Managing combatants, a rider for power sharing?

KATHMANDU: With the election of Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal on May 24 to the post of Prime Minister, Nepali Congress president floated the idea of High-Level Political Mechanism. Koirala, at his home in Biratnagar told journalists on July 3 that such mechanism would give guidelines to run the government on the basis of consensus. “It, however, will not supersede the government.”

He said he wanted to lead the mechanism so that Maoist chairman would also feel comfortable to be a part of the mechanism. “It will help build positive environment to forge consensus among political parties on the contentious issues,” he had said.

Initially, the Unified CPN-Maoist rejected the idea of the mechanism. Later, the party said it would consider participating in such a mechanism, if it will bother itself only with the constitution-drafting process and not interfere in the affairs of the government. The UCPN-M, who had quit the government, seemed hesitant to give guidelines to the government from outside. Later, the three major parties - UCPN-M, NC and CPN-UML agreed in principle to set up such a mechanism. They even formed a task force on August 17, comprising leaders of the three parties to do the groundwork to form the mechanism. Narayan Kaji Shrestha ‘Prakash’ and Dev Gurung of UCPN-M, Gopal Man Shrestha and Krishna Prasad Sitaula of NC and Ashok Rai and Bishnu Poudel of the UML comprised the task force. The task force was mandated to prepare a proposal on modalities and work procedure of the mechanism. It, however, could hold only a couple of meetings.

The Maoists had been pressing to settle the issue of civil supremacy before forming such a mechanism. November talks held in Singapore between Koirala and Prachanda also gave top priority to set up the mechanism. Later, Koirala, Prachanda and Jhalanath Khanal threw their weight behind HLPM. Their eagerness to set up the mechanism made other leaders of NC and UML jittery. However, the three leaders eventually formed the mechanism on January 8.

NC Vice-President Ram Chandra Paudel had proposed to include the Prime Minister in the mechanism. But Maoist chairman rejected the proposal.


Change of guard


A majority of NC and UML leaders do not want change of guard. They doubt that their leaders may use the mechanism for toppling the present coalition in the name of consensus. Some of them suspect Koirala and Prachanda plotted it during the Singapore talks. Some say the three top leaders are in minority in their respective parties and want to exercise power via mechanism.


Joint statement


The joint statement signed by Koirala, Prachanda and Khanal made after the formation of the HLPM reads: “A High-Level Political Mechanism has been formed to give the peace process a logical end, write the new constitution on time through the Constituent Assembly and end the current political deadlock. Girija Prasad Koirala, President, Nepali Congress, will coordinate the mechanism. Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda’, Chairman, Unified CPN-Maoist and Jhalanath Khanal, Chairman, CPN-UML, are its members. The leaders, when necessary, will be able to invite other leaders of their respective parties in the meetings of the mechanism. Other political parties will also be included in the mechanism on the basis of consensus.”


Expectations


The mechanism was formed on Friday and four days have already elapsed without any progress. The HLPM members had said they would hold meeting within two-three days and delve deeper into their mandate and Terms of Reference, but no headway has been made in this regard.

Since the setting up of HLPM, the three parties have specified three broad objectives of the mechanism. They should be clear about their goals and flexible while deciding contentious issues. They must be able to enlist strong support for their decisions from their respective parties. If they could not clear the mistrust within their parties, the mechanism will not be able to get legitimacy. As they will have to decide the most contentious and historical issues, they should be able to exhibit courage, as at times they may have to take decisions against their party-line for the sake of country. In such a situation, they should be able to address dissidents’ concerns.

Apart from the two major objectives — settling the issues related to constitution-writing and peace process — the HLPM has third immediate objective — ending the longstanding political impasse. Maoists’ two agendas — addressing the President’s move on army chief row and sharing of state power — must be addressed to end the impasse. Regarding the President’s move, parties have done groundwork on the joint Sankalpa Prastav (stricture motion) and are about to reach a consensus. However, they differ on whether to effect a change of guard or not. As powerful sections of the ruling coalition — NC and UML — are strongly opposing a change of guard, it will be difficult to dismantle the present coalition for the three top leaders even if they feel the need. Moreover, the UCPN-M’s active participation is a must in managing their combatants and in the process of writing the constitution. The UCPN-M wants an honorable share in power to effect the same. This can be a big hurdle for the NC and the UML bosses to end the deadlock. The constitution writing and management of combatants are more crucial than a stake in state power. However, during the fragile transition period, NC and UML fear Maoists’ allegedly ‘hidden strategy of capturing state power’. This has strengthened the NC and the UML’s resolve not to give up power.

Since the issue of power-sharing seems most crucial, it will be prudent on part of the NC and UML to establish it as a precondition to compel the UCPN-M to manage their combatants and arms on time and find a democratic solution to the contentious issues.

Leaders think aloud

Prachanda

The formation of HLPM has cleared the path to consensus. UCPN-M will think about whether or not to withdraw its movement (indefinite general strike to start from January 24) only after the mechanism’s next meeting. Until then our scheduled programme will remain unchanged. We did not demand change in government during the talks to form the mechanism. We hope that the mechanism will strengthen our resolve to iron out differences on vexed issues.

Koirala

We should resolve all problems of our country ourselves. Consensus, cooperation and unity among us should be the mandatory preconditions to accomplish the historic responsibilities — completing the peace process, writing constitution and establishing political stability in the country. (Quoted by NC leader Krishna Prasad Sitaula)

Jhalanath Khanal

The HLPM will prove to be an important move to settle national problems through consensus. The PM has no grievances about it and there is no reason to mistrust.

Ram Chandra Paudel

The mechanism will neither talk about the government nor act as a parallel power centre. I don’t think the mechanism can work effectively without the PM’s participation.

KP Sharma Oli HLPM was never discussed in UML. It will be useless until its objectives and its authority are clarified.

Dr Baburam BhattaraiThe mechanism will be useless until its purpose is clarified.

Smaller partiesIt’s a step in the right direction to end the political impasse. But all parties representing the CA should be included in the mechanism. The three parties alone will

not be able to settle national agendas.