Embattled party chiefs

The late Girija Prasad Koirala, as NC president, exercised absolute power in his party as long as he lived. With complete disregard for democratic processes he took decisions at his whim but always prevailed in implementing them irrespective of their unpopularity within and outside his party. His authoritarian style was rightly despised, but his ability to stand firm by his decisions and his tight grip on his party are now being missed in the Nepali polity. You name any party chief -- Maoist Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal, NC President Sushil Koirala, UML Chairman Jhalanath Khanal or MPRF Chairman Upendra Yadav -- and each one remains embattled, unable to take or implement any decision. That´s not good for the parties or for a country that is facing momentous challenges.



The chairman of the UCPN(Maoist) has become substantially weaker within his own party, and he sometimes appears a feeble shadow of his own past. The party remains vertically split into three factions -- at least psychologically -- belonging respectively to Dahal and the two vice chairmen Dr Baburam Bhattarai and Mohan Baidya. This division seems to have greatly sucked out Chairman Dahal´s energies as is reflected in his inability to implement his decisions. The whole country is witness to UML Chairman and Prime Minister Jhalanath Khanal´s dilemmas-- he is vacillating between positions, unable to persuade his own party or implement his own public commitments.



He didn´t have confidence in his own party and that´s why he signed the so-called seven-point deal with Maoist Chairman Dahal without informing the party. But since then he has neither been able to own up to it nor is he in a position to abandon it. NC President Sushil Koirala has failed to get his nominees for the post of party general-secretary and vice-chairman endorsed by the party central committee even five months after the party general convention though the party statute says he should have done so within two months after the party convention.



What does this mean? Proponents of intra-party democracy and check and balance of powers within the party may argue that it´s a good thing. May be. But a weak party leadership in a difficult and complicated political climate can be a great handicap. Trying times often require the political leadership to take correct yet hugely unpopular decisions, something that a weak leadership seldom dares to do. Just as important, parties are expected to make compromises and strike deals through genuine give and take in the larger interest of the country.



Here again a shaky leadership, which is more concerned over its position in the party, hardly makes the hard choices but rather becomes stiff during negotiations. The dynamics of weak party leadership seems to be at play in our recent inability to break the deadlock and will, unfortunately, continue to stymie the parties´ ability to work together.

Related story

Embattled PM Oli grows stronger as ‘ideological polarization’ b...