If UML quits, the new government too will be chased well within two months of its formation

TGQ1: Very freshly the High level Political Mechanism that comprises of major parties held a meet. What was the outcome of this meet? Mr. Adhikari please.

Mr. Adhikari: Yes! The meet saw the presence of the top leaders of the NC, the UML and the Maoists. The said meet arrived at a consensus on having six point agenda and the meet itself went on in a cordial environment.

The first among the six point agenda which were discussed was about carrying forward the entire agreements and commitments made after the 12 point agreement and evaluate the past performances; the bitterness that exist in between and among the parties must be abandoned which should be replaced by an atmosphere of confidence; end the current political dispute; managing the Maoists militias; brushing aside the complications seen as regards the draft of the new constitution; and finally the meet also discussed the “power sharing”. If we now fail in forging consensus on even a single agenda, the rest of the agenda, even if we all agree, will become automatically redundant and nonfunctional. That’s why this has been taken as a “package deal”. The top leaders of the three parties forwarded their views in a frank manner. The leaders even came to a point wherein verbal war of words took place. Allegations and counter allegations were also there at the meet. Now what has been clear to us all that since we have talked face to face and expressed and forwarded our respective views and thus we must not get carried away by what the Nepali media writes?

The leaders agreed that the six point agenda must see a consensus and after such a consensus is at hand, the rest of the disputes will be sorted out in a manner stipulated in the agenda or say the package deal.

TGQ2: Could you elaborate as to what you mean by “power sharing” contained in the sixth agenda? Your explanations please in this regard.

Mr. Adhikari: Well it is very much clear. What has been agreed upon is that if we forge consensus in the first five point agenda then and then only can the talk of “power sharing” could be initiated. It is about the power sharing in the government structure. If we quote Dr. Babu ram Bhattarai of the Maoists party then the “power sharing” means not only share in the government but the participation in several organs of the government in order to forge more consensus and proceed ahead making joint efforts.

TGQ3: So this does mean that now the formation of a national level government has become necessary and urgent? Is this what you mean Mr. Adhikari? How do you explain it? Mr. Adhikari your comments please.

Mr. Adhikari:  Well, the central committee of my party-the UML-has already declared all the possible alternatives. What we mean to say is that our party will not block the process of the formation of a national government if that is to take a formal shape time permitting. We also have not been saying that the new national government has to be led by the UML. The change in government is neither a priority nor important at this critical juncture. However, the priorities are and should be the prevalence of peace, and drafting of the new constitution. If permanent peace prevails and the constitution gets drafted then my party UML is open for any political alternatives.

Why the UML should quit the government now? We will quit Okay, but the new government too will also be chased well within two months of its formation much the way as it prevails today.   

It has been more than thirteen months plus that we have been talking of the Militia integration but that has seen no progress. For the restructuring of the state, we must invite “experts” as stated in the constitution and constitute a Commission. We want all the three parties make a solid commitment on unlocking the political disputes and a committee be constituted in this regard; the three parties’ commit that they will not engage themselves in killing and murders and restore peace. If such commitments come to us-the UML-my party, is ready to quit the government. But there should not be a foul play of making or breaking of the government(s).

When Prachanda was the Nepal Prime Minister, the Nepali Congress did not recognize him for over four months as the country’s Premier.

To recall, at that time, Girija Babu is on record to have proposed our party President Jhal Nath Khanal to become the Prime Minister. But we disagreed to this Girija proposition.

TGQ4: There exist now two diverging views inside the UML party which is very much visible. The first opines to quit the government and the other prefers to remain in government. Well, let’s presume for a moment, that a national level government is finally formed then in such an eventuality, will the UML be in the “Opposition” or in the government?

It is also being rumored that Sher Bahadur Deuba of the Nepali Congress in the eventuality of the existence of a national government will lead such a new government? What say you Mr. Adhikari? Your opinions please.

Mr. Adhikari: If such a national government comes into existence then there is no question that the UML will be in the opposition bench. Where there is the presence of opposition, there is the absence of consensus. We have opened all the political alternatives and avenues recently through a party’s CC meeting which saw the participation of the Prime Minister itself. Yet we will try to bring in the Maoists in the national government first which is being led by Madhav Nepal itself. In the past, Girija Babu failed to bring the Maoists in the political consensus. The same happened with the Maoists as well. Prachanda too failed in bringing in the Nepali Congress in its government, if one were to recall. The bitter truth is there.

If there is the prevalence of political consensus among the major parties, we will not mind whether the national government is led by Congress, the Maoists or even the Madhesi Janaadhikar Forum? We will not express our grievances then.

Until the new constitution gets drafted, no parties should prefer to be in the opposition bench.

TGQ5: Is it that the party kept all the alternatives open concluding that the Madhav Nepal government miserably failed?  Why the UML party made upside down its own previous claim that “this government will not only draft the constitution but will also conduct the next general elections”? Why the sudden change in stance? Your remarks please.

Mr. Adhikari: Prime Minister as such is not only the leader of a party but of the entire nation. You must understand this fact. The government must be responsible in restoring peace and also in the draft of the new constitution. We must evaluate the emerging things through the lens/eyes of the common men. Definitely, the entire Nepali society currently sans peace. Peace is absent. There is the absence of law and order in the country. Brutal killings have taken place right here in the capital and that too in a broad day light. Firing of bullet sounds are in the air. At several places across the country, there have been ghastly murders. In Madhesh there is the existence of some hundred plus armed outfits. The political wrangling continues and thus the government must shoulder all these responsibilities.

The main thing is that the Maoists must be taken into confidence and a sort of consensus forged with the party of the ex-rebels, failing to do so will mean that nothing tangible of sort will happen in this country. Unfortunately, the Maoists do not want to practice the politics of consensus. The main agenda of prevalence of peace and constitution draft have already taken a back seat. This is really unfortunate. The present failure must thus be shouldered by all the three major parties. But by being in the command of the government, the major share of blame must go to the UML party. The party can’t escape.

It would be in the wisdom of all to evaluate the performances of this government. Yes! Madhav Nepal’s government is a Himalayan failure.

There are two procedural methods to be in the government or to assume the post of the Prime Minister. The first one is to bag majority and  prove it at the CA body Hall and the second one is through forging consensus. Prachanda neither has been able to garner majority nor succeeded in forging consensus with the major parties. State power could not be gained by jumping in the streets.

But by disturbing peace and constitution drafting process, my party does not wish to remain the government. We have been convincing the Maoists to participate in this government and provide it the form of a national government. Unfortunately, the Maoists remain adamant which is why we have kept open all the possible political alternatives.

Posted on : 2010-03-10 06:29:52

Comments (0)