Pages

Monday, October 10, 2011

BABURAM BHATTARAI GOVT. STINKS SAYS UML CHIEF

MAOIST CHIEF OFFERS OLIVE BRANCH TO BAIDY
Kathmandu, 11 Oct : Maoist Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal on Monday requested party hardliners to withdraw their separate cadres’ gathering slated for October 15 in Kathmandu, and to instead participate in the “official” gathering of the party scheduled for the following day, Post B. Basnet writes in Republica.

“In return the chairman offered to the hard-line faction to put forward their views at the same gathering the next day. But they are yet to be convinced,” said a senior leader close to Dahal.


Leaders close to Senior Vice-chairman Mohan Baidya declined the offer, saying the intention behind the so-called “national gathering” was to woo the support of cadres from their faction.

“It is a meeting of a particular faction, not the whole party. So why doesn´t the chairman dare to call it his own meeting, rather than lying to the cadres,” said Maoist leader Khadga Bahadur Bishwakarma.

According to party insiders, Dahal, in his bid to persuade the hardliners, is in constant touch with Senior Vice-chairman Baidya, who leads the hard-line camp, and General Secretary Ram Bahadur Thapa, who has recently been a more vocal critic of the party establishment.

“We are still making attempts to work out a formula to stop them from holding a separate gathering, for that would amount to a vertical split of the party,” said Central Committee (CC) Member Kumar Paudel, who is close to Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai.
Worst confrontation

Party insiders say the rival factions are headed for the worst-ever confrontation in the party, with each faction holding a separate mega gathering of cadres in Kathmandu, partly to test their respective strengths.

Is reconciliation still possible between the rival factions or is the party irrevocably headed for a split?

“In one sense the party has already split, and there is very little hope for unity. But none of the factions is willing to announce the split and take the blame for engineering it,” says a senior leader close to Dahal.

According to Maoist leaders, the Baidya-faction leaders, mainly Netra Bikram Chand, CP Gajurel and Dev Gurung, wish that the party establishment would take disciplinary action against them so that they can blame it for precipitating the split. “But the chairman is not so dumb as to take action against them now and be blamed for the split,” says a leader close to Dahal.


And that´s the reason why Chand is adamant on holding the national gathering: He wants to provoke the party chairman by denouncing him in front of the cadres for “ideological deviation”.

“We are ready to withdraw the program, but they should first cancel their “illegitimate” program as the party has not taken any decision to hold it,” said Chand.

But the party establishment is not in a mood to back down. The last Standing Committee meeting, which was boycotted by the Baidya faction, had decided by a majority vote to hold the program as a countermove against the Baidya faction´s nationwide campaign. “The gathering is being held to disseminate the party´s official decision about the peace process. So there is no question of canceling it,” said Dahal.

The hardliners see the gathering as a move to weaken their faction. “What message do you get when the establishment keeps on postponing the Central Committee meeting that was supposed to settle the current dispute, and instead calls a national gathering of cadres for training?” asked Chand.

Sources says leaders from the hardline faction have already met Nepali Congress (NC) and UML leaders many times and warned them not to sign any deal with just the establishment faction of the Maoist party. And the sources argue they may even go for toppling the current government as they feel badly cheated by Dahal and Bhattarai.

This just indicates how far the two factions have drifted from each other and how deep the resentments run in each faction.

“Both factions have the same political character that fosters divisiveness rather than unity; hence the possibility of the party remaining united is getting slimmer by the day,” says Politburo leader Ram Karki.

Bishwakarma agrees: “Yes, the way the chairman is handling party affairs is sure to lead to a vertical split, and we cannot save it no matter how hard we try.”
Nnnn

INTERVIEW

________________________________________




BABURAM BHATTARAI STINKS SAYS UML CHIEF JHALANATH KHANAL
There hasn’t been any tangible progress on the twin tasks of peace process and constitution writing even as the current prime minister is approaching the deadline of 45 days that he had set for himself to resolve the fundamental integration issues. Republica’s Thira L Bhusal talked to CPN-UML Chairman and former Prime Minister
Jhalanath Khanal on current political scenario. Excerpts:

Why is there no headway in the peace process and constitution writing?

The tasks of constitution writing and the peace process can’t progress without first forging consensus among the major political parties. We knew this reality prior to holding the Constituent Assembly (CA) election in 2008 and we have been consistently lobbying for that. But we tried and had a majority government every time. We haven’t been able to come out of the rut. Worse, the present government is giving priority to populist agenda instead of concentrating its efforts on forging consensus on concluding the peace process and writing a new constitution.

What about the prime minister’s proposal to transform the present government into a national consensus coalition?

Many have said so in the past as well. There is a difference in saying something and working on that. We have to speak only realistic things. Cheap populist ideas will serve no purpose. People had an expectation from Baburamji. But the way he kept on changing his stance against his own commitments, people have also changed their perception about him. Therefore, I advise the prime minister to focus his efforts on constitution writing and peace process rather than paying only lip-services.

Why can’t this government be transformed into a national consensus one?

I don’t see any possibility of that because we can’t give it the form of a consensus coalition without first finding common ground on major contentious issues. First, we have to agree on the issues of concluding the peace process and then on constitution writing. We also have to agree on the implementation mechanism.

Who is the main obstacle in forging consensus?

As the largest party, the UCPN (Maoist) is the main obstacle. The government, which is headed by Maoist, is responsible because it is failing to take any initiative to this effect. The government is moving ahead carrying garbage. It is stinking too far. Therefore, such a government can’t make any progress in peace and constitution. If Baburamji is really eager to do some progressive works, he has to get rid of that garbage first.

Did you mean that there should be a new coalition?

You evaluate on your own. Those who are in his cabinet are among those who have been charge sheeted by police for murder cases. Some are facing corruption cases at Special Court and at the Supreme Court while another minister has threatened to divide 20 districts from the Tarai region from the country. We are wondering where our doctorate prime minister is headed leading a group of such individuals. I have nothing to say about Baburam himself but a serious question has been definitely raised against him due to his choice of the cabinet members.

Wasn’t it a compulsion for him to do so after the NC and UML didn’t support him?

When did he talk to NC and UML? What was his proposal? As far as the UML’s stance is concerned, we tried to form a consensus government under the leadership of the Maoists. But he rejected the proposal and chose to take the support of a crutch that made his government handicapped from the very beginning itself.

Didn’t he try for a consensus government?

I didn’t find Baburamji putting in any efforts for that.

Why do you think he was attracted to this coalition?

It is only because of his hunger for power. It is because he thought that his will have an upper hand after capturing the state power. The recent government decision to hike the salary of Maoist’s PLA underscores that. Is it an issue to be unilaterally decided by themselves or should it be decided through consensus? The fundamental issues of the country shouldn’t be decided without national consensus.

Have you arrived at the final conclusion that the present government can’t solve crucial issues?

I am not optimistic. PM had committed himself to conclude the issues of peace process within 45 days after he assumed the office. Everyone knows it. We aren’t fools. But immediately after he returned from the UN visit, he claimed that he had meant it was 45 days after forging consensus among the parties. It is very shocking to listen to such a lie by a person from that position.

The new government will complete its 45 days on Tuesday. Do you mean that the prime minister should step down for failing to advance the peace process?

He should ponder over his commitment. It is our duty to remind the government that it is completing 45 days on Tuesday and we would like to know what the government is going to do on the crucial issues.

Then, what is the solution?

National consensus is the need of the hour.
Four years have been passed just repeating the rhetoric of national consensus. Also, you had failed to forge consensus when you were the prime minister.
At least major three political parties should come together to forge national consensus. I couldn’t accomplish this because UCPN (Maoist) and NC leaders were not ready for that. We had explored good possibilities during my tenure. But later leaders from both the parties became reluctant to consensus as they saw chances of heading a majority government by themselves. Leaders from both the parties remained busy for that. And, our efforts to forge consensus yielded no result.

You failed to rope in NC in your cabinet. Wasn’t that your fault?

There were serious problems in NC and Maoist party. They weren’t ready for a consensus coalition.

Isn’t it true that you failed to make any headway in the peace process during your tenure? Even a proposal on your behalf was floated during the final days of your tenure.

We developed a proposal and prepared a strong ground to take the peace process forward. The Maoists were still talking about revolt then. It took at least two months for them to change the party policy and set peace and constitution as their party’s priority. Apart from various other things, we held several rounds of discussions over finding possible solutions to resolve the five fundamental contentious issues of the peace process. And, finally, I floated a proposal. I believe, the issues will eventually be settled based on more or less the same proposal.

The leaders were reportedly near consensus over the proposal. Why it couldn’t be achieved?

At that time, Pushpa Kamal Dahal had committed to make some breakthrough within couple of days. Also, friends from the Congress had said peace and constitution were their priorities. But over the time, they changed their opinions because they thought they can form a majority government under their own respective leadership. Their priorities changed.

Was it the Maoist chairman who betrayed you?

I don’t want to blame any individual. As far as a party is concerned, the Maoist party definitely didn’t give continuity to the initiatives it had taken earlier. The Maoist party and Pushpa Kamal Dahal changed their opinions mainly after the Dhobighat meeting. Eventually, the possibilities that we had explored during the time couldn’t be materialized at last.

Don’t you think the situation would be different had you brought the same proposal immediately after you became the prime minister?

It would have been better. But it takes time to develop a common proposal. I floated the proposal when the time was ripe.

Why the parties are changing their stance on peace process?

I don’t think that the parties have been changing their stance significantly. There is a room for changing the stance but there are limits as well. For instance on integration numbers, some political parties are for four thousand, other is for five thousand while yet other is for integrating seven thousand. But there is a limit as well.

What is the thorniest issue of the peace process?

Even the five fundamental issues -- integration number, norms, modality, rank determination and rehabilitation package -- and the matter of forming truth and reconciliation and other commissions are no longer the contentious issues. Also, the major issues are no longer contentious among the major parties. At this juncture, we need to show flexibility for national consensus and building trust among the parties. There must be an environment where all the political parties can claim that “we are the ones who delivered peace and constitution”.

Some UML leaders have lately accused the Maoist and Congress leaders of trying to ignore the UML party. Do you think so?

Of the three major political parties -- Maoist, NC and UML -- any of the two political parties can’t resolve the current political imbroglio ignoring any one of the three parties. Such attempts are doomed to fail. There have been no serious discussions among the major parties ever since Baburamji became prime minister. These issues can’t be resolved without Maoists making sincere initiatives for that.

Is the UML for halting constitution drafting process until the fundamental issue of army integration is resolved?

This is completely wrong. This is very much narrow-minded and a parochial view. NC is for stopping the constitution writing process until there is no progress in peace process but the UML doesn’t agree with the idea. We are for giving priority to the peace process but the constitution making process shouldn’t be stopped on that pretext.

Let’s change the topic. What is the status of the intra-party feud in UML at present?

It ended after I resigned (from the prime ministerial post).

That means the quarrel within the UML was over who leads the government?

It’s up to you to decide. You may interpret it that way.

A Maoist faction has stood against the present government and it is holding talks with various political forces. Is it holding talks with you as well?

All the governments formed after the CA election gave importance to strengthening the national interest. But the present government is the only coalition that did not feel the need of mentioning ‘national interest’ while signing the four-point deal. This is the reality. Various sections have made remarks over it. A strong reaction has come from within the Maoists. Since it is an internal matter of the party, I don’t want to enter into that topic.

Are the leaders from Maoist’s Baidya faction holding talks with you or not?

We are holding talks with everyone. We don’t deprive anyone of the opportunity to talk. Political leaders always remain busy in talks and discussions. But I don’t want to make any comment on the internal matters of another party in public.

Do you think the role of foreigners have changed now?

People are saying that activities of external forces have intensified after formation of this government. The way people are feeling such an experience, it has become a serious matter. All the Nepalis should remain alert on this. We should be able to stand on our own feet. We should build this country and run it with our own wisdom
nnnn



________________________________________

No comments:

Post a Comment