Sushil Koirala's leadership
Prime Minister Sushil Koirala was never going to be a decisive leader like Girija Prasad Koirala, his predecessor as prime minister and Nepali Congress President. Even so, not many expected him to be such a weak prime minister.The constitutional process has been stuck for months. Sushil Koirala has neither been able to take opposition parties into confidence, nor does he seem to have the guts to push ahead with voting process in the CA. Instead it is KP Oli, the chairman of the second biggest party and NC's coalition partner, who, for better or worse, seems to be calling the shots, and not just on constitution.
PHOTOS: Dhanraj still draws Naag posters though printed impress...
The prime minister, it appears, caved in to UML pressure to outsource the sensitive visa operations to a foreign company. And now he is blaming UML for the government decision to grant affiliations to new medical colleges. Bogged down by compulsions of coalition polity, this government has been characterized by a sense of drift and failure of its leader to assert his authority.
This characteristic reluctance of Koirala to take hard stands is not always such a bad thing. Often, Koirala and Oli have played complementary roles: while Oli has chosen to drive a hard bargain with (the often unreasonable) opposition parties on new constitution, Koirala has appeared as a conciliator tasked with keeping the opposition on the negotiating table. But after the government missed the vital January 22 deadline, Koirala should have exerted his authority and to put forward two clear alternatives before the Maoist and Madheshi parties: either negotiate in earnest or face voting in the CA. But he chose the safest option, of doing nothing, and let governance and constitutional process drift. Now the same thing is happening with new medical college affiliations and outsourcing of visa procedures. PM Koirala also likes to speak of how corruption has risen under his watch. Koirala, as such, is trying to portray himself as a helpless leader hemmed in by compulsions of coalition and the unique demands of a protracted transitional polity.
That does not suit someone who has assumed the mantle of governing the country at such a sensitive time. After January 22, what we needed was a decisive leader who is not afraid to take potentially controversial decisions, be that regarding voting process in the CA, stopping new affiliations or blocking the outrageous decision to outsource visa administration.
Though the two are a study in contrast, he could take a leaf or two out of the well-thumbed book of Girija Prasad Koirala, whom Sushil apparently idolizes. Enmeshed in various corruption cases and shamelessly lobbying for his incompetent daughter, his cousin was also far from the ideal leader. Yet his decisiveness was crucial to bringing the Maoists into political mainstream—against the wishes of many in his own party. As government head, he also liked to get things done. This is why GPK's legacy as a politician and statesman is secure. In sharp contrast, by postponing crucial decisions and always trying to please everyone Sushil Koirala is fast earning the reputation as one of the weakest leaders in contemporary Nepal. More worryingly, the leadership vacuum has all kinds of undesirable consequences for the country.
