalitions by ensuring the participation of all coalition participants in decision-making processes. The idea behind this exercise is to alleviate deep-entrenched feelings of marginalization. Creating a precise policy framework that describes the coalition's goals and tactics will aid in minimizing policy divergences. Coalition partners can avoid miscommunication and disagreements by having explicit, documented agreements that specify power-sharing arrangements, policy goals and dispute resolution procedures. Stability depends on creating strong democratic institutions capable of resolving disputes and guaranteeing that coalition standards are followed. Ideological differences may be closed and collaboration can be fostered by encouraging political parties to engage in consensus-building and communication. Restoring public participation in political processes can aid in restoring trust and guarantee that public officials remain answerable to their citizens.

Disputes within coalition governments bring to light the difficulties coalition politics inherently faces in a fast changing and varied political environment. Coalition governments encourage diversity and representation, but they also need careful handling of conflicting interests and power relationships. In order to ensure a stable and efficient government as Nepal moves closer to consolidating its democracy, it will be important to address these issues through unambiguous agreements, institutional development and consensus-building. 

The inherent difficulties of coalition politics are exemplified by conflicting goals and ideologies within Nepal’s ruling coalitions. In a multiparty democracy, ruling coalitions are necessary, such coalitions should have an appetite for compromise and the proclivity to put the greater good of the country above petty gains. Nepal’s political leaders should have the capacity to overcome these obstacles to foster political stability and long-term growth as the country continues on its democratic path. Conflicts within Nepal’s coalition administrations are a reflection of the larger difficulties of governing in a pluralistic democracy that is undergoing transformation. 

In a political environment marked by fragmented power, ruling coalitions are necessary, but they call for mutual respect, a careful balance of power and a common commitment to the advancement of the country. Nepal's future depends on the existing coalition’s capacity to resolve internal conflicts and provide stable administration. Notwithstanding obstacles on the way, a more stable and prosperous Nepal can be achieved through dedication and sincere cooperation.

Comments