The idea of active passivity is contradiction in terms, but some revolutionary Marxist-Leninists first tested this oxymoronic theory by boycotting the National Referendum that was held in 1980 to determine the fate of Panchayat system. The paradoxical position of political detachment during defining moments of democratic evolution paid rich dividends. The ‘leftist’ politicos were freed of the stigma of inadvertently supporting the dictatorial system while benefits of being in the good books of the regime began to pour upon their leaders, supporters and sympathizers.
In the dying decade of the Panchayat, the bureaucracy was packed with reformed revolutionaries of Marxist-Leninist variety. A large number of former communist cadres were co-opted by the system as teachers, community organizers, labor leaders and even human rights activists. A comprador class emerged that made quick money from ‘export-import’ businesses of the 1980s—they exported foreign currency and imported consumer goods—and began describing itself as nationalist capitalists.
Before the launch of the People’s Movement in 1990, democratic activists were skeptical about intentions of perennially squabbling Maoist-Leninist politicos. The colossus of democratic struggles Ganesh Man Singh facilitated the creation of a United Left Front and laid the groundwork for the emergence of what came to be known as the CPN-UML. Had it not been for the Ageing Lion of Nepali Congress (NC), most of UML bigwigs would probably have ended up as loyal followers of Lokendra Bahadur Chand or Kamal Thapa.
Lapsed radicals
In the post-1990 politics, Madan Bhandary tried to test an ideological glue to hold his disparate flock together. His idea of Bahudaliya Janabad (Multiparty People’s Democracy) was yet another experiment of reconciling the irreconcilable: Domination of the proletarian party is integral to the concept of ‘people’s democracy’ and an abomination in a multiparty polity. The term survives, but its essence blew away with the smoke from the funeral pyre of the fiery communist leader.
In the post-1990 euphoria of market triumphalism, the fluttering of red flag with hammer and sickle in the land of Mount Everest must have startled ideological gurus of the “End of History” doctrine in the West. A few pragmatic Marxists had already established working relationship with powerful International Non-Government Organizations (INGOs). With the rise and fall of minority government of the UML in mid-nineties, the boom in NGO sector began to soak up young activists of the party. Former and present UML leaders, their spouses, offspring, nephews, nieces and in-laws continue to rule the roost in the flourishing NGO-industry of Nepal.
The recent controversy over British aid agency DFID’s admission that it has been funding the Nepal Federation of Indigenous Nationalities (NEFIN) is merely the proverbial tip of the iceberg. It is widely rumored that various factions within UML are based upon major sources of funding of their NGO platforms: The British, Norwegian, Danish, Swiss, German, USA and even Japanese and Korean factions of United Marxists-Leninists!
There are thus three clear blocs of status quo forces within the UML. The most powerful group professes what can be termed as the ideology of Hindu Corporatism where the mantra of harmony, consensus, and community-building under the domination of the Brahmin priesthood is considered sacred. This section has always had a close relationship with the traditional ruling elite of the country and is consequently virulently anti-Maoist. The public face of the traditionalist camp is K P Oli, but most second-grade UML leaders are closet conservatives. Since the signing of Mahakali Treaty in mid-nineties, this group has managed to keep a cozy relationship with the Indian establishment.
The NGO-lobby is more conversant with jargons of contemporary social sciences. Darling of bilateral donors and multilateral lenders, operators of this bloc are adept at playing with ideas of participatory democracy, importance of social inclusion, the question of national integrity, the civilian party doctrine and the ideology of constitutional supremacy but they believe only in one thing: The more things change in the country, the more they must remain the same. Despite the influence of this faction, it remains almost faceless.
The third faction is composed of a hotchpotch of established professionals, petty traders, middling bureaucrats, upwardly mobile journalists, trade unionists, degraded nobility and smart careerists of all kinds. They keep the balance between corporatists and compradors and their expertise lies in inventing compromise formulas. Madhav Nepal became the longest-serving Secretary General of UML on the strength of this influential lobby.
All the three factions of UML have a shared object of hate—the NC. For corporatists, the NC reminds them of what they had set out to become but could never achieve: A revolutionary party rooted in the ground realities of the country. The compradors are unhappy that they seldom receive the respect accorded to bourgeoisie by the revolutionary section of the society. The compromise artistes have a different grudge; no matter how hard they try, both the radicals as well as the conservatives dismiss them as timeservers rather than the bridge between two competing camps.
Frustrated revolutionaries
Surprisingly, a section of UML cadres continue to believe in the idea of transforming society even though none of their leaders talk anymore about socialism, imperialism, expansionism, neo-colonialism, revolution or liberation. Hierarchy is inherent to the idea of cadre-based party; hence, few raise their objections publicly. However, the gulf between cadres and leaders can be most clearly seen after an all-party meeting at any district headquarters. Once formal deliberations are over, ground-level UML cadres are drawn toward their Maoist comrades while leaders invariably congregate around local government officials. Here again, NC sympathizers stand alone, neither here nor there in the polarization of political forces in Nepal.
The band at the center—the political middle-ground—in Nepal is too narrow to sustain a truly national party. The NC chose a shift rightward where its previous occupants—the royalists, the militarists, the mercantilists, the former Panchas and religionist radicals of Hindu society—are unwilling to accommodate it. The UML claims to be leftist but is dangerously tilted toward the right. On issues of political economy, almost all Madhesbadi parties locate themselves in the conservative camp. Maoists have a free reign of leftwing politics.
It may not have been by design, but the UML has turned out to be a recruitment ground and orientation center for Maoists. If Chairman Jhalnath Khanal decides to keep the so-called left-democratic alliance intact, most of his flock would go into the Maoist camp by fragmenting the party if necessary. Supporting Maoists in the legislative-parliament has its own risks—the UML foot soldiers may discover that rewards of associating closely with the new political force are more lucrative!
It is easy to decry political neutrality of the UML, but there is no other way for Chairman Khanal to save the party from disintegration. The coalition with NC was a marriage of convenience between incompatible political partners, destined to fail from the day of solemnization. That it survived for a year is a testimony to the fact that expediency has displaced ideological politics. Once again, its continuity is possible only if the NC withdraws its candidate from the race of premiership and decides to support the UML unconditionally. Chairman Khanal can always look toward Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal for comradeship. Ram Chandra Paudel must learn to plough a lonely furrow.
It is easy to decry the UML’s consistent avowal of neutrality, but that is more out of necessity than a desire to help form a political consensus in the country. Since it is nobody’s interest to see a division in the rank and file of UML, Chairman Khanal needs to be commended for his untiring efforts of keeping the party intact.
Let NC reach to an understanding or Madhesbadis make peace with Maoists. The truce between different factions of UML is too fragile to be fiddled with now. The moment the cover of neutrality is blown away, the stench of a generation of degenerated revolutionaries will drive away all chances of peaceful resolution of latent conflicts of Nepali society. The veil looks ghastly, but it has its uses in politics.
Related story
Net Neutrality in Nepal
