Don't quit on consensus

The political parties’ commitment to forming a national unity government is gradually turning out to be just a gimmick for public consumption as they are nowhere close to a consensus, nor are they negotiating in earnest toward that end. If the parties were serious about taking the peace process forward and forming a national consensus government, they would already be focusing all their energies on hammering out a peace deal. Unfortunately, the parties haven’t so far sat for any meaningful dialogue on the peace process; instead, they are behaving like candidates during a general election—the two major parties that have declared their prime ministerial candidates are busy seeking support and votes from other parties. As a consequence, the peace process and constitution-writing have taken a back seat.



Though the party leaders continue to pay lip-service to a consensus government, in private they are already dismissive of such a possibility. That is unfortunate given that the lesson from the past three years of our messy politics is that only a national unity government can see the peace process and constitution-writing through. If successive majority-based governments failed to make any tangible progress in the peace process and the writing of the constitution in the last three years, there is no reason to think that another majority government—whoever leads it— will have any better luck in future. Only fools repeat the same mistake over and over again and our sincere hope is we Nepalis don’t fall into that category.



Though the deadline given by President Dr Ram Baran Yadav for forming a consensus government ends on August 21, the constitution does not bar the parties from striking a consensus even after that date. The parties should therefore, if necessary, defer fixing a date for the prime minister’s election in parliament and make sincere efforts for the peace process till the end of August, when the current term of the Constituent Assembly ends. Neither Nepali Congress nor the Maoists have demonstrated the required sincerity in negotiating the peace process and the reason seems to be that each of them hopes it has a better chance of leading a majority government.



We encourage both parties to refrain from such a win or lose game and focus on a win-win one instead. Since the two parties have already agreed in principle to hold the prime minister’s post alternately between them, it should not be difficult for them to find an answer as to who should lead the government first. We sincerely believe that the parties can cut a peace deal in the next ten days that will create an environment of trust, enabling the two largest parties to settle the question of who should be first to lead the national consensus government. Don’t give up on consensus so easily when you know that the absence thereof will only invite disaster.

Related story

The Do's and Dont's before buying a laptop