 SUBHAS RAI |
The parties have once again locked horns and the peace process is stuck. The debate about executive president vs parliament has spilled out into the op-eds with politicians writing opinion themselves or through proxies.
Kathmandu's powerful prefers coterie politics and has chosen to disengage from the masses and their needs. A majority of bemused Nepalis don't care either way as long as their lives get better, and their hard-won freedoms are protected.
This week, the NC and UML coagulated with 16 other parties to pressure the Maoists, who themselves are going through the throes of internal turmoil. The utter disregard shown by both sides for cooperation and compromise goes against the spirit of 2006 people's movement and the mandate of the 2008 interim constitution.
The NC fears that an executive head directly elected by the people will lead to a totalitarian president, especially if the person is Pushpa Kamal Dahal. The NC's Ram Sharan Mahat and his cohort in the media and civil society feel the Nepali people are incapable of choosing the right leader and must therefore leave the task to the traditional parliamentary parties. This sums up the up arrogance of the political elites who consider majority of the population as 'cattle-class' with no aspiration or understanding of democratic norms and culture, not to mention the party that has been in power for most of the period after 1990 has repeatedly let the people down.
There is growing anxiety in Kathmandu's power centres about losing their kingmaker role and stepping into the unknown domain of mass politics. Their long writeups in the Nepali media reflect this uncertainty over treading in uncharted territory.
This is not so much about whether or not Pushpa Kamal Dahal becomes Nepal's executive head, but who gets to call the shots, the reluctance of kingmakers to let go of what they passionately enjoyed doing for so long. The people no longer want to be told what they should or should not want. If the people don't want Dahal as leader (either as MP, Prime Minister or executive president) they will not vote for him. If they want him, that is their democratic choice. And if he turns out to be a dictator, the same people will also throw him out. The cynics would do well to look to last year's Arab Spring which uprooted military dictators after decades.
In the last two months, after the signing of the seven point agreement, the parties made a remarkable progress on both peace and constitution.
There were 200 contentious issues resolved by the dispute resolving sub-committee, and there are only two main ones left on state structure and form of governance. There were many give and takes, compromises along the way that made it possible for parties to get this far. This is not the time to let anyone's personal or partisan agenda to dominate the discussions. There is no alternative to give-and-take with an intent to come up with a workable model that is acceptable to all and reflects the public good.
When the history of New Nepal is written it will feature those who thought outside the box to take Nepal out of the paralysis of the past decades. The absolute monarchy didn't work, the parliamentary system floundered, we now need to devise a stable system with sufficient checks and balances, details are besides the point. It is up to Ram Sharan Mahat and his likes to decide whether they want to be a part of this change or watch history pass them by.
