Unearned victory

Everyone is contemplating the factors that carried the Nepali Congress (NC) and CPN-UML to an impressive victory in the recent CA elections. The scale of the NC and UML’s victory has surprised not only political pundits, but also NC and UML cadres. The victory came despite the absence of fresh candidates and clear messages, and wavering political commitment towards empowerment and emancipation of Madheshis and ethnic minorities. 

The debate over whether people who voted for NC and UML actually subscribe to their liberal ideals will continue to play out over the months ahead. However, the most important question that everyone should be asking is: what led to the withering of the symbolic emphasis that voters placed on the need for radical change in the first CA elections? 

Long-standing socio-economic grievances, disputes among ethnic political parties, and security dilemmas brought about by weak and unaccountable system of governance are some factors that could have led to a more pragmatic move towards the center, leaving the bourgeois Maoist populists and ‘ethnic entrepreneurs’ that hijacked and subsequently maligned the genuine need for ethnic empowerment and emancipation to fend for themselves.

The Maoists and ethnic parties failed miserably to gauge public intelligence. Their attempt at defeating NC and UML by stoking the same agendas—establishing an ethno-centric republic, building an inclusive society, administering equality and justice, etc—failed. They ignored the same issues when in power, grossly underestimating the public’s intelligence. However, the loss of Maoists and ethnic parties which are infested with ethnic entrepreneurs is by no means a death of the quest for “total equality.” It will come back to haunt NC and UML if the ideas of social justice and egalitarianism are not enshrined in the constitution. 

Having witnessed the defeat of Maoist and ethnic parties, people are now in the process of figuring out what a NC-led coalition government means for Nepal’s peace and stability. Since the current polity is one that the Maoists have defined, it will be extremely difficult if not impossible, for NC and UML to deviate from the Maoist interpretation of democracy. While the Maoist leaders have said that they will be “pragmatic and cooperative,” it would be naive to imagine that this group will abandon its basic ideology and play second fiddle to NC and UML. 

There simply is not enough evidence at this point to believe that two Brahmins—Pushpa Kamal Dahal and Baburam Bhattarai—who failed to fulfill their political dreams under multiparty set-up and turned the country into killing fields will consume NC and UML’s “liberal democratic” bait hook, line and sinker! The second CA elections might have temporarily transformed the political landscape whereby moderate democrats will now replace radical ideologues and ethnic entrepreneurs, but it will not take very long for Dahal and ethnic entrepreneurs to mount a comeback if the root causes of Maoist insurgency and ethnic unrest are not adequately addressed.

The Maoists lost for a simple reason. Dahal and know-it-all Bhattarai believed that political manipulation, belligerent rhetoric and occasional violence were sufficient to endlessly sway public consciousness. Their inability to transform from a guerilla outfit to an open, viable political party that is capable of translating popular support into effective policies was the main reason behind their electoral debacle. 

While the Maoists lost because of their inability to actually transform, NC and UML won despite the absence of clear vision on how they would actually solve burning socioeconomic problems, growing insecurity, and wavering political commitment towards empowerment and emancipation of Madheshis and ethnic minorities. 

More than anything else, the victory of NC and UML is a result of incompetence on part of the Maoists and ethnic Madheshi parties, and that is where the problem lies. When the opposition’s victory is largely a result of an inability on part of the party in power to fulfill the aspirations of the people, there is a great risk of screw-ups. You tend to value things that you earn the hard way. 

If you look at the history of the people who have won big lotteries, most of them waste their newfound wealth on women and alcohol. Another classic example is of Nepali students and the diversity visa lottery winners in the United States. Students outperform their fellow citizens who have won the diversity visa lottery a large percentage. Students’ competitive edge comes from their conscious decision to be in the US and belief that hard work can conquer all obstacles.

The early signs of an unearned victory are already becoming visible. It’s been a month since the completion of CA elections, and major parties are yet to give full shape to the new CA. NC’s opposition to elections for President and Vice-President exposes its lack of seriousness towards democratic institution building. Selective preference of this nature will open the door for political perversions, which is the last thing we want at this juncture. NC’s political immaturity is also quite clear from the way it is engaged in appeasing the Maoists. 

Yes, you want them to be on board, but not through endless appeasement. The more you try to appease them, the more inflexible they will get. They would try to drag the political process down to a level so juvenile and debased that the infant democratic order could find itself in a dump. It would not take much after that to convince voters to vote them in. After all, if we look at our history, parties get back in power not because of their vision, good governance, and service delivery, but because of the incompetence and failure of those in power. 

Nepali people have, once again, given NC and UML a chance to prove their worth. It will become clear within a couple of weeks whether NC and UML’s learning curve continues to be hampered because of their self-inflicted mental block, or if these parties have actually learned from their mistakes. One will not have to wait too long. All you got to do is see the kind of people that will be nominated under proportional representation and brought in as cabinet members.

 If Girija Prasad Koirala’s protégés make a comeback, we can be pretty sure that the Maoists and ethnic entrepreneurs will have the last laugh. All that they will then have to do is keep riding the wave of people’s anger and wait for these drunken sailors to push the country into another political and constitutional abyss, which they are very much capable of doing. 

The great president hunt

It has been more than two months since CA elections were concluded. Except for the abolishment of monarchy, which was already agreed upon, political process has not moved forward by an inch so far. It appears that unless the ongoing power sharing negotiation gains some momentum and a deal is struck, pressing issues such as skyrocketing inflation and lawlessness will have to wait. In a nation where politicians' gain come before peoples' need, do citizens have a choice?

The parties involved in the negotiation are trying hard to sell their choice for the first president of Democratic Republic of Nepal. Puspa Kamal Dahal vouches for a non-political person but proposes Ram Raja Singh for the top job. Since when did Ram Raja Singh become a non-political person? June 20, 1985's bombing, for which Singh, has taken responsibility, is not something that a law abiding non-political person gets involved in. However, when compared to the death and destruction caused by the man who is proposing him for the top job, Singh's crime is minuscule.

Although Girija Prasad Koirala has not expressed his desire to become the first president himself in public, it is an open secret. As long as the likes of Krishna Prasad Sitaula are around, is it even necessary for Koirala and Dahal to do their dirty laundry?

The Maoists were clever enough to keep Koirala guessing when it came to the issue of the first president of Nepal for the last 2 years. What the Maoists know very well but may not acknowledge in public is that, had Koirala known that he would not become the first president, he would not have pushed for a republic as hard as he did. Had the Maoists made it clear well in advance, Koirala would have refused to become a "useful idiot." So they played it smart and played it well.

Dahal and his men do not want Koirala to become the president because they seriously think that they are the ones who brought this change, and to a large extent, they are right about it. For the Maoists, making Koirala president is like acknowledging him as an agent of change. Furthermore, it opens up a space for future intervention. Given Koirala's proximity with the international players and the Nepali Army, the Maoists' game plan of swiftly marching towards the authoritarian regime may come to a grinding halt. Why take a risk? From the Maoists' stand point, it makes a perfect sense.

No matter who becomes the first president, the power sharing negotiations should come to an end pretty soon. For common Nepali citizens, Dahal's desire to checkmate Koirala and deny him the chance of fulfillment of his desire to become the first president is irrelevant. All they want at this point in time is a regular supply of fuel, textbooks for their kids, and some degree of law and order. It is, thus, completely unjustified and immoral to overlook the problems faced by the citizens and concentrate solely on sharing the pie.

It is time to move beyond the petty politicking and address the problems faced by impoverished Nepali populace. No point beating around the bush. Do what it takes and move the political process forward. If the politicians were really serious about having a well respected and accomplished citizen as a first president, they would be proposing the likes of Ganesh Raj Sharma, who not only respected the law of the land himself but also made others do it, not someone who has been involved in bombings. When the entire process is not about setting a right precedence and selecting an individual with a strong moral character, how does it matter whether it is Ram Raja Singh or the killers of Dikendra Thapa, Jitendra Sah, Ram Hari Shrestha, or for that matter, another bomber Babban Singh?

If it is all about political correctness, then why not propose Jwala Singh for the first president? A Dalit, a Madhesi, and an insurgent. What could be a better package? For the populists who value ethnicity over meritocracy and character, it would be a super deal. It might even help insurgency in the southern plains to subside. When a former insurgent can be a prime minister, why not at least discuss the prospects of an insurgent, who happens to be a Dalit and a Madhesi for the top job?

Regardless of whom the Maoists propose, when it is all said and done, there is a big probability that the Maoists might end up accepting Koirala as the first president. They are not that foolish to blow away the revolutionary gains just to appear politically correct.

How long Koirala's legacy will last in a society, which is engulfed in perpetual revolution is, altogether a different question.

Actually, the Maoists might gain by accepting Koirala as a president. The best way to preempt Koirala's anti-Maoist moves in future is to make him the president. Koirala's lust for limelight is simply too big to be underestimated. The infamous back-stabbing of Krishna Prasad Bhattarai to secure the prime ministerial berth in one of the general elections not very long ago serves as a classic example of how far Koirala can go to get what he wants. When Koirala could not contain the Maoists as the most powerful Prime Minister in the history of Nepal in the last two and half years, why should the Maoists be afraid of him as a ceremonial head of state?

Given his age, letting him become the president might be a safer bet for the Maoists.

The very minute someone else becomes the president, seven party alliance (SPA) is unofficially over. After that, political realignment will take place. The political resistance that will start after Koirala is denied his cherished dream job might be, too soon and too big, for the Maoists to contain.

Becoming a president of the youngest republic might be a dream come true for Koirala and might benefit his blind followers, but for democracy in Nepal, it will be a disaster. Once Koirala becomes the president, the ongoing appeasement of the Maoists will continue further. Having secured the place in history, it would be foolish on the part of liberal democrats to assume that Koirala will do anything to contain the Maoists and strengthen democracy. In the last two and half years, instead of containing the Maoists by forcing them to disband the YCL and surrender all their weapons, Koirala relentlessly engaged in their appeasement, which resulted in strengthening of both the political and muscle power of the Maoists. When Koirala could not understand that appeasing radicals only makes them bolder through his half a century long political career, what will he do differently and significantly after he becomes the president to force the Maoists to change their beliefs and embrace multi-party democracy?

If it is really for democracy in Nepal, the Maoists' hardheaded pursuit of having a left-leaning individual as the first president should prevail. The political realignment will occur only when Koirala is forced out. As long as Koirala enjoys the limelight, in the name of taking the peace process to its logical end, NC will keep on rationalizing the Maoists' high handedness and the march toward authoritarianism.

The bewilderness

With the successful conclusion of CA polls, all eyes are on India and the United States now. The extent to which India and the US will recalibrate their policy vis-à-vis the Maoist victory in Nepal will determine whether or not the Maoist government will have a smooth sailing.

Puspa Kamal Dahal's assertion that the Maoists are in for a long haul might prove true unless international players like India and the US tighten the screw on the Maoists and provide support to the democratic forces, which at this point in time appears highly unlikely. For India, a nation that has a substantial security and economic interests in Nepal, it simply does not make any sense to overrun a party, which has both: A private militia and people's mandate to govern. And, why should India stick to the old guards if the new kids on the block are willing to render similar services? As far as the United States is concerned, it has already outsourced its Nepal policy to India. Due to the lack of any major interest in Nepal, the US is expected to continue toeing India's policy towards Nepal.

Those in the NC and the UML who think India will not abandon the horse that served their interests faithfully for almost two decades should rethink why India should stick with a horse that lost badly in a high stake derby. They should reconcile with the fact that India loves to bet on a wining horse. If we look around, it becomes evident that, for India, its security and economic interest is far more important than democratic rights of citizens of foreign nations. Indian government's cordial relations with Myanmar's repressive junta and Banngladesh's military rule speak volume about how India hoodwinks international community when it comes to its stand on democracy.

When India can roll-out the red carpet for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, it can definitely do so to keep Puspa Kamal Dahal at its arm's length. It is just a matter of time. The very minute India extract promises from the Maoist comrades on issues related to India's security, democrats in Nepal will be on their own. With time and change in political stature, international actors' betting preferences do change.

For the NC and the UML to beat the Maoists, they have to completely overhaul their current strategy of trying to appear more progressive than the Maoists. Nobody is going to buy that. If the NC and the UML really want to succeed, let the Maoists do what they do best, and you do what you do best — resonate with the people that are at the center of the political spectrum. It is virtually impossible to defeat a party whose very basis of existence is grounded on proletarian agendas by trying to appear more progressive than them. One of the reasons why the NC and the UML had to face humiliating defeat might have to do with this unwarranted political shift. When you, as a centrist political force completely abandon what you traditionally stood for, loyal supporters that are attached to the party on the basis of ideology have no inclination or incentive to remain wedded to the party.

Surprisingly, even after the humiliating defeat, the NC and the UML have not abandoned the Maoist-style of doing business. In a rat race of proving itself more inclusive, visionless and petty-minded politicians at the NC's helm of affairs have chosen to sacrifice people like Radheshyam Adhikari, Harihar Birahi, and Manmohan Bhattarai that make up the NC's intellectual backbone. Instead of nominating these individuals that could have made a significant contribution in drafting a liberal constitution, bewildered NC's leadership decided to nominate semi-illiterates en masse. Does this act of wholesale nomination of semi-illiterates for a responsible job of drafting a constitution, which requires a great deal of technical expertise, really serve the purpose? If the answer is no, then how justified it is to pay bench-warmers as constitution makers? Where is the fiscal responsibility?

Establishing a herd of semi-illiterates to warm benches rather than nominating experts like Radheshyam Adhikari, who have been practicing law for decades, is neither fiscally responsible thing to do, nor a good strategy to counter the Maoists' desire to mould the constitution to their liking. When will the air headed idiots within the NC realize the gravity of the situation?

In a way, the recent CA election results might prove to be blessings for those who really want to practice principle-based politics within the NC and the UML. As it will take considerable time and effort to dislodge the Maoists from the power and defeat them in the upcoming parliamentary and local elections, the fat cats within the NC and the UML that have made a fortune by remaining in power for the last two decades might not have the required patience and the desire to stay put. However, there is no guarantee. If they still decide to hang around, the dedicated cadres that really want to see their party come back to power should revolt. Now is the time for some purification.

Shashank Koirala of the NC and Shankar Pokharel of the UML have the potential to bring back the lost glory. They are neither populist nor tainted. They can actually unite the party and put up a good fight against the Maoists. In order to defeat the Maoists, you got to prove that you are different. So far, by trying to hijack their political agendas, the NC and the UML have been blurring the difference between their party and the Maoists. In the absence of visible difference, people will continue to support the Maoists.

After forming the government in the next couple of weeks, the Maoists will do their best to negate the exiting threats. The threat of takeover by the army will be negated by merging the PLA with the national army and promoting the likes of Kul Bahadur Khadka within the Nepal Army. So the only way left to bring down the Maoist government to its knees, if needed, is through revolution in the tarai. At this point in time, only Madhesi regional parties such as the MPRF and TMDP have the power to unleash enough violence to choke the power structures in Kathmandu. It is, thus, crucial for the NC and the UML to remain in good terms with these regional parties.

At this point in time, the NC and theUML neither have an agenda for counter mobilization nor have the required strength to fight back. So the days ahead are not going to be easy for them. But the game is not over yet. There is one more chance and that is the upcoming elections. In order for the NC and the UML to win the upcoming elections, they need to restructure their party and come up with a sound counter-mobilization strategy. Try to do it right this time around.

Respect Electoral Mandate

With the conclusion of CA elections, yesterday's major political parties and new entrants such as MJF and TMLP are busy interpreting the people's verdict to align with their respective worldviews. Predictably, the next round of politicking will involve sharing the "power pie" through some form of "constitutional adventurism." The constitution will once again be amended to suit what will be sold as an "'X' point" deal.

It is quite surprising to see the traditional democratic forces unable to resist Maoist maneuvers because of the incumbents' lust for power. Apparently, the lust is still alive even after humiliating defeat and the Maoists are positioned to accrue additional mileage by relying on their original formula-extending of olive branches. No matter how morally repugnant and unprincipled the act of sharing power with a party that both the UML and NC rank and file claim, "stole" the elections, the idea of holding onto power (no matter the cost) seems to have taken center stage. Short term power mongering over long term survival is almost certain to yield the consolidation of state power, with the Maoists at the helm.

It is quite surprising (although not completely unexpected) to see the politicians of the NC and UML engaged in talks around power sharing even before they have taken complete stock of what the Maoist win means for their own party structures. The NC and UML should have spent time, thoroughly debating the root causes behind its humiliation at the Maoists' hands'. Certainly, the easy way out of this debate would be to point a finger at honorary Maoist, Krishna Prasad Sitaula (no surprises if the Maoists appoint Mr. Sitaula as a Minister without a portfolio in their cabinet), but this is not where the buck should really stop.

Despite politically aligned pundits and constitutional experts who are working around the clock to spin the Maoist victory (and gain bargaining power for the NC and UML), ordinary citizens who believe in democratic process are not fooled. To them, the poll results speak a single truth: The Maoists have won the elections fair and square and there is no reason whatsoever, why they should not be allowed to lead the next government.

Since the Maoists are carrying out this process democratically, there are no objections to be made. Clearly, in Nepal's case, power to the Maoists has arrived "under the shadow of a gun" with much help and fanfare from their political adversaries for whom the lust for power overrides all other considerations. To be perfectly clear, what we are seeing in Nepal now is not any benevolent act of greater good or consensus building for the sake of multiparty democracy. It is power politics, plain and simple.

Those acquainted with historical facts and interpretations of the methods and tools used by radicals to attain (and cling to) power, know exactly what Nepal has acquired through CA elections. However, they also recognize that subverting the people's mandate (irrespective of how unfairly this mandate was allegedly acquired) only benefits another set of power hungry politicians within the NC and the UML that are hell bent on remaining in the corridor of power even after the humiliating defeat.

The question that remains to be answered is whether the Maoists' ascendancy to power will ultimately benefit the consolidation of democracy in Nepal? Given the scale of the Maoists' victory, they are sure to exhibit ideological rigidity and there is very little the parties like the NC, UML, and the international community can do about it. The incentives for ideological rigidity are largely influenced by the leanings of the electorate, and in our case, voters have made their preference clear.

No matter how bitter the outcome is, we got to accept it. It is imperative that everyone respect the verdict of the CA elections and reward the winner. This is the very essence of democracy - people get to choose who they want their leaders to be. Any leadership structure that fails to place the Maoists at the apex, will be a complete perversion of the norms and processes of democracy and simply put, unacceptable.

In today's Nepal, where the deal based politics is the mantra for political survival, the critical democratic challenge is not only to keep winners from abusing their power, but also to keep losers wedded to the rules of the game. And so far, we have no systematic knowledge of the conditions under which this is likely to happen. The political elites in Nepal lack the required willingness to abide by the rules of the democratic game and accept its outcomes when the outcome is not in their favor. Democracy in Nepal chokes every now and then because of the lack of this consent that forms the foundation of political legitimacy.

Legitimate opposition to Nepal's Maoists has always been forwarded as some combination of the following premises: Principled disagreement with the Maoists' violent and gratuitous methods and/or a firm belief that those who rise to power by subverting democracy, are incapable of functioning within a democracy's paradigmatic construct.

As for the first premise, there is nothing left to say - especially when the people on whose behalf the principled stand was taken, have overwhelmingly voted for the perpetrators of their suffering. As for the second premise, only time will tell whether Nepal's Maoists are truly "Maoists" or power-hungry social democrats who happened to borrow Mao's military strategy as means to an end.

The verdict of the CA elections may be used to as an opportunity to improve consensus building amongst all parties and as a period for deep reflection and introspection amongst the major losers. This is a must if multiparty democracy is to survive over the long run.

While the period of opposition based on Maoist methods has come to a spectacular end, a new era which requires working relationships with supposedly "moderate" Maoists by staying outside the government has just begun.

Stop rationalizing defeat

Those who call themselves diehard democrats but remain enamored by the Maoist win in Nepal need to return to reality urgently. For if they do not, this “surprise” Maoist victory will turn into a lengthy series of astonishing feats.

The humiliating defeat of Nepal’s democratic forces is a consequence of the convergence between the following elements: A failure of collective intellect, dedicated effort, and imagination. In aggregate, these individual deficiencies amounted to a gross underestimation of Maoist capacity - much of which was allegedly based upon the application of dubious methods. Where collective intellect and effort are concerned, the debate is bound to rage on. But where failure in imagination goes, it becomes necessary to put oneself inside the Maoist mind and see things as they see them, to understand their beliefs, strategy, and supporting tactics.

Bridging the intellectual chasm that divides the Maoist worldview from the democratic worldview is not a simple task. It takes tremendous patience, conviction and moral rectitude to recognize elements that differentiate one’s political outlook from those of one’s rivals. Had either the Nepali Congress (NC) or United Marxist Leninist (UML) leadership taken time to dispassionately evaluate the Maoist machine, they would have understood long ago that the Maoists are in this to win - not to compromise, or become mainstreamed or to play by anyone else’s rules but their own.

For the Maoists, the game that began with projecting feudalism as the root of all evil will logically end with the realization of their strategic intent. The Maoists’ goal of using different combinations of bullets and ballots (and whatever other mechanisms and individuals that happen to be available) will culminate only when all marginal threats to their expanding power base have been eliminated. Whether this process of elimination occurs figuratively or literally, whether through perversions of democratic process or through decrees, are all secondary to the question of what remains the Maoists’ strategic end-goal?

The best way to have this question answered is to ask it: “Do the Maoists intend to exercise a system of vibrant multiparty democracy as defined by Western standards or do they intend to implement their own vision of democracy in Nepal?” The relevance of this targeted question remains the contradictory manner in which Maoists within their party have traditionally responded, and unfortunately, the manner in which Nepal’s rent-seeking civil society pundits have interpreted available Maoist responses.

In effect, allegations that the Maoists used undemocratic methods to subvert their competition during constituent assembly elections simply cannot be written off using rationale which suggests that the NC and the UML did the same, a decade ago. By extension of this line of reasoning, is the hypothetical implementation of a one-party communist republic justified based on the fact that Mahendra implemented a one-party Panchayat system a half-century ago? Barring differences based on political extremities, the logic is identical - and equally flawed.

While it is hardly surprising that the Maoists will continue to leverage ethnic appeal to fulfill their remaining agendas, it is completely shocking to read staunch democrats justify the Maoist victory on grounds of political goodwill generated through the Maoist insurgency. Is goodwill borne of political cleansing and then capitalized on through the absence of choice, a new democratic standard for Nepalese to look forward to?

Understanding a problem is the first half of the path to solving it. The democratic forces in Nepal should learn a lesson from how the Maoists have done “business” to date. The Maoist method of power consolidation amounts to restrictions over choice, populism over substance, and the use and abuse of any and all elements that elevate the Maoists’ chances of consolidating their powerbase.

The next step in the Maoist game plan is to garner international legitimacy through a power-sharing arrangement with the NC and UML. Ironically, Maoist strongman Pushpa Kamal Dahal is guilt-tripping the NC and UML into remaining within the Maoist government by citing the need to live up to past agreements. As for unprincipled individuals like Bam Dev Gautam, he isn’t far behind on the list of “useful idiots” and may be written off as an aspiring Maoist.

The point here is that the utility of the Seven Party Alliance (SPA) is not quite over for the Maoists. The Maoists still need the UML and the NC to maintain international cover, while the Maoists mould a constitution of their choice. They understand that if the constitution-making process is delayed and that the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) returns to the power in India, the Maoists’ days of smooth sailing will be over. So, until the constitution of their liking is drafted and the Maoists are positioned to sweep the next round of local and parliamentary elections, they will continue to extend olive branches to the NC and the UML.

The urge to cling to a false sense of short-term power at the detriment of a vibrant, long-term democracy is something that both the NC and UML should carefully consider. As far as past agreements are concerned, elected NC and UML members to the constituent assembly are already positioned to fulfill their parties’ commitments. At this time, it may be more appropriate for the NC and UML to engage in some long overdue introspection, soul-searching and re-invention so their parties do not re-perform the recent acts of humiliation when the time for parliamentary elections arrives. There’s nothing wrong with these parties for some “time off” from the daily grind of governance to get their own houses in order.

For the Maoists, the game is almost over. They have substantially weakened the UML and are in the process of accommodating the Royalists. By suggesting the provision of social, economic, and cultural rights to the king they have indirectly tested the public’s appetite for a ceremonial monarchy using different terms (“monarchy with certain cultural rights”). By hinting at providing space to the Nepal’s King, the Maoists have once again attempted to define the direction of the Nepali’s political debate. In essence, they are experimenting BP Koirala’s notion of national reconciliation but once more, by using different terms. The Maoists are systematically recreating their own public image while eroding the defining characteristics of their political opponents.

Under such a radically transformed environment, the mainstream political parties of yesteryears can only survive by positioning themselves in the center and forming an alliance to protect multiparty democracy. The NC and UML need to spearhead efforts to align moderates from all walks on political life in Nepal. This act, in essence, must address the urgent need to guarantee the sustenance of multiparty democratic politics in Nepal and have nothing to do with opposing the Maoists. If the Maoists construe the formation of such an alliance as unacceptable to their agenda, people must understand that there’s a fundamental problem with the Maoist agenda, not the proposed multiparty alliance. If it serves to assuage the Maoists’ fragile sensibilities, they (along with their leftist alliance partners) may be invited as observers to the alliance of multiparty democrats. Who knows? The Maoists might even learn a thing or two?

Constituent Assembly Election Post-mortem

Everyone is contemplating the factors that carried Nepal's Maoists to an impressive victory in the country's CA elections. The scale of the Maoists’ victory in the CA elections has surprised Western observers and the Maoists alike. Had the Maoists sensed their landslide victory in advance, their quest to form an electoral alliance with the UML would have ended long before the election date. And had the West (or India) anticipated a red curtain falling over Nepal, they may have thought twice before pushing elections at all costs, despite the overwhelming state of lawlessness immediately before elections.

History in this sense hasn't just been made within Nepal; rather, the Maoists' ascendancy to power has set a precedent for the entire South Asian region and the world to "marvel" at. No matter how the Maoist victory is ultimately spun, the cold, hard and uneasy facts stare us squarely in our faces - one permutation of the idea that "power comes from the barrel of a gun" is alive and well and Nepal's Maoists are living proof of this concept.

Having witnessed the Maoists' rise to power, the Nepali people are now in the process of figuring out what a Maoist-majority government means for Nepal's democratic future. Unraveling this mystery requires working-knowledge of the factors that benefited the Maoists as well as elements that amplified the incumbent parties' humiliating defeat.

The debate over whether people who voted for the Maoists actually subscribe to Maoist fundamentalism will continue to play out over the months ahead. However, the symbolic emphasis that voters' placed on the need for radical change requires no further deliberation. The Maoist party swept CA elections primarily because it conducted an excellent electoral campaign but equally because the campaigns of their political adversaries were so hollow. The Maoists had fresh candidates, clear messages and an unwavering strategic objective upon which to pontificate. To the contrary, never mind a winning strategy, the major parties of the yesteryears had neither clean candidates to forward, nor distinctive messages to convey.

To the ordinary observer, the similarities between the candidate list forwarded by Gyanendra less than 26 months earlier, which included the likes of Kamal Thapa and those forwarded by the Nepali Congress (NC) that included the likes of Khum Bahadur Khadka for the CA elections, are hard to miss. Surely, dynamic reactions that reflect public sentiment (instead of a fixated reliance on status quo candidates) would have positioned the NC and UML for less humiliating defeats?

The NC and the UML also appear to have failed miserably at anticipating the Nepali public's intelligence. These parties' attempt at defeating the Maoists by re-packaging agendas for which the Maoists fought a decade-long civil war - establishing a federal democratic republic, building an inclusive society, administering equality and justice, etc. - grossly underestimated the Nepali public's prowess. After all, like informed consumers anywhere in the world, voters in Nepal decided to "purchase" the republican agenda from its original architects - the Maoists.

Once again, the credit goes to the Maoists for their superb "republican bait" – a bait that the NC and UML consumed, hook, line and sinker! By framing the debate exclusively in terms of the republican agenda, the Maoists tactfully engineered a situation where NC and UML candidates unknowingly campaigned on the Maoists' behalf.

The Maoist leaders' continued campaigning while the YCL effectively denied competitors access to large sections of Nepal that have not had any State presence for over a decade. Persistent aggression in the pre-poll environment should have given advocates of liberal democracy reason for logical pause. But the risk of being branded "anti-election reactionaries" undoubtedly subdued (otherwise logical caution) from the liberal democratic camp.

The populist fervor architected by Nepal's Maoists forced Nepal's liberal democrats to continually walk a tightrope between conviction and credibility. Which of these competing agendas was ultimately served, will become uneasily clear in the near future. Already, the process of rationalizing the CA results in terms that praise the democratic process but pin hopes for a functional democracy on a known utilitarian strategy, has begun in earnest. Whether one agrees or not with the Maoists' tactics, the brilliance in the political maneuvering is hard to ignore.

Like the NC that failed to realize the importance of fielding clean candidates and distinctive messages, the UML never got beyond the politics of "fence-sitting". Madhav Nepal held repeated parlays with his Indian and American interlocutors, frequently educated Puspa Kamal Dahal on the meaning of CA elections and invested much in efforts aimed at portraying the UML as responsible for "mainstreaming the Maoists."

Somewhere in this fray however, Madhav Nepal forgot how close Marxism, Leninism and Maoism truly are. The challenge in distinguishing the UML from the Maoists along ideological lines was an enormously important task that Madhav Nepal simply neglected to act on. The UML's strongman busied himself maintaining political correctness and in the process, buried the UML's identity.

It is now clear beyond any credible doubt, that the UML's claim to having mainstreamed the Maoists was in fact, inverted - it is the Maoists who have defined the mainstream to which the NC and UML have migrated, not the other way around. Also, since the current polity is a mainstream that the Maoists have defined, there is little by way of logic to suggest that the constitution that is a product of this polity, will be anything but a Maoist interpretation of democracy.

The CA elections have transformed Nepal's political landscape whereby moderates are now replaced by radical ideologues. While the Maoist leaders have said that they will be “pragmatic,” it would be naive to imagine that this group will abandon its basic ideology.

The Maoists are demonstrably inconsistent when it comes to what they say versus what they actually do. Not even seventy two hours had passed from the time Puspa Kamal Dahal delivered his victory speech (in which he reaffirmed his commitment to multiparty democracy and continued coordination amongst other political parties) and the current Finance Minister Ram Saran Mahat had already been attacked by Maoist cadres, in Nuwakot. The message such actions send to the NC's rank and file is clear - the Maoists do not like losing and they're willing to get violent to prove their point.

Both Hitler and Mussolini took power in more or less a democratic fashion and what they did with democracy is forever engraved in the annals of tragic history. Although the German and Italian examples are not one hundred percent analogous to Nepal, the larger point to take away is that extreme caution is necessary to prevent any group that is borne of radical ideology, from running away with their radical, undemocratic ideas.

Many may posit that Nepal’s excessive dependence on India and its aid dependent economy will serve as natural restraints to Maoist excesses. But the reality is that given the nature of the Maoist victory in Nepal and the nationalist platform the Maoists and Royalists share, India is the one that will be treading lightly on Nepal, not the other way around. This is all the reason why Nepal's liberal democrats have to exercise even more precaution and care over the immediate future. If this group fails to leverage its credentials and act on convictions over credentials, democracy as we know it will undoubtedly come under siege in Nepal.

Act responsibly

After the Constituent Assembly (CA) elections on 10th of April, Nepali politics will take a new direction. Hopefully, the Maoist party that has been sending conflicting signals about accepting the people's verdict will exhibit some political maturity and decency even if it fails to cruise to thumping victory. If nothing, a lesson that they can take home at the end of the day is that ballots can bring political change faster than bullets. Who knows how long it would have taken, or for that matter, if it was even possible for the Maoist party to overthrow monarchy that had a cozy relationship with professional military through a classic guerrilla hit-and-run tactics.

There is no doubt that violence has served as a springboard for the Maoists to get where they are today but by rejecting CA election results (if they actually do so) the Maoists will be forcing Nepali people to think whether the Maoists' demand for CA polls was a sincere attempt towards empowering the poor and downtrodden masses of Nepal or tactical ploy to lure innocent Nepali people that are yet to experience the trickle down effects of the developmental aid pouring into the country for the last five decades or so.

There is no doubt that the Maoists spearheaded the demand for the republic. But the senseless acts of violence, which the Maoist cadres actually never gave up in the last two years even after signing fifty plus agreements, clearly shows that there is a substantial difference between the kind of republic that the people want and the Maoists cherish for. The people, for sure, do not want a type of republic whereby candidates contesting elections get beaten black and blue by the cadres of brainwashed, irrational, and intolerant Young Communist League. If the Maoists really think it is the most trusted party, then they have even bigger responsibility of delivering what people want: peace, democracy, and prosperity.

The people want real peace, not the false sense of security that Kim Jong-Il has been providing his hapless subjects in North Korea. They want a true democratic state whereby every single individual has a right to float a new political party or contest elections fearlessly, not the one where the party at the helm of affairs decides who is progressive, and hence, worthy enough to contest elections.

Peace and democracy alone will not be enough to contend people for long. If we look back, it becomes evident that, the mass-democratic movements of the eighties that swept the developing world were essentially based on bread and butter and local issues such as electricity, water, and low wages. Unless the political transformation that took place in the last two years brings about socio-economic transformation, neither long lasting peace nor democratic consolidation is possible in Nepal. It is socio-economic transformation, like ocean currents deep below the hurricane-tormented surface of the sea that will have the lasting and permanent effect, when it comes to establishing a largely peaceful democratic state. Failure to bring socio-economic changes will once again force people to rebel; however, the next revolution in Nepal will be against economic apartheid.

As far as the major political parties that have been participating in the democratic exercises of the last two decades are concerned, they have even a greater role to play. They have a solemn duty to show to the people that they are actually capable of bringing peace through the moderation of the Maoists, which they promised will happen eventually, or else it will become clear that the democrats failed to understand the Maoists' ploy of using democrats as "useful idiots" in order to leapfrog to a higher level of the Maoist revolution pyramid.

In addition, the major political parties will have to counter the utopian dreams of equality that the hardcore left sells to woo people in its favor with programs that produce real tangible results if they want to survive politically. They got to prove that they are actually capable of delivering the results. Failure to do so will not only embolden the footings of the Maoists but will also open up a space for another set of radicals to pursue a dream of a perpetual revolution whatever the costs.

The last one and half decades of the Maoist insurgency and the last one year of ethnic dissent are to some extent results of weak performances of the major political parties in terms of social and political integration. Due to lack of internal democracy within political parties, the leaders with vision and actual problem solving abilities never got a chance to come to the forefront. Hopefully, with the onset of a new dawn, intra-party democracy will take root, which is absolutely important for an emergence of competent leadership that can replace the older folks, who tend to have the years they spent in jail fighting for democracy as the only credible credential, which in the real world of performance-based politics is not worth even a penny.

For how long should one's actual potential to deliver tangible results be waived for the years s/he spent in prison fighting for democracy? Shouldn't it stop at some point? What could be better time than now when we are making a fresh start to build a new Nepal?

The challenge of creating a "New Nepal" requires a vision and sacrifices on part of the political leadership. The abolishment of monarchy is the first step in the process of dismantling feudal structures and creating an equal society. With that taken care of, the real challenge will be to ensure that, rising tide raises all boats. The people have really started seeing the dreams of living in a "New Nepal," in which, the fundamental issue of good governance, in terms of effectiveness, efficiency, transparency, responsiveness and accountability, will be attended to.

It would not be wise on the part of politicians to let down the people that are so focused on the hope for peace and prosperity with enthusiastic creative imagination. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a German pastor, who vehemently opposed Nazism famously said: "the ultimate test of a moral society is the kind of world it leaves to its children."

The current generation of politicians in Nepal, thus, has an obligation to become moral and worthy ancestors. They have a responsibility of making sure that the ongoing political transformation brings peace, prosperity and democratic freedom to the people or else they run the risk of being remembered as bunch of loonies that embarked on the journey of political engineering without proper vision, knowledge, and direction and ended up creating a political Frankenstein.

Let the people decide

It’s been almost a decade since Nepal had legitimate elections. A lot of things have changed since then. The Maoists that once ran for their lives are now making others run. The mainstream political parties that once hardheadedly undermined the inclusion of Madhesis and Dalits have fielded candidates from these marginalized groups in large numbers in the upcoming CA elections.

The upcoming CA elections may not be perfect like any other elections in the developing world but they will definitely take the nation a step forward. For now, it is the best game in town. It will help break the cycle of political stagnation.

With the successful conduction of CA elections, we can: (1) get rid of monarchy that has never stopped fiddling around with democracy and democratic rights of people, (2) put a brake on autocratic aspirations of graffiti-president Puspa Kamal Dahal even if it is a temporary one. These two individuals pose a perennial threat to stable democracy. Unless we negate the threat posed by them, transition to a stable multi-party democracy will always remain an illusive dream.

We have long passed the discussion on utility of the monarchy. The nation is ready to embrace a new system. Krishna Prasad Bhattarai and his followers should stop confusing the voters with their open exhibition of royal obsession. King Gyanendra’s foolishness of 2005 aside, the monarchy as an institution has been serving as a punching bag for politicians that want to hide their own incompetence and failures. It is, thus, necessary that we get rid of monarchy and prepare grounds for politicians whereby they will be forced to take responsibilities for their incompetence and failures.

Like the democratic movement in Nepal did not die after the demise of the visionary statesman like BP Koirala, we, as a nation, will definitely survive as a republic.

The upcoming CA elections will again bring the democratic forces to the forefront. The people, if given opportunity, would always reject both the hardcore left and the right. If we look at the period between post-1990 popular movement and the beginning of the Maoist movement, the nation had already moved towards the center. Even the United Marxists Leninist Party (UML) which has a sizeable number of extreme left-leaning ideologues like Bam Dev Gautam that appears more radical than many Maoist radicals at the higher echelon of the party, had embraced multiparty parliamentary democracy.

The growth of media was impressive. Slowly but surely the mainstream media was eroding the reach of vernacular weeklies that serve political parties rather than shaping public opinion for the greater good of the nation. Schools and colleges were being opened in villages like never before and the private sector had begun to flourish. Had the Maoists not bogged down the genuine democratic process, we would have made a significant political and economic progress by now.

For the mainstream political parties, gaining the lost political grounds might not be as hard as it might seem to be. All they got to do is, act smart and act now. Before it gets too late, the NC and the UML, that are the major partners of the current coalition should do two things: (a) ask security forces to make the cadres of the mainstream political parties feel safe (2) explain to people as and why it is dangerous to get swayed by the brainwashed ideologues and ethnic hustlers. Give them real world examples. Let he people know how Communist regimes around the world got crumbled under the weight of their Orwellian goals, of which, they never got even close. Tell them why it is dangerous to experiment radical communism even if it is for a short period of time.

It is important for people to know how hard people of former communist regimes are struggling to overcome the legacy of totalitarianism, which aggressively sought to eradicate anything that might serve as an institutional foundation for democracy.

Like the recent uprising in the tarai gave moderate regional parties a space to operate, the upcoming CA elections will give space to moderate mainstream political parties that have been competing with each other democratically for almost two decades. Nepali society will again move towards the center.

Like the 3-year long draconian Panchayat regime could not force the society to move towards the extreme right, the decade old Maoists’ propaganda and violence will not be able to persuade Nepali society to move towards the extreme left. It will simply not happen under the ideal conditions. Nepali society is resilient enough to survive forceful indoctrinations.

Lately, the Maoists have been acting like cornered animals and intensified their attacks on political rivals. The mainstream media are awash with the breach of the election Code of Conduct by the Maoists. It is important to understand that the Maoists are intimidating the mainstream political parties’ rank-and-files with a hope that their intimidation tactics will force the NC and the UML to come to an informal understanding that they need to ensure the victory of the Maoist candidates in the upcoming CA elections. They know it very well that without the support of the NC and the UML, humiliating defeat in the CA polls is inevitable.

Unlike in the past, the NC and the UML should not fall into the laid Maoist trap this time around. Any informal understanding to ensure the Maoist victory will falsely project their strength and hence encourage them to indulge in more irrational political bargains in the future. Let the actual strength of the political parties emerge. That is what democracy is all about, isn’t it?

There is still a huge population that despises both extreme left and the right.

Young Turks like Gagan Thapa should rethink the danger associated with positioning oneself towards the far-left fringe of the Congress party. By positioning yourself on the far-left, you will blur the difference between yourself and Khim Lal Devkota.

There is nothing to worry about the Maoist crowd gathered to listen to threat laden rhetoric of the Maoist ideologues in the open theater. Boris Yeltsin is a spectacular example of how former communists can easily become anticommunists. All you got to do is, position yourself in the center, and fight against both the extreme left’s propaganda machine and the muscle power. Once people understand the limits of an outdated utopian dream of equality that the extreme left is trying hard to sell and once they get convinced that the physical threat posed by the left can be challenged, they will come out in favor of democratic forces like never before. People are sick and tired of the violent politics practiced by the hardcore leftist radicals. Just hang in there and do what true democrats do best: fight against the extreme left’s propaganda machine and muscle power by energizing the democratic base. It is definitely a winnable game.

Will CA polls be 'free and fair'?

Election fever has finally hit the nation. After two years of political confusion and chaos, the chances of Constituent Assembly (CA) elections taking place appear brighter than ever. However, the major concern now is: What will happen if elections go one way or the other?

Will the Maoist radicals that believe only violence can effect political change for the people, and for whom, death of innocent civilians, children, or a land owner who owns too large a plot of paddy is simply the cost of war accept the defeat if they fail to emerge as a major political party in CA elections? Will the royalists that seem to be excited by the recent opinion poll that shows a surge in king's popularity accept the verdict of CA polls wholeheartedly if people reject monarchy? What would the mainstream political parties' like the Nepali Congress and the United Marxist Leninist (UML) do if they fail to put up a decent fight in the CA polls?

Has anybody in the mainstream political parties or the donor community thought about these scenarios and their possible fallout seriously? The game does no get over with the CA elections. Rather, the real power game will begin after the elections are over. There is a big possibility of a post-election violence like the one that happened in Kenya recently. As the real battle for the political survival will begin after the CA elections, donor community should work with the moderate political forces and the Army and come up with a post-election strategy.

For Puspa Kamal Dahal, his life-long presidential ambition is at stake, whereas for King Gyanendra, more than two century-old royal legacy is almost over. Will these pompous egoistic individuals accept people's verdict like rational human beings? There is very little room to believe that. So, it is important that we, as a nation, remain prepared for the worst.

On the brighter side, upcoming CA elections have provided a perfect opportunity for the democratic forces in Nepal to emerge as a winner. All they got to do at this point in time is to ensure that elections are not rigged by the groups that want to falsely project themselves as a major political force. Free and fair CA elections have the potential to re-legitimize the mainstream parties through a process of universal suffrage. Rigged elections will further legitimize a decade of violence.

The Maoist party is clinically dead in the tarai. It will, thus, do anything for a clean sweep in the hills. Politically, it is a do-or-die situation for them. The best way of testing the Maoist commitment towards the free and fair elections is through the deployment of the Nepali Army during the CA elections.

As the demands of every dissenting group in the tarai have been fulfilled, except for the secessionists, deployment of the NA to ensure free and fair elections should not be a problem. If there is an opposition, be sure that the opposing group definitely has something else in mind. It would be a blunder to cage a professional army that has successfully conducted elections in war-ridden countries when we need its help to identify the legitimate political forces that the people of Nepal trust to take the nation forward in the right direction.

In a situation whereby the Young Communists League (YCL) is openly intimidating leaders and campaigners of other political parties in the hills and secessionists are creating havoc in the tarai, the only way to enhance the popular participation in the upcoming elections is by making them feel safe at polling stations. And, Nepal Police under Krishna Situala's leadership is neither professionally capable, nor psychologically strong to do so.

Let us all be practical for the greater good of the nation, shall we? At this juncture, we have got two choices: (1) let the polls to be rigged out of fear that lack of political space will force the Maoists to return to the jungles (2) conduct free and fair elections and send a strong message: guns can't buy votes, ultimately you got to win the hearts and minds of people.

Radicals survive their confrontation with reality by withdrawing from society into their "sect." Irrespective of its ideological substance, radicalism as a frame of mind, exists at all times. Our success lies in conducting free and fair elections so that the people that are easily lured and indoctrinated by the radicals like Puspa Kamal Dahal, Nagendra Paswan, and Jay Krishna Goit get a message that, by raising arms against the state you can get only so far.

In a country like ours that has been a victim of bloody insurgency and ethnic divide, elections can be seminal events that, if free and fair, not only confer legitimacy on governments but also can profoundly influence political and social institutions, power arrangements, and citizens' expectations. Confining NA to the barracks at this juncture when the cadres of the Maoists and the secessionists are intimidating and annihilating political opponents will be a blunder of Himalayan proportion.

Do not make upcoming CA elections a fading shadow of democracy, by letting it to get rigged, when we are actually capable of conducting free and fair elections. Rigged elections will further squeeze the juice out of major political parties that are already dehydrated.

Like the Maoist violent means taught those groups out there that are now raising arms against the state that, raising arms against the state is not a heinous crime but a profitable political bargain, rigged elections will teach them another set of lessons: first, bring down the mainstream political parties to their knees at a gun point and then replace them through rigged elections. How good of a lesson would that be?

Stop coddling despots

Recently, during a training program for party cadres in Chitwan district, in a threat-laden statement, Prachanda assured his brainwashed cadres that the “State” after the Constituent Assembly (CA) election will come to the Maoist fold at any cost. He made it pretty clear to his cadre that if the Maoists failed to capture power through the CA poll, it would be done through a coup.

While the Maoists are tirelessly trumpeting the possibility of a "democratic coup" backed by the army like the one in Bangladesh, they have their own model --"nationalist coup" ready. Two years after the landmark victory against the despotic monarch, the Nepalis are once again nervous about the possibility of another despotic regime.

The revival of the Maoists' parallel administration across the country clearly shows how committed they are towards the forty plus agreement that they have signed with the government. While the mainstream political parties are having a hard time reaching their constituents -- Dilendra Badu's episode says it all -- the Maoists have kept both the option of bullets and ballots open.

Was it expected? Absolutely yes. The Maoists never gave up the idea of capturing the state altogether. It was political parties who thought that the moderation of the Maoists would take place after they come to power. However, what the leaders of the major political parties failed to realize is that providing political power only begets the desires of the radicals to perpetuate and aggrandize power and does not contribute towards “moderation.” Bringing the radicals to the helms of affairs has never resulted in moderation. It simply does not work. After coming to power, radicals like Hitler, Mussolini, Khomeini, Castro, Kim Jong Il, Mullah Mohammad Omar, got even more “strong headed” and rhetorical. And, yes, our own Prachanda is not getting any softer.

The only way to soften the radicals is to militarily weaken them first. Negotiation with them should happen only after their dream of capturing the state is completely aborted. Unless you abort their dreams of possible military victory over the state, they will never abide by the rules of the game.

Furthermore, when you join hands with radicals whose views are completely opposite to your's, you are bound to get betrayed. From the never-ending episode of the Maoists' betrayal, if nothing, the politicians of the mainstream political parties must have learnt one lesson -- ideological dilution never pays off. The mainstream political parties could have defeated King Gyanendra without the help of the Maoists. Despots like King Gyanendra cannot remain in power for long. Sooner or later people succeed in unseating them. It might have taken a little longer but it was certainly a doable job.

Musharaff's military regime in Pakistan would have been toppled long ago had Benazir and Nawaz Sharif joined hands with the armed radicals in Pakistan. But Benazir never tried to reach out to the radical Islamofascists. She must have known the cost associated with coddling the radicals.

For an alliance to work, it must have the involvement of like-minded parties. When you forge an alliance with a party that believes power comes from the barrel of guns rather than ballots, you run the risk of getting robbed at a gun point. This is what is precisely happening in Nepal. The Maoists are robbing off the political parties at gun point. The sheer threat of violence brings the major political parties to their knees and forces them to fulfill the Maoists' demands.

When we look back, it becomes quite evident that our politicians have once again failed to live up to the nation's expectation. The last two years were the years of wasted opportunities. We had never been so close to realizing the dreams of being a peaceful and democratic nation. Had the Maoists been committed to the peace process and the government sincere towards fulfilling the genuine demands raised by ethnic minorities, the country would have been pretty peaceful and stable by now. The nation would have taken a giant leap towards peace and democracy.

Nearly two years have passed by, but the people are yet to witness the dividends of democracy. The state has been unable to fulfill its basic duties towards citizens. Safety and security of civilians is still a major concern. Inflation has skyrocketed and smooth delivery of goods and services are far from being normal.

The April revolution of 2006 had provided a perfect platform for securing peace and democracy. Two years down the road and here we are again muddling through. What is it that brought us to this level of chaos, conflict, disunity, intrigue, and erosion of a sense of nationhood?

After the victory against King Gyanendra, what our politicians failed to understand is that, in order to establish a durable peace and stability, the violence and lawlessness that has existed thus far must give way to the security of citizens and the rule of law; social and political exclusion must give way to participatory institutions; animosity between the Maoists and the internally displaced persons (IDPs) must give way to national reconciliation and the economy that has been ravaged by the decade-long violent insurgency must be transformed into a well-functioning market economy. Reconciliation and reconstruction never took off.

While the Maoists always remained glued to their glib idea of capturing the state, the major political parties had no strategies whatsoever. They did not even bother to punish the culprits of King Gyanendra's regime. When the state fails to punish the culprits and reward honest citizens, thugs have no reason to stop thuggery.

The chances of holding CA election on April 10 are very slim. Every politician knows that in the current situation free and fair election cannot be conducted. It is just that they don't dare to cruise against the tide of populist politics and be the bearer of the unpleasant news. Instead of window-dressing, the political parties should be truthful about it.

What next? The prime minister should be tasked with forming a national unity government after consultation with the civil society organizations, religious leaders, and all political parties, even those that are outside the Seven Party Alliance (SPA). The new government should then hold CA election after fulfilling the legitimate demands of the regional parties. It is better to have legitimate election later than have forced election now. Only such practical steps can save Nepal from falling into the hands of power hungry despots like Prachanda and King Gyanendra who want to crush democratic rights of the people.

The road ahead

Last week, in British Broadcasting Corporation's (BBC) program “Sajha Sawal”, the stalwarts of the Seven Part Alliance (SPA); Dr Ram Sharan Mahat, Jhala Nath Khanal, and Hishila Yami; were caught off guard. Sushil Sharma's simple question -- will you all retire from politics if you fail to conduct twice postponed Constituent Assembly (CA) election this time around, made them pause. It made them stop blowing their horns, even if it was for a few seconds, and forced them to reflect in their real ability to get things done.

Despite all assurances and promises to flock together this time around to fulfill people's desire to have a CA election, not a single politician that participated in the program had enough guts to say; yes, as a senior member of my party I will take the responsibility for repeated failure in not being able to meet people's desire, and thus, will retire.

Although repeated failure is an example of incompetence, none sounded like the ones who had flunked thrice in the same mission. Like his boss Madhav Kumar Nepal, Jhala Nath Khanal was at his best in fence-sitting politics.

In a typical Madhav Nepal style, Khanal blamed Yami and Dr Mahat's party for the debacle and tried to project his party as the only viable alternative that can wipe-out all ills confronting Nepal. Yami appeared more aggressive than needed. Like a cornered animal, she spent most of her time hounding fellow participants, especially Dr Mahat, left and right. In a typical leftist style, with help of jargons such as progression, regression, inclusion, she tried her best to justify her party's run away from the CA election in November of 2007.

Yami repeatedly mentioned people as a wise lot, but did not refrain from trying to fool the very same people by justifying the CPN (Maoist)'s run away from the CA election scheduled for last November. Are we that stupid not to know why the Maoists ran away from CA election in November? Madam, give us a break.

Dr Mahat at times came down heavily on the Maoists' duplicity and dubious character but had nothing new to say. Later on during the program, he joined the chorus to assure the seriousness of the SPA in conducting the CA election this time around.

Last week's program clearly revealed two things: (1) the confidence of the ruling coalition in its ability to conduct CA election (2) honesty of the stalwarts of the ruling coalition. Like in the past, the ruling coalition wants to assure the people that they will pull it off. But there are very few buyers this time around. How can people be assured that the CA election will not be postponed this time around when the politicians that are supposed to conduct election are not themselves confident enough in their ability to it? What is even more troubling is their lack of honesty and sincerity towards the people, who deserve truthful assessment about the prospects of CA election, if nothing.

Is it practically feasible to conduct a free and fair election in less than three months in the current situation whereby the presence of the state is confined to the Kathmandu valley? Populist politics is at its best in Nepal. Strange but true, no politician wants to be the bearer of any unpleasant news. So, instead of banking on politicians' assurances, why don't we do our own analysis?

There are two major hurdles in the path of successful completion of CA election: (1) the ethnic dissent in the tarai (2) Insincerity of the Maoists. The security situation in the tarai is deteriorating at an unprecedented pace. Civil servants in various tarai districts are being extorted, abducted and killed. Many government officials in the tarai are devoid of civil servants. In a context whereby the polling officers to conduct the election in the tarai have publicly said that they would not abide by the government's instructions and have threatened to resign, how is the government going to conduct the election?

The spiraling security dilemma will become particularly intense and at some point, it is likely to move to outright conflict if the condition is not improved. Unless the tarai issue is addressed amicably and the participation of credible political forces such as the Madhesi People's Right Forum and Tarai-Madhes Lokantrik Party is ensured, there are very slim chances of conducting the election in the tarai.

Election is not an end in itself. Its results without the participation of the ethnic parties, at best, can be called as partial mandate. The issue of credibility will continue to haunt the SPA like it did King Gyanendra if the political participation of those outside the ruling alliance is not ensured. And, the reverence of the constitution will always remain in question if crafted without the participation of the certain segment of the society. It will not be able to survive as the supreme law of the land for long. Sooner or later, it will have to be scrapped or amended substantially.

Another major hurdle in the path of CA election is Maoists' insincerity. Despite signing forty plus agreements with the mainstream political parties, understandings in the paper have not turned into reality. Based on the Maoists' track record of adherence to the peace process, it cannot be ruled out that the Maoists will again abort the prospects of CA election.

The fear of defeat in the CA poll forced the Maoists to make U-turn from their earlier commitments and scuttle it. Since then, things have not changed much in the favor of the CPN (Maoist). The very minute the Maoists realize that they will not emerge as a major political force, they will scuttle the process. As a matter of fact, they may do that even before. There is a big probability that the Maoists will make integration of their combatants into the NA and walk out of the government once they pocket around 2.15 billion rupees as salary/arrears for their guerillas. They may put forward kicking King Gyanendra out of the palace as the new precondition for election, and leave the government. Based on the Maoists' track record, which is full of duplicity and dubiousness, these scenarios cannot be ignored altogether.

Furthermore, Prachanda's recent revelation about his admiration and reverence for Lenin raises more questions than it answers. Like his reverend leader Lenin, who grabbed the power after dispensing his opponents and dismissed the constituent assembly, Prachanda too might be toying with the idea of scuttling the CA poll and annihilating the political rivals within the SPA.

For radicals, things appear in black and white, grey areas do not exist. They can only visualize the birth of Lord Buddha or Junga Bahadur Rana. Non-violent Gandhi that freed millions of Indians crushed by the British Empire does not impress them. As Buddha is not the right person to tame the people that are posing a serious threat to the existence of his brainwashed cadres and militias, he might try to justify the need of Junga Bahadur Rana and prove his relevance.

The road to successful CA election is a thorny one. The ability of the mainstream political parties to force the Maoists adhere to the agreements and ensure the participation of the political parties outside the ruling alliance will determine whether or not the CA election will be held this time around. Failure to do so will plunge the nation into a political and constitutional crisis.

In order to save Nepal both from the dictatorship of the proletariat and the 'guardian coup', whereby the military steps in with the goal of restoring public order, reducing corruption, or fighting insurgents, civilian power must be wielded legitimately. For that to happen, the April CA election must take place, and they must produce credible results. Should this election be postponed/cancelled or the poll lacks credibility due to the lack of participation of parties outside the SPA coalition, then the transition risks derailing and no further possibility can be ruled out.