Opinion The red flag on top

The House failed to meet the deadline for electing a consensus for the promised national unity government. President Rambaran Yadav wrote to parliament secretariat once again on July 12 to have the new Prime Minister elected by simple majority at the earliest. But even that does not seem to come through easily. Each of the three major political parties insist on having their own candidate as PM. Nor are the constitution making or the peace process moving ahead smoothly. Instead,they are facing much tougher challenges.

A lot is at stake now. The possible collapse of the peace process — something that India played a crucial role to initiate four years ago — for example. Maoists not being able to form or head the new government will lead to further isolation of one major stake-holder in the peace process. Such a scenario is only going to push the country back into the conflict that the peace process had brought to an end. Hormis Tharakkan,former RAW chief who played a crucial role in bringing Nepal’s Maoists,then underground,and the seven pro-democracy political parties together in the anti-monarchy platform under four years ago,knows the consequences of the collapse of the peace process.

On these pages,he argued (‘This time in Kathmandu’,IE.,July 5) that Nepali and Indian Maoists are not the same as the former have joined the democratic process and they are staking claim to government democratically. In Nepal,this is being interpreted as support of Baburam Bhattarai as a prime ministerial candidate provided other pro-democracy parties extended their support. But the UCPN-M politburo recently extended its solidarity — after nearly four years of indifference and silence — to “communist revolutionaries” in other countries,especially India. Bhattarai was not a dissenter.

The Indian government can afford to remain silent on the record about Nepal’s power squabbling. But Nepal’s biggest challenge at the moment lies in forming an effective government. Major political parties need to be flexible and willing to give up their own claim. However,the much talked about politics of consensus suffered its biggest jolt in April 2008 following G.P. Koirala’s insistence on,first,not quitting the leadership in favour of the UCPN-M which had emerged as the largest party in the House,and second,on not joining the Maoist-led government three months later.

All the three governments after that have one or the other major parties not joining the government. And in the latest round,if the leadership goes to UML or the Nepali Congress,the biggest party in the House is neither likely to join the government,nor extend support to the peace- and constitution-making process.

The UCPN-M is taking a more stridently aggressive posture as they realise the chances of its heading the new government are very very slim. The party’s senior vice-president Narayankaji Shrestha Prakash announced on July 11 that it does not have to return the property it confiscated from political rivals and ordinary citizens during the years of conflict. This comes on top of its insistence that all its 19,000 combatants — except those who opt out or who are disabled — have to be absorbed in the Nepal army,and their stated belief that the Young Communist League is not a paramilitary outfit. As usual,the Maoists have nothing to offer,only to take as in the past. Maoists may not be able to form the government on their own,but outside the government,they will continue to dictate the political course of the country given their organised cadre and their strength in the house.

yubaraj.ghimire@expressindia.com