Congress suspects UML moves: What makes Koirala to change his heart suddenly!

Kathmandu: NC president Koirala, analysts say, has lost his targeted path. Others say Koirala is still kicking and alive.

Some academics wish to call Koirala a personality who blows more hot than cold. Yet another section of the intellectuals opine that Koirala is a political personality who has done more harm than good to the democratic system in the country. And many more comments about the septuagenarian who has vowed that he would renounce politics if the King yielded to his demands.

However, for analysts in this paper, Koirala is a political creature who can go to any extent if his views were accepted by others, whether it be the King or the leaders of other parliamentary parties.

Koirala was the one who blew hot against the monarch from the very beginning, to recall. It is Koirala now who appears to have acquired little bit of mild posture on the King and has directed his “obedient boys” to refrain from inciting violence at time of the routine agitation. He commanded his boys that Wednesdays agitation will have to be packed up much ahead of the King’s landing in Kathmandu’s airport.

Here lies the significance of his instructions.

But why Koirala is a changed political personality now?

Analysts wish to forward these comments for the abrupt change seen in Koirala’s change of heart vis-à-vis the Nepali monarchy.

Firstly, rumors have it that King Gyanendra’s confidante, Mr. Prabhakar S. Rana met with Koirala and whispered that the King was all prepared to sit for a talks with him provided the agitation were scrapped altogether.

An all beaming Koirala jumped with joy hopefully and assured the King’s special envoy that the agitation will continue as scheduled but then the sharpness of the agitation will henceforth cease to exist and that even if the agitation continued it would in no way affect the King.

Believing hundred percent on the words of the King’s emissary, Koirala definitely toned down his rhetoric against the King and one fine morning he told his colleagues that some sort of “positive hints” have come to him. Since then the congress participation in the routine agitation has remained some what half-hearted.

Informed sources say that the rumor that the King advised his long time private friend to mediate in between him and Koirala is far from truth,

Rumors had it that the King sent words to Koiurala that if he could adjust his role with personality like Thapa who created trouble for the present King during the Panchayat days, then it would not be that uneasy to work together with Koirala.

All gossip, say high placed sources.

Though the authenticity of such wild rumors can never be established but then, as the luck would have it, Koirala appears to be happy as if he has been told by the King to have patience. Now the question is that how come a political leader of the sort of Koirala’s stature could divulge that he had received positive signals from the King unless he received it? Why should he tell a lie to the general public more so to his own frustrated cadres?

The manner and the style with which Koirala has deliberately toned down the tempo of the routine agitation does hint that if not Mr. Rana but then from certain other quarters (could be envoys from foreign countries) he has captured some signals which he wishes to term positive signals.

The same story applies to the UML as well.

Upon listening to King’s positive signals, the leader of the UML, Mr. Madhav Nepal, became so excited that he even boycotted the agitation of last Saturday. This he apparently did so hopefully not to annoy the King. In doing so Mr. Nepal appears to have sent signals to the King that should he be honored by the King, he would abruptly delink his association with the congress.

The congress president Koirala got a mild jolt when he was told that the UML did not support the Saturday agitation.

Later the UML devised a face saving mechanism and informed that the UML’s non-participation on that day was not intentional but was a sort of “misunderstanding” only.

It is interesting to note that both the congress and the UML appear to have been advised to calm down. Both have been told that some thing very concrete will emerge immediately after the King’s return. Both the leaders are happy thinking that their days have approached to enter Singh Durbar.

However, there is one technical difficulty. Can the country have two prime ministers at a time?

Certainly not. If not then why Koirala and Madhav Nepal both are jumping with joy?

The million dollar question: Has the King sent any positive signals to Koirala and Mr. Nepal separately while being in London? If yes then should we expect a positive change to the current turmoil?

Since Koirala will not ride the power horse, should it mean that the next chief of the executive is Mr. Nepal? If yes then will Mr. Nepal prefer to get appointed himself as the nation’s prime minister under the (in)famous article 127? What if Koirala presents himself yet again as potential candidate for the Premier’s post? By way of reference, what if Deuba too claims the same post?

Does this all mean that the routine agitation has nothing to do with what the agitators call, regression? Is it that if the PM post is allowed they would never pronounce the word regression? What if all the contenders for the PM post are not satisfied? Logic backed by the constitution is that the King at one time can satisfy the ego of any one among the crowd of many. Will the one left in the freezing cold will allow his rival to continue easily?

Questions galore indeed.