HARD-BARGAINING
Probably, the toughest bargainer in these negotiations has been the Nepali Congress (NC). Despite its humiliating defeat in the Constituent Assembly (CA) election two years ago in which it won less than half the seats as those won by Maoists, there is no inclination on its part to accept electoral outcome and let someone from another party take up leadership. In fact, after much reluctance and some four months of delay following its defeat in the CA election did the late Girija Prasad Koirala (GPK) agree to leave his chair and let the new winner Maoist Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal become prime minister.
However, despite him making this concession, there was never a trace of doubt in GPK’s mind that democracy is his for perpetuity, and other parties such as the CPN-UML and Maoists were there to steal democracy from him, regardless of the electoral mandate and his own record while in government. In much the same way that Rana rulers and, later, the royalty, considered Nepal to be their Birta (bequeathal), GPK took democracy and also his leadership of NC as his Birta, and tolerated democracy only to the extent that it legitimized his personal claim on democracy and on NC that he headed.
This Birta mindset legitimizing NC’s ownership of democracy continues to infect the post-GPK leadership of NC, which is the major force stemming the prime ministerial bid of NC candidate Ram Chandra Poudel. With less than a fifth of total CA votes under his belt, a legacy of NC misrule during its period in office, and its well-known reputation for corruption and nepotism, Poudel should not have the courage even to face the public, standing on his own two legs, much less claiming prime ministership!
Maoists’ bid for prime ministership is less problematic but not as strong as it was the first time when they were freshly out of election with an honorable win.
For UML and its leader Jhalanath Khanal, it is difficult to ascertain their points of bargaining and, certainly, after the disappointing performance of Madhav Nepal, there is no ground for them regaining government leadership which, apparently, was the intent of Khanal bidding for the job, with or without Maoist support. If Khanal’s bid would have succeeded, he would have exited with worse performance than Madhav Nepal’s, given his coolness toward the Madhesis, his reputation of tilt towards China, and his implicit unwelcome from India.
Maoists’ bid for prime ministership is less problematic but not as strong as it was the first time when they were freshly out of election with an honorable win. Specifically, Maoist supremo Dahal’s bid to regain his job is not as convincing this time than it was earlier for the reason that circumstances that had coalesced together to drive him out of office then haven’t changed, much less disappeared, and, in fact, these have strengthened with the public’s growing disenchantment with Maoists’ handling of its role as a democratic opposition.
COMPROMISE
The second element of horse-trading is trying for a compromise solution of the problem, something like give and take and a live-and-let-live approach. There is no doubt that warring parties will strike a compromise in order to save face or for minimizing loss but at this time the outline of such a compromise seems unclear and fast-changing. The most likely scenario that will emerge is the one being pushed by Khanal—and supported by Madhesi parties—which is for a consensus government. And in the absence of a unified support from Madhesi parties, Maoists would likely go for consensus but only if they lead. If, in case, Dahal’s leadership meets serious opposition—most likely from the army and, possibly, India—they will have to find a substitute for Dahal acceptable to the coalition. At the same time, the chances of a coalition government will doom if a non-Maoist candidate is proposed for the job.
SHREWDNESS
The top marks for shrewdness goes to Khanal for inventing a strategy of playing neutral after he withdrew his bid for the job which was earlier supported by Maoists but opposed by most in his own party and NC. Now that UML’s leadership of new government seems out of question, Khanal’s bid is to maximize his party’s representation in a new government that is not headed by NC. Of course, he is smart enough not just to walkover to the Maoists and offer his support but he is doing everything he can for Maoists to head a coalition government that will strengthen his own hold on the party.
Closely behind UML, in terms of the measure of shrewdness, is NC which, despite the electoral loss, considers any government without its participation to be illegitimate and unacceptable. Unfortunately, the international community is not in a mood to dispute this claim, since it has come to view a NC-less Nepal to become a den of communists and menace to regional democracies. Also, by projecting an image of being the ultimate protector of the country’s regular army, NC has gained strength at the expense of all other parties.
Maoists are the last on the scale of shrewdness that largely reflects their unworkable ideology and relative inexperience in political maneuverings. Maoists have not been able to cash on its popularity and electoral triumph in the CA election with further erosion of their public goodwill which ensued from the misplacement of priorities— their choice of ideology over realism. While an adherence to extremist ideology had provided much fuel to their movement—enabling them to shake the roots of feudal power—once they were in power, the wise course of action would have been to undertake meaningful reforms. They missed out on this opportunity and despite Maoists’ intentions of doing good, ideological baggage they carry from their revolutionary past make them look silly, even childish.
UNSCRUPULOUSNESS
Measured by the level of unscrupulousness—meaning, someone not restrained by moral or ethical principles—NC and UML both score high marks, while Maoists can be placed below the mid-point on a scale of 1 to 100. Looking at the background, both NC and UML had started with some good beliefs and idealism—democracy, socialism, people’s rights and freedom—but, overtime, they made compromises that were unprincipled and unethical, costing them their distinct identity. The joke is that politics in the country, instead of moving forward, has regressed backward, with NC becoming feudal and authoritarian much like its predecessor Panchayat, while UML has inherited all the NC vices that has led to its downfall.
NC and UML’s current negotiations with Maoists exhibit the classic features of unscrupulous behavior. Both parties know that they lack political mandate, public trust, and a recognized vision for shaping post-monarchy Nepal. For good reason or bad, Maoists have an edge over them in all these respects, and they should definitely lead this effort which, however, both NC and UML judge to be unacceptable.
CONSTITUTION CAN WAIT
Regardless of the outcome of prime ministerial election set for September 5, it is unlikely that normal politics in the country will resume any time soon and constitution-making can get a fresh start. In all likelihood, problems that have slowed down—even halted—progress on the new constitution are not going to go away just because a new government is in power, even if that be a coalition government. Differences on the basic outlines of the constitution—state restructuring, government structure, regional demands, ethnic issues, Maoist militia vs the army—as well as a two-thirds majority required for the passage of each critical clause of the constitution will make it a daunting task to arrive at a consensus within the timeframe allowed for it. For example, in a much less divisive environment that existed in the 1950s, it took almost eight years for the parties to agree on a new constitution that was not as ambitious and revolutionary as the one envisaged at this time.
For the creation of an enabling environment to underpin the constitution-making process, it would be wise for the new government to address the key issues of public concerns and show progress toward solving them as a pre-condition for the start of constitution-drafting process. Among the dozens of issues that have come to affect public life almost on a daily basis, only a few of them need to be chosen as a test case, to help establish government credibility and secure its relevance to the general public. Public security, property rights, urban amenities—drinking water, sanitation, electricity, to start with—should be placed high on this focused agenda. A final item could be some carefully chosen irrigation projects that could provide immediate relief for the rural population.
It would be less of a daunting task for the coalition government to galvanize public support and impart a sense of enthusiasm for the drafting of a new constitution if it succeeds in making a credible start with the improvement of basic government functions, which is a more urgent need at this time than having a constitution.
sshah1983@hotmail.com
Related story
Politics and Business
