What course will politics take in the days to come?
The road ahead is thorny. It´s very bumpy. Setting out on the path ahead is a challenging task because this time we have to create a new path. Delivering peace and a constitution is not possible without consensus.[break]
What are the alternatives?
Why do we need many options? What we need is to come up with solutions to three major issues: concluding the peace process, writing a new constitution and forging an agreement on power-sharing.
You [leaders] haven´t been able to strike a deal with a clear meaning. Agreements reached among the parties are ambiguous. How will you forge national consensus?
It is obvious that inter-party agreements are often an outcome of compromise. Therefore, the language must reflect everyone´s sentiments and it may appear ambiguous.
Some leaders have said there is no point summoning a parliamentary session without first forging consensus on ending the political deadlock. Is that the spirit of the two-point agreement?
The spirit of the two-point agreement is not to call the session only after forging consensus. The agreement was to call the session within a week. As per the agreement, the agenda of government formation should be given priority in the session.
Maoist leaders have said there was an understanding to form a new government within 10 days. Is it true?
No, there was no such agreement. But there was an understanding to call the session within seven days.
Some leaders have also argued that the NC and UML should strike a deal before NC leader Ram Chandra Paudel´s candidacy is withdrawn. What do you think?
We are for moving ahead maintaining good relations among all the parties. We don´t want to forge an alliance with certain political forces while isolating a particular political party. We are not in favor of polarization.
What about UML leaders lobbying in favor of a democratic alliance?
Let them forge such an alliance. Anyone desiring such an alliance is free to do so. But I still reiterate that the UML is against such polarization. We want unity among the major political parties and democratic republican forces.
Is the NC seeking an assurance in writing from the UML[for leadership of the new government]?
We can´t give any assurance in writing to anyone. We are for striking a package deal.
What kind of package deal are you for?
The tasks of constitution-making, peace process and government formation are interlinked. We have to find ways to take all three processes ahead together.
Will the UML be ready to give up the leadership to help strike a package deal?
Leadership is an important issue. Effective leadership is a must to take the country ahead. We are for finalizing the leadership question through consensus.
You had claimed recently that neither NC and nor Maoist leaders are efficient enough for leading the new government.
What I meant is the country is in need of effective leadership and UML is the only party that can lead the country efficiently. Leading the country and the government are different things. The country needs leadership that can deliver peace and a constitution.
What type of coalition is likely then?
We still need to push for national consensus. Our party is for that. Who can term the UML decision to try for consensus wrong?
But parties have failed at consensus despite efforts for months.
We can share some issues only at three-party meetings. We have to try for solutions with the parties instead of disclosing things through media.
What type of coalition is possible if the parties eventually fail at consensus?
Let´s not think negatively. UML will try for a consensus government until the last.
But there is dispute within the UML?
No, there is no such dispute. Some leaders may think differently but that doesn´t make any difference in the party´s official decision. UML runs as per the party´s central committee decision.
You stuck to the stance of national consensus for the last seven months. But ultimately you decided to go for a majority system. Was it a wrong stance?
It´s not true that we decided to adopt the majority system. Our latest decision is to seek alternatives to ensure national consensus. We can´t even imagine any alternative to consensus government. Let´s see, who can deliver peace and constitution without consensus.
But UML leaders have publicly lobbied in favor of a new government in collaboration with the NC.
Sometimes we find pro-NC and pro-Maoist tendencies within our party. But we are alert about such tendencies and we will not allow any polarization.
Sometimes, you are also labeled pro-Maoist. What do you think?
This is an allegation by those who are stupid and don´t understand things properly. Those who can´t find out what the truth is and what it is not are indulging in such allegations. I am never for or against any particular party. I am always for national consensus.
Related story
Stocks inch higher amidst subdued market activity
