I n d e p t h A n a l y s i s
Kathmandu: The Nepali Congress has never fought and won elections in the country without residing over the electoral government. In this light the Girija Koirala stance that parliament be restored is easily interpreted. When parliament is restored the Girija Congress can muster its ranks also from the disgruntled Deuba party, align itself with the UML and claim its stakes to government. This is precisely why Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba dissolved the parliament pre-empting moves by Girija Koirala to muster UML alignments and seek desertions from Deuba ranks on the pretext of opposing Deuba’s attempt to prolong the emergency. This is precisely why also Girija Koirala insists on the revival of the dissolved parliament.

The UML role, however, in the Congress attempt to grab electoral government must necessarily be viewed as that in competition. Firstly, the UML is a much younger party. In this sense, its actions are prompted by the need to take advantage of the prevailing situation in competition with the Congress. No less than Girija Koirala is accused by the “democrats” themselves for strengthening the communist movement in Nepal by partnering the “Left” in the “movement for the restoration of democracy” in 1990. Girija is accused of deviating from the B.P path on account of the fact that B.P refused such partnership consistently in order not to give the left the advantage of opportunism that the UML readily demonstrates today. It is this opportunism of the UML that is under scrutiny currently in the background of the mounting crisis of government.

The UML is in the Deuba government charged with the task of building an environment suiting elections. Elections are the only constitutional recourse for the restoration of the parliament. The UML partnered the Deuba government only after Girija Koirala refused to publicly back Madhav Nepal to the post of Prime Minister ship of such a government when the King openly asked that contenders to government come forth publicly. This was when the UML was partnering the Girija Congress on the streets openly alleging that the appointments of Prime Ministers L.B. Chand nd S.B. Thapa were “regressive” under article 127. The UML currently claims that their partnership with Deuba in government is a “partial correction”.

Having helped engineered a split in the Congress and having secured its place in government the UML actions currently display the same opportunism that has placed it in power and helped enhance its position to topple the Deuba government. Contradictory actions of the UML may be thus explained. Regardless, as holders of key government portfolios in these transient days the UML has successfully nurtured its sagging cadre numbers that currently flock the urban areas displaced by the Maoists challenge. The UML appears poised from position of strength now to partner a weakening Girija Congress to take its pound of flesh.

Indeed, Girija Koirala openly woos the UML participation in its street program hoping that such a partnership will turn the tables on Deuba and facilitate disgruntled Deuba to join his congress. “Barkis is willing” as the adage goes. The Deuba central committee meet more than reflected this trend.

And so the onus is now on Deuba. His UML ministers continue to function as the opposition in cabinet. The UML leadership encourages this. Be it in the appointment of the Rastra Bank Governor or in the resignation of a key peace committee UML member, be it in the opposition to the Raj Parishad’s constitutional meeting or on the key question of holding elections, the UML has set a double standard of public convenience. And now it has timed the thorny issue of energy price hikes well. This comes at a time that the Maoists have refused the Deuba deadline for talks and when the UML is saying that elections can’t be held prior to the talks. The message to Deuba is clear.