The UML need not become the spokesperson of the Maoists

TGQ1: It appears that your party, the UML, is plunged into a controversial political debate? Why it is that the party leadership favors a government under Maoist leadership and the other equally powerful camp in your party prefers to provide continuation to this set up? Does not this mean that the differences are dangerous both in content and nature? What say you Mr. Gyanwali?

Mr. Gyanwali: Yes, I do agree that of late some political problems have cropped up inside the party. The differences are basically on how to analyze the current political situation and also on how to evaluate the intra and inter party relations plus on how to manage the internal differences in the party’s rank and file. The eighth general convention of the UML had provided mandate to the party to keep united the party at all cost and steer the party abiding by the norms of the democratic system. The convention had also decided to evaluate the causes which made the party to embrace debacle in the last CA polls. But unfortunately due to some seen and unseen reasons the UML party could not live up to the mandate of the last general convention.

Yes! The central committee meet that accepted and later approved that the steps taken by the Maoists as regards the issue of the Chief of the Nepal Army staff was a decision which enjoyed the party’s unanimity. That the Maoists wanted to go alone caring little of the coalition partners and thus our party’s quitting the government too was a collective decision of the UML party save the note of dissent penned by Comrade Bam Dev Gautam. The decision to form a new government under Madhav Kumar Nepal too was the party’s collective decision. We want to transform this government into a national one by inviting the Maoists as well. This too has no objection in the party. But if some one wanted to topple this government and make fresh overtures to form yet another government under the Maoist’s leadership then that would be an unfortunate adventure. If some one in the party encourages the prevalence of this new equation and speaks in favor of such misadventure then such utterances neither could be in the larger interest of the party, nation nor in the interest of democratic order. 

TGQ2: The problems that have cropped up in the UML may even split the party, it is rumored. When the party captain himself favors the Maoists then it must have some impact on the party. What say you in this regard?

Mr. Gyanwali: We can’t even imagine of the split in the UML. No body should try to goad the party in the Rightists’ or in the camp of the Extremists. The wound that has been there in the party must be provided with ointment and steer the party in a united manner as in the past. The UML, I must say, neither favors Rightist nor the Extremist camp. Be it known to all. If any utterances surface which clash with the UML approved stance, as I have said, all stand null and void.

Whosoever speaks, must speaks the voice of the UML. Whether it is the UML Chairman or a lower echelon cadre, they must speak UML voice. The Maoists have enough cadres to speak their language and voices. The UML need not become the spokesperson of the Maoists.

The UML must concentrate its entire efforts on how to lead the country in an effective manner by keeping Extremism at a distance and also direct its efforts in drafting a new constitution for Nepal.

If any body speaks beyond this line, that will not be taken as the voice of the UML. That’s it.

TGQ3: It is widely believed that the UML cadres have been deserting to the Maoists camp under the instructions of the UML leadership itself? It is also said that there had been a sort of bungling while amending the UML constitution. What say you Mr. Gyanwali?

Mr. Gyanwali: The habit of changing political camps by the political cadres or for that matter leader is not a new phenomenon for Nepal. One remains in the party as long as he or she adheres to the political line of the party concerned. One is free to abandon the party as and when he or she differs with the political line of consideration of the mother party. But those who change the camps for serving their petty political interests neither can bring about a transformation in the society nor can strengthen the party wherein they have just entered into. It would be just a change for change.

Had it been so then the Nepali Congress which opened the gates of the party after 1990s change should have been the largest and the strongest party in Nepal as of now. But when it came to the crunch, the new entrants went back to where they in effect belonged to in the past. The same situation prevailed in the UML around 1995. The process appears to have been the same with the Maoists now. But those who have just found a place in the Maoists camp will shift their political allegiance as and when the Maoists will face a grave situation. But some dedicated cadres from the UML have gone to the Maoist camp. The reason for such desertion must be found. However, no UML member as such has deserted into the Maoists paraphernalia under the Party’s instructions as stated by you.

In a democracy, one is free to sing songs that entertain others. However, some have taken the available opportunity to cash for their petty gains. Some consider on how to come up at the front from the CA poll debacle faced by the UML.

But no one should be allowed to disturb the party’s unity. No one should be allowed to hit hard upon others.

TGQ4: It is said that your party takes decisions while some important members of the party are not available in town? Don’t you think that the accountability of the emerging nasty situation should be shouldered by the Party’s leadership? What say you Mr. Gyanwali?

Mr. Gyanwali:  If decisions are taken by the party on arithmetical basis then it will not serve the interests of the party as such. The decisions arrived at thus may not be acceptable for all. I admit that some of the decisions taken by the UML party in the recent days appear imbalanced. This would hurt the party in a grave manner in the days ahead.

The UML party is currently engaged in a sort of debate for ideological transformation. Many UML leaders were against the democratization of the party in its internal matters and proceedings. However, the eighth general convention pushed them all to embrace democratization. Many have begun asking as to whether there has been a design to push the UML to become some one’s shadow?

TGQ5: The Maoists have begun their agitation. How the government will proceed in the days ahead? Do you think that the country is being polarized: the one with the Maoists and the other against the Maoists? What would be your comment Mr. Gyanwali?

Mr. Gyanwali: The recent utterances and the activities of the Maoists are beyond my comprehension. These have raised question marks on the very policies adopted by the Maoists. When the Maoists summarily failed in capturing the State then it resorted to the illusionary notion of people’s supremacy and has jumped into the agitation. How can the Maoists who have yet to abandon its relations with violence and who have yet in their possession the militias can talk of people’s supremacy? The Maoists have simply been doing unwanted things. I believe that the Maoists are not at all honest for the draft of a new constitution and for providing the peace process a logical conclusion.  

The Maoists must retreat from this agitation as there is no alternative left for them.

Well, I want to make it clear to you that we the coalition partners in the incumbent government do not want any sort of confrontation. But the Maoists have been threatening through their lectures that this was the third uprising and thus may not be a peaceful one. Some of the fresh erratic activities of the Maoists have made us all grave enough. The steps that the Maoists have taken of late could be a suicidal one for themselves. They must foot the bills for their erratic acts sooner than later.

Posted on : 2009-08-19 06:25:20

Comments (0)