The façade of Nepali politics has been appearing irritatingly similar with the same three faces of Sher Bahadur Deuba, K P Oli and Prachanda projecting in the political panorama, one after another. After the announcement of the Federal Republic following the exit of the 240-year-old monarchy from the political scene, two of the three parties, the Nepali Congress (NC), Unified Marxist-Leninist (UML) and the Maoist Central(MC), have formed a coalition government turn by turn. With them their leaders also have made their natural presence.

But all these three parties have been reduced to an unpleasing one man show. If Deuba has reigned continuously in the NC, Oli and Prachanda have imitated this scene in their respective parties. They are continuing despite staging a dismal performance for a long time, putting the country in a virtual seize. This is reflected by the failure to spend the minnow development budget, which is far less than the running budget when it should have been the other way round in a developing country like Nepal. The remittance-based economy of the country coupled with the escapade of the youth to foreign countries, rendering Nepal a virtual senior citizens' home amidst alarming corruption scandals, speaks volume about the incompetence of these leaders.

That the people want to see the back of these leaders is clear from their voices that resonate in the public fora in Nepal. But they are strengthening their position slowly but steadily following a kind of salami-slicing strategy. It can be glaringly seen in the recent meeting of the UML's politburo where the clause related to the 70-year bar for political contest has been removed. This is a ploy to again allow the present president of the UML to continue along with the other septuagenarian political leaders to stick to the post, posing an obstacle for deserving young politicians. What is even more hilarious is that this clause was inserted by the president himself a few years back during the Eighth Annual Convention, opening a window for the young generation leadership. Though it has to be approved by the Central Committee after it is discussed by the provincial, district and local chapters of the party, this appears to be a foregone conclusion.

The Oli camp is also making desperate attempts to block the entry of former President Bidhya Bhandari, who has decided to enter active politics. As a result, the UML has now experienced intense polarisation as indicated by the likes of Ishwor Pokharel, the senior vice-president, joining the Bhandari camp.

On the NC front, the scene is not much different. Deuba is impatiently waiting to be the prime minister again despite having been so six times without making any notable achievement for the country. This is likely if Prime Minister Oli paves the way for Deuba as per the agreement reached between these two parties prior to forming the present coalition.

Similar is the situation in the Maoist Centre where Prachanda has been enjoying the president's post since the party went underground for almost a decade and continuously thereafter. This is despite the tumbling of his party to third rank from first that it enjoyed earlier.

It is then clear that these leaders have dominated the political scene for a long time. But they have managed to stay in the helm with the support of the majority of their party volunteers. It then means that these party volunteers, leaving aside a few dissenting ones, support a dominating leader. But what are the features of a dominant leader? What are their physical appearances like? What kind of party volunteers prefer a dominant leader? In what kind of situations do the dominant leaders thrive?

According to a study entitled 'Dominant leaders and political psychology of followership' made by Michael Bang Petersen and Lasse Lausten, dominance is the induction of fear through intimidation and coercion. Masculine faces with lower pitched voices followed by more assertive and self-interested dispositions with more right-wing policy positions are viewed as the features of domination. Those who identify themselves as conservative or right wing are more likely to show enhanced preferences for dominance. Terrorist attacks and economic turmoil increase preferences for dominant political leaders.

Intimidation and coercion can be seen in the UML though indirectly in the firing of the former deputy prime minister Bhim Rawal. Actions were taken against Binda Pandey and the youth leader Usha Kiran Timilsina. Similarly, rumours of Prachanda telling the dissenting Janardan Sharma to leave the party is a pointer in this direction. Many leaders have recently been shown the exit door in the NC for alleged violation of discipline, following which the Shekhar group has launched a series of protests.

Similarly, all the three leaders are assertive with self-interested dispositions, following which Prachanda appears to have enjoyed a following due to the leadership in the terror-tinged People's War. Similarly, Oli gained popularity after the economic turmoil that the country went through due to the killer earthquake and the border blockade. Deuba appears to have remained in the helm because of the conservative or the right-wing mindset of the majority of his party members. It then shows that the research findings are applicable in the Nepali context also.

Though Deuba has said time and again that he will retire after becoming the prime minister, he may change his mind after Oli has decided to continue forever as evidenced by the removal of the 70-year bar. Prachanda will not hesitate to fire the dissenting junior politicians as he appears unshaken even after the exit of senior leaders Babu Ram Bhattarai and Mohan Baidya. The domination of these leaders is thus likely to continue for a long time.