“Nepal seriously needs statesmanship”

People should discard candidates over 65 years of age in elections


“Nepal seriously needs statesmanship”

KATHMANDU: After returning from a visit to India, CPN-Maoist Center Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda’ seems to be trying to take a leap politically.

Even though there are indications of an alliance with the Nepali Congress (NC), he has taken forward the discussion on forming Samajbadi Kendra (a socialist forum) comprising Maoist Center, Madhav Nepal-led CPN-Unified Socialist, Janata Samajbadi Party’s Dr. Baburam Bhattarai faction and leader Bamdev Gautam.

Even though there is a preparation for the left unity excluding CPN-UML Chairman KP Oli, Prachanda has given it the name Samajwadi Kendra.

Maoist Center and UML which had been united as Nepal Communist Party for some time are split and have become each other’s worst rivals.

In this context, Khabarhub’s Chandrakanta Neupane approached political analyst Mumaram Khanal to discuss the issues ranging from the NC-led coalition to the leftist alliance in the forthcoming general election.

How do you see the latest political development?

Forming the Samajbadi Kendra and a left alliance is the same thing as those who talk about socialists, they are somehow left-wing or political forces that claim to be communists.

There are many characters in Nepali politics. After doing what they should have done during their tenure and now still in politics, the country can get nothing good from them.

During their tenure in power, they wasted all their strength and the country’s resources, they emptied the resources for personal benefits. They could not keep their words. Such leadership is irrelevant in the country now.

The attempts to reorganize the same forces with the same promises will not bear any good fruits. Whatever name they might give to the group they form to regain the chance to capture the resources, whether they call it a leftist alliance or the Samajbadi Kendra, it is the same.

They coin the names to retain their control of the resources so that they can exploit them longer. This is a failed attempt to label irrelevant politics ‘relevant’.

After Prachanda’s visit to India, this issue became more widespread. Dr. Bhattarai has also said that a socialist center should be made, how did this come suddenly?

In Nepal’s politics, in the face of elections, the leftists of Nepal unite not because of any political agenda, but when the top leadership faces a crisis.

As the power struggle escalates, the party splits. Some leaders like Baburam Bhattarai don’t have a party, they have to face many challenges to make a party.

Bhattarai needs a forum or front to declare his party has been united. Prachanda’s party has also lost its independent existence without joining anyone. Such unity and divisions caused formed or induced by selfish interests do no good to the people and the nation.

Does it indicate that the parties of ‘once top leaders’ are in an identity crisis now?

All these political characters are outdated and irrelevant now. The next generation of leaders would try their best to form a party with new visions provided these outdated characters vacate the seat.

As long as these old and visionless leaders are in power, the new generations will be sterilized. Hence, these old characters’ presence is a burden to the nation.

Their unity and strength are baneful as it merely further enhances corruption and Corruption is not small but big corruption. Why should such hounds form larger packs?

If Prachanda is not successful in building a socialist center, what will be his fate?

Since Prachanda’s party came from an armed struggle, he is afraid that if he does not stay in one party and hold power, his own party members will bruise him.

Therefore, he is concerned about keeping himself at the center by forming a group that can keep bargaining for power. He is smart to bring others to his side while in crisis and get rid of them once he manages to get the power back.

Can these outdated leaders score a goal for the country? No, the youths should come for it. These top leaders are only focused on making the political pond muddy and fishing there, not scoring goals at all.

See the fate of our foreign policy, the Ministry of Finance, the Courts, and the Central Bank, the mechanism is rotten to the core due to these corrupt leaders. There is no point in commenting on them. The same thing always comes up.

What will happen if Prachanda fails to coordinate with UML and NC in the upcoming elections?

If we look at the situation since the Maoist Center came to power, the country is reaching the abyss at a rapid speed. See the condition of the country, Nepal’s passport has become one of the 10 weakest passports in the world.

Prachanda is not a politician. Since he came from violence, he threatens that he would go to the arms rebellion again, which he himself knows is not possible now. His identity is a terrorist.

If there was a politician in Nepal, Nepal would not be like this. No matter how much the party has failed in Nepal, the leaders have succeeded.

He has made a mockery of the system itself. There is no good leader in the packs of these old hounds. They sucked the country.

Those who become rich by making the country poor are anti-national leaders. They are traitors. They will desert the country in crisis.

The laudable fact about former King Gyanendra Shah is that despite being sacked out from the power, he has not run away. These leaders will quit the country when the country will be at stake.

Afghanistan’s leaders fled to America. The Prime Minister and President of Sri Lanka fled to Singapore. Therefore, no leader came as a politician.

There are so many problems in the nation. As these parties do not work on resolving the crisis in a democratic manner, Nepali Congress, Maoist Center, and UML are also gangs that hijack democracy and discourage democracy. Therefore, there is no scope for democracy in all three parties.

Do the Nepali voters have alternates for these leaders? Are not the people in the situation to choose from the same leaders again?

There have been few efforts in this regard. Even if the people get dissatisfied with the current democracy, they have to start the quest for a bigger and wider democracy. We cannot take the regressive moves.

There is no chance for right-wing politics. Panchayat and the King’s rule are over. There is no space for such forces as well.

Rabindra Mishra openly advocated for the king’s side and published the king’s picture in the manifesto of the party ‘groomed’ as an alternative power?

He is a royalist. Therefore, he has also published many books on the subject of kings. That is his personal opinion. While making the party, he hid his reality for a while. When he failed to run the party, he got unveiled.

Is there no hope in Nepali politics now?

There have been some efforts for course correction. However, most of such attempts are from rightists; in other words, there have been some right-wing efforts for reforms.

They can not make things better. The politics cannot be made better by making efforts worse than the existing parties.

To improve the course the wrong leaders or corrupt leaders should be defeated; one should help the forces struggling against corruption.

The existing top leaders should be defeated from within their parties. The leaders above 65 years should be defeated. Unless all people including party cadres and members revolt against corrupt leaders and their monopoly, the country’s sovereignty and integrity will be at stake. If the new generation fails in it or does not dare to do so, the country will suffer a lot.

Recently, the Citizenship Bill has created controversy, what do you see as the reason behind this?

Citizenship is prepared based on the geography of each country. The nature of citizenship varies according to the country.

However, there should be no discrimination between men and women. Nationality is the same for everyone. The citizenship policy is based on the political status and democracy of the country. Reviewed on these parameters, the citizenship policy passed by the parliament is anti-national.