--By Achyut Wagle

 

On May 15th, 2014, the senior deputy prime minister and, at that point in time, acting president of the ruling major coalition CPN-UML, Bam Dev Gautam, was happily dancing on a folk tune at a public function. On the same day, Nepal Human Development Report was released in another public function in a five-star hotel that ranked Nepal the lowest in the Human Development Index (HDI) even among the South Asian countries; let alone the global rank. The next day, the so called mainstream media placed Gautam's news on the front page with picture as if it were a major national happening while the HDI news was pushed asa routine filler to 9th or 17th page as if it were amere ritual.This is Nepal's eco-political reality personified, reflecting the degree of (in) sensitivity of both politics and media to the development and prosperity related issues of the country.

 

What is it that makes politicians like Gautam so happy while country is at absolute political mess and economic stagnation, if not recession, for decades? It is unambiguously sheer apathy and ignorance of gravity of the situation that is coupled with vested interests and remnants of feudal psyche of a ruler. The current set of Nepal's all influential politicians, generally all across the parties, were indoctrinated during late 60s or early 70s. Their last philosophical reorientation had taken place perhaps in the 1990, for the movement to reinstate the multi-party democracy by toppling the panchayat oligarchy. This 60-above generation has been left far behind in updating the knowledge required to run a country. They have been untouched by mesmerizing revolution mainly in information and communication technology, transportation and emerging new world order in power politics. For this reason, these leaders have failed to understand the aspirations of time and the generation that represents here-and-now. They have not even learnt the art to dream for the better future of the country and her people.

 

All these realities together, the persistent poverty and backwardness and apparent vacuum in leadership that is still willing to strive for ameliorating them, warrants a new political force that hopefully possesses desirable qualities like right kind of motive, integrity, energy, vision and willingness to serve the nation. Until such a new force replaces the existing parochial order, things too are obvious not to change for the better.

 

The need for such a force was acutely realized when the first constituent assembly (CA) despite its four year-long tenure ended without delivering a draft for a new constitution. The incessant blame game among the parties for the failures and their uniform adamancy to transform themselves with time multiplied the public disenchantment on them. The need of displacing these parties was more intensely felt after the current incumbent government formed even after the second CA elections appears completely dysfunctional and, mostly averse to the democratic norms in whatever little move sit is making. Prime Minister Sushil Koirala's unwanted 'lobbying' to save the Judicial Council's controversial nominations to Supreme Court Judges is one of glaring examples of such aberrations. On fulfilling his own responsibility he has miserably failed, not even able to nominate 26 CA members through a cabinet decision.

 

In fact, Nepal's political history has witnessed literally hundreds of incidents of leaders or would-be leaders trying to form 'new' political force at different junctures of time. But all of them in due course proved to be either protest outcomes to the mother partyby a dissenter or a newer interest group serving to a small circle of its constituents. Dozens of breakaways of communist parties and recent similar divisions in Terai-based parties may be everything as they claim but surely not the political parties of the quality that the country is desperately looking for, for long time now.

 

Lately, the UCPN Maoist leader Dr. Baburam Bhattarai took the debate on the topic to newer heights by proposing a 'need of a new political force to address the new challenges the new Nepal faces.' This initially appeared to be a statement aimed to fill the overarching gap of the national political vacuum by establishing a new, forward-looking, dynamic and democratic outfit. It created ripples too, at least among the left ideologues. But eventually, after much ado, Baburam's proposition of new force, at least for now,turned out to be nothing more than a trump-card to bargain barely some more space within the party from his party chief Puspa Kamal Dahal.

 

The current series of debate also revealed a philosophical dichotomy in articulation of needs of such a new force. The more aggressive advocacy, or to some extent endeavours to form such a force from the communist ideologues, borne out of worries to contextualize their own existence in multi-party competitive politics that is inevitably going to be the political mainstay for the future. This sphere of debate therefore has focused more on rewriting archaic communist dogmas and replacing arcane vocabularies like 'power only from the barrel of the gun,' ‘dictatorship of the proletariat,' 'class elimination' etc. with more contemporaneous political jargons. Clearly, for those indoctrinated under Marx, Lenin or Mao-developed literatures, this simple departure has been difficult and piecemeal, yet inadequate to democratize themselves even at par of existing, relatively democratic forces like Nepali Congress. Therefore, birth of a true new force that is capable of addressing nation's overall governance and deemed prosperity considerations, through this slanted process is absolutely unlikely. However, if this process at least could transform some of communist outfits to reasonable democratic forces that too would be a desirable outcome.

 

Another sphere of the debate is, rather should have been, to explore the possibility of creating such a force that has some blueprint to address Nepal's multi-faceted problems which have rendered the country to a virtual brink of becoming a failed-state. Crisis of governance, deficit of democracy, bleeding economy and pervasive hopelessness of the common masses are some of the immediate concerns which, if not addressed soon, may in fact degrade the country to anarchy, unmanageable even in the long run. But, the current expanse and depth of the debate do not seem enough to give rise to such an all-encompassing political force. Surely, some of rational thinkers from academia and media tried to take the current discourse beyond the cocoons of the communist jargonism, but the triggerers of it from the Left band seemed unwilling to step out of Marxist philosophical umbrella.

 

Coming back to Bhattarai again, he appears to be less-than-ready to completely forsakethe UCPN Maoist at present. Understandably, it is difficult to desert political Alma Mater. But, at times it is more difficult to mould it to fit to the contemporary need, which justifies conception of the new force. Despite hiccups, Bhattarai has been reiterating the need of such a force. 'It may take a few years for such a force to take a shape', he said in an interaction in the third week of May. His recent China visit was also reported to be to gauge the pulse of Beijing on his plan, without jeopardizing his 'warm' relations with New Delhi. For this reason, he dubbed his visit as 'pilgrimage to Mansarovar' and chose to set the travel camp not in Beijing but Lhasa, the capital of Tibet autonomous region of China. But, the Chinese authorities left no stone unturned to accord his visit an official status fitting to a former prime minister of a neighbouring country. A number of high officials made a point to travel from Beijing for political discussions with him.With change in guards in New Delhi, he probably has to strike a different chord to attract attention from India's ruling rightwing Bharatiya Janta Party and Prime Minister Narendra Modi. If Modi could prevail over India's bureaucracy, he would perhaps like to see Nepal still a Hindu state, in contrary to Bhattarai's brandishing of Nepal as a secular state. This may need further fine-tuning of his new plans.

 

‘Why should only Bhattarai be at the centre of discussion for this new political force under consideration’ is a valid question. The common masses still consider him perhaps the most talented persona currently active in Nepali politics. While in government, particularly when he was the finance minister, he came out untainted in shady financial dealings. And, he is the one who is now unambiguously advocating of the need to transform the communist forces to democratic ones, which indeed is crucial component for the democratic future of Nepal. But, Bhattarai doesn't fully seem to realizehis strengths and perhaps lacks confidence to renounce the ideology that he has so far kept so close to his chest. But, still he could be the best choice to lead such a force if he dares to drop the old cloak and readies himself to lead a new Nepal.

 

Again, regardless of whether Bhattarai can exhibit enough courage to spear head a new force or not, the relevance and importance of it has been realized more intensely than ever before. The rampant criminalization of politics by the existing parties, their out of date  - out of place leadership, sheer apathy to the needs and priorities of the country, widespread corruption on public resources and increasing culture of impunity, among many other malaises, are unlikely to be corrected by the existing forces. Or, just correction may not be enough. The culture of irresponsibility has become the norm in exercising, misusing to be precise, the state power.

 

For a rational and functional political force to come into being, Nepal undoubtedly needed a more systematic discourse on the topic involving all ideologies and all possible identities. For last seven decades, Nepal as a nation has chased the dream of such a nationalist democratic force, but it still remains a game of chasing a mirage. The current debate has reignited hope, but just hope is not enough. Therefore, we only have leaders dancing in a wrong tune at the wrong time.

 

(The writer is former editor of Aarthik Abhiyan National Daily.)