Kathmandu: The constitutional monarch is fortuitous, politically speaking.
This is so because he is provided a sort of shield, deliberately or otherwise, by some one from among the political paraphernalia as and when he is subjected to scathing criticisms for his October 4 moves.
Needless to say, the monarch is under stinging censure for his what the congress and the UML plus other three parliamentary parties call as “unconstitutional moves” of the last year when he dismissed the then Deuba government for failing in conducting the elections on time.
The agitation of the five parliamentary parties against the King is on and does not seem to come to a happy ending in the impending future.
The King is simply listening to the high-sounding and at times even fiery lectures made against him by leaders like Koirala, Madhav Nepal and the men housed in the five party coalition.
The fact is that the coalition itself has already developed a crack for certain political reasons which the leaders wish not to make public for fear of being humiliated by the lay men who have exhibited neither support nor disagreement to their ongoing agitation.
The crux of the matter is that the agitation is continuing sans the people and hence it is an agitation comprising of those only who one time or the other had remained in power and enjoyed political spoils and apparently wish to bounce back to power to continue the loot of the state exchequer.
To come to the point, it was Ms. Shailaja Acharya who only recently had defended the King’s appointment of the incumbent Prime Minister Thapa by stating that the agitation now being waged by the big-5 has already lost its meaning and significance for the Thapa government now is invested with the executive powers which the King had with him till the ouster of the Lokendra Bahadur Chand establishment.
She was talking sense, said analysts, but her colleagues in the party took her statement in a different manner and sought that the party penalized her for her absolutely erratic expressions which, her colleagues believed, were sufficient to weaken the agitation being waged against the King.
In fact Ms. Acharya also had ventilated her views that how could a party like the congress having adhered all along to a middle line could become the tail of the political parties who advocate republicanism?
The inner meaning of her saying was that the congress should fight a struggle on its own and instead not toe a political line adhered by communists forces. She believed that if the present agitation brought a positive result, if any, that would strengthen the communists but not the congress.
Be that as it may, Shailaja’s statements in an indirect manner must have come as a solace to the monarch who has been experiencing criticisms from the parliamentary parties since his October 4 moves.
Ms. Acharya’s might not have come to the rescue of the monarch at all, but then the timing of her statements gave one the impression that she was in some way or the other defending the constitutional monarch.
And now here is the next high profile communist leader, Mr. Khadga Prasad Woli, who has been defending the monarch though in a very subtle and diplomatic manner. Though his intentions could not be that as mentioned here, however, the fact is that Mr. Woli’s recent utterances wherein he lambasts at the agitating five that includes his own party, does suggest that he is criticizing the parliamentary parties not for nothing.
“A personality of Woli’s political stature could not do so unless he is told to do so by certain invisible forces”, commented a political analyst.
Yet another political analyst maintains that Woli in criticisng the agitation of the big-5 either speaking his heart or is expressing his inner hatred what he possesses for his party leader—Madhav Nepal—whom he says has gone erratic since the Janakpur convention which, to recall, elevated the ranks of Madhav Nepal as the party’s general secretary. In effect, the Janakpur jamboree of the communists made Madhav Nepal an incarnation of the late Lyonid Breznev of the bygone Soviet era.
Whether Madhav is acting like the late Breznev or not is a matter that could and should be best left to the party activists to decide on their own, but the fact is that since then, read after Janakpur convention, Madhav Nepal’s political overtures have been paining senior leaders like Woli and B.D.Gautam and many others. Sources close to Woli and Bamdev say that Madhav Nepal these days prefers to confront his archrivals even his colleagues who differ with him come up with positive proposals that if brought into effect could give a democratic image to the party.
Woli and Bamdev are the ones who demand “democratization” in the party. This means that the party is being run under adhoc decisions more so the party is running under the whims of the party leader—Madhav Nepal.
The Madhav group rejects this allegation summarily.
This time Woli differs with Koirala. He refutes Koirala’s observation that if the King so desires can reinstate the now dissolved parliament through the use of the Article 127 itself.
” Is Koirala democratizing further the institution of the monarchy when he expects the King to use article 127 to reinstate the parliament?”, asks Woli.
In saying so Woli apparently means that if the King is allowed to use article 127 for the revival of the parliament would mean that the King is pushed to commit yet another unconstitutional move.
Woli is talking sense but Koirala who in himself is no less than a constitution will definitely with Woli’s assertions.
Woli this time has visible come up against his own party leader-Madhav Nepal. In effect Woli in a satirical vein talks of Madhav Nepal applying for the post of the Prime Minister a month back.
“I will have never done so, come what may,” opined Woli the other day.
He however has suggested that the agitating five parties must now abandon their agenda and directionless agitation which, he considers, nothing but a ploy to bargain with the King for power.
“It is these political leaders who brought the nation to this chaotic state, and look it is these very political parties and their leaders who are crying foul today”, lamented Woli.
Woli also bluntly said that the agitation will never come to a happy landing and enjoy mass support unless the corrupt leaders leading the agitation were kicked out.
Summing up, the King must have found a good soul in Woli who knowingly or unknowingly been defending the moves of the crown.
However, this doesn’t mean that he is all and all in favor of the King’s moves.
Has Comrade Woli become a rebellion? Is he apparently taking the sides of the monarch to take revenge with his archrival—Madhav Nepal? Will he succeed in securing political benefits from his current changed postures? Should this mean that the agitation launched by the big-5 will go to the dogs ultimately? Time will tell.