Dahal’s self-serving leadership under scrutiny

In 2009, President Ram Baran Yadav decisively countered Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal's ill-advised attempt to dismiss Army Chief Rookmangud Katawal. The reinstatement of the Army Chief led to Dahal’s resignation, which he framed as a defiant stand against external interference, particularly from India. Dahal famously declared that he would engage only with the “masters” (India) and not with the “servants” (Nepali parties).

Fast forward fifteen years, and Dahal, during a party meeting, shifted his blame to the United States, alleging that external powers, including the US, played a role in his recent ouster from the government, along with that of Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.

Since his entry into peaceful politics in 2006, Dahal has frequently made controversial and often unsubstantiated statements, consistently keeping himself at the forefront of national discourse. His rhetoric has often relied on anti-India nationalism as a tool to strengthen his political standing. Today, he appears to be using the same tactic, insinuating that foreign powers orchestrated his dismissal because he resisted their agendas.

Dahal’s self-serving narrative has inflicted more damage on his party and his own reputation than on any external entity. Within the Maoist ranks, there is growing concern that their decade-long armed struggle, which paved the way for republicanism and federalism in Nepal, will be in vain if the party continues on its current path. Yet, this existential threat seems lost on Dahal.

When in opposition, Dahal has a history of making headlines with provocative and unexpected remarks. Despite being out of power for just a month, he has already made a series of statements that have drawn public attention. Among these is his claim that the US was involved in a regime change in Kathmandu. Following the formation of a new government under CPN-UML Chairman KP Sharma Oli, Dahal accused forces opposed to good governance of engineering the split within his party.

Recently, Dahal made a surprising announcement that he would not seek the prime ministership until after the 2027 elections, catching even his own party members off guard. He stated, “I will not become prime minister during this tenure of Parliament. I may consider it only if our party emerges as the largest in the 2027 elections.”

During a recent meeting in Koshi province, Dahal admitted to several mistakes, including his failure to prevent the party split, mishandling of the Maoist combatants during peace talks, mismanagement of party cadres, and his decision not to support Girija Prasad Koirala for the presidency. He also indicated a shift in strategy, asserting that his party would contest the next election independently, marking a departure from his previous alliances with UML in 2017 and Nepali Congress in 2022, despite these coalitions failing to halt the party’s decline.

Dahal also hinted at rekindling alliances with fringe communist and non-communist forces, including discussions with former Maoist splinter groups and CPN (Unified Socialist) led by Madhav Kumar Nepal. This stands in stark contrast to his past criticism of these fringe groups while he was in power. Notably, he has revived the agenda of a directly elected chief executive, an idea the Maoists abandoned during the 2015 constitution drafting process, citing that the current parliamentary system has tainted the Maoist party.

Dahal deliberately ‘sowed division’: Sharma 

Within CPN (Maoist Center), Dahal’s leadership is under severe scrutiny. The recent proposal by Maoist Deputy General Secretary Janardan Sharma has sent shockwaves through the party, exposing deep concerns about the party’s direction and leadership. Sharma’s allegations that rumors of party splits were deliberately spread by the leadership have instilled widespread fear among party members and the public.

“The rumors started from Khumaltar (Dahal’s residence), intensified in Baluwatar (Prime Minister’s residence), and escalated further in Pokhara where the party leadership asked members to choose sides,” Sharma’s proposal states. “This sequence of events has created a widespread fear of party division among cadres and the general public.”

Sharma’s proposal criticizes Dahal for sowing division within the party, ignoring crucial discussions during key conventions, and for adopting a royal-like lifestyle that has alienated the party's core supporters.

“Baluwatar has directly named Janardan Sharma as the instigator of the split. This has led to daily phone calls from hundreds of worried party workers and citizens and has become a topic of concern for other political parties, security agencies, and even the bureaucracy,” the proposal claims.

Sharma has questioned why the 8th General Convention was undermined by the announcement of a special convention. He also criticized the leadership for disregarding discussions and opinions expressed during the Statute Convention, questioning why some members were not allowed to speak. He also inquired why propaganda campaigns were orchestrated against him and Barsha Man Pun while the party was in government.

Sharma further questioned why efforts were being made to divide rather than unite leaders at various levels within the party and why parallel committees were being operated by the leadership itself. He also questioned the rationale behind the frequent changes in government coalitions.

Sharma also criticized the party’s failure to implement key policies when it held government power, such as transferring police authority to provinces and supporting local governments. Sharma’s criticism points to a party that is shrinking, losing the trust of the constituencies that once supported it, and failing to fulfill its promises.

He attributed the party’s declining support base to the leadership’s failure to deliver on promises made during their time in government. The proposal highlights that the public disapproves of the leadership’s lifestyle, likened to that of royalty, and the disconnect between the party and its core supporters. Sharma questioned whether the party can rebuild public trust by revisiting and delivering on the issues and slogans it once championed for the people.

Sharma also raised concerns about the leadership’s stance and decisions on several policy matters. He accused the leadership of resisting calls to add ‘Kirant’ to the name of Koshi province. Sharma questioned why proposals to transfer police authority to provinces and shift small and medium-sized projects and budgets to local and provincial governments were not implemented when the party held key government positions. 

He also revealed that he was removed from his work area as a punitive measure, stating, “Despite my four-decade-long loyalty and cooperation with the leadership, my actions are being met with suspicion. The chairperson believes in creating larger conflicts to resolve smaller ones, which is causing significant harm to the party.”

Sharma has proposed dissolving the central committee and forming an interim committee under Chairperson Dahal, with the mandate to hold a convention and elect new leadership through direct elections by a specified date.

Dahal’s recent statements include

 

• An assertion that an “invisible force” united the NC and UML.
• A claim that a significant nationalist faction exists within UML.
• The suggestion that investigating large corruption cases led to his government’s dissolution.
• A declaration that the Maoists will contest the 2027 election independently.
• An admission of committing “five major blunders.”
• Recognition of the new government’s consensus on the TRC as an achievement.
• His refusal to seek the prime ministership until after the 2027 elections.
• Allegations that extra-regional powers were responsible for his and Sheikh Hasina’s ouster.
• A call to consolidate all fringe communist parties.
• A critique that the existing parliamentary system has corrupted the Maoist party.
• A push for a directly elected President or Prime Minister for greater stability.