Congress after Koirala
Useful Links
» A new way to read online, exact replica of your daily and magazine
» For all you tweety fans out there!
» Allows you to find only those news from any date you choose!
» Search any news/ articles by author/ category/ date/ keyword
Aryan civilisation is excessively generous in posthumous aggrandisement, at times to the extent of deification, about a person’s heroism, greatness and achievements of the lifetime. Death unquestionably is the greatest exonerator in our culture.
The shower of tributes and tears after the demise of Nepali Congress (NC) president and former prime minister Girija Prasad Koirala last Saturday certainly has that cultural component too. But even through the most pragmatic of lenses, his death at a very crucial juncture of our peace process, and the gaping absence of another statesman of his level of authority and stature to succeed him, has created an immense vacuum in Nepal’s political atmosphere. As seen by many, it has caused uncertainty regarding highly critical issues like management of the ex-Maoists combatants and writing the constitution.
The acutest of all uncertainties lies in deciding an acceptable leader for the NC itself. The death of GPK marks the end of the leadership and influence of the Koirala lineage in the NC that has been invariably dominant since its formation by his brother B.P. Koirala in 1948. Despite tireless efforts by GPK till his last breath to groom his daughter Sujata as the Koirala clan “heir” in NC politics, he did not succeed as expected. And, for the foreseeable future, no other member of that family is likely to assertively claim the top leadership position in the NC.
Whatsoever, only after the death of GPK the responsibility of leading the NC effectively comes to the second generation of its leaders. As the only surviving founding-member of the NC, K.P. Bhattarai is now in absolute seclusion. The task of reviving the party from its present ramshackle state jointly lies on the shoulders of the three frontrunners — senior leader Sher Bahadur Deuba, acting president Sushil Koirala and parliamentary party leader Ram Chandra Poudel. Hopes for such a revival of this oldest and largest democratic party of the country could only emanate from the collective leadership of the trio. Still, the gulf in the leadership quality between GPK and all three or more combined would remain wide, perhaps unbridgeable for many years to come.
Reinvigoration of the NC as an essentially democratic and centrist force is crucial to adopting a pluralistic democratic polity in the long-term interest of Nepal. For this, the nature and role of the new leadership in the party is momentously important. The moral authority, vision and amiability of the new leadership, be that collective or single, are some of the prerequisites to rekindle hope. Personal qualities definitely count a lot. Although we have no alternative but to manage with these available faces, their present postures and practices do not portray a very bright picture either.
Sher Bahadur Deuba, a three-time prime minister by now, had emerged as a potential national leader by the end of the 1990s. His simplicity, down-to-earth approach and non-corrupt image instantly connected to the feelings of the people on the street. But things have drastically reversed since. Now Deuba is not only a very a rich man with all the possible luxuries at his disposal, he also chooses to behave like a nouveau aristocrat, not generally willing to interact with commoners. Lately, like what his mentor GPK tried to do for his daughter, Deuba is putting in a lot of personal effort to establishing his wife in mainstream politics who now reportedly functions as the ultimate political decision-maker on his behalf. The trade-off between GPK and Deuba did not pay dividends as the latter lost the last election for the NC parliamentary party leader. For these reasons, a big chunk of erstwhile loyalists have deserted his camp. Yet, his strength lies in his already developed stature and the trust of the international community in him. If he is prepared to mend his ways, hopes for him are still alive.
Sushil Koirala has a very clean image. But his organisational skills are in question. Despite many opportunities to become a minister during the last two decades, he declined the offers not because of sacrificial motive but, as alleged, due to lack of confidence even to run a ministry. He is often blamed for being part of the intrigues to quash opponents in the party. “He is so good that is good for nothing,” argue many. But many GPK loyalists are likely to turn to him for reasons of his simplicity and long affiliation.
Ram Chandra Poudel indeed presents some real hopes. He is comparatively well read and better versed in the political philosophy of the party. Lately, he has shown rare boldness in raising some very meaningful questions vis-à-vis Maoist behaviour and their democratic credentials. But his chicken-heartedness, inhibition to rise to a level of sophistication and absence of backing from organised loyalists are the real bottlenecks.
A mechanism devised to draw the respective strengths, being oblivious to their weaknesses, from all these three could facilitate resolving the present leadership crisis in the NC. But again, things are easier said than done. The Sushil-Ram Chandra faction, for quite some time now, has been actually practicing “collective leadership” in the party. But Deuba has yet to come into this conceptual ambit. If he remains inflexible, that may prove to be personally suicidal to him and a big impediment to implementing this concept too. Other influential leaders like Arjun Narsingh K.C., Ram Sharan Mahat, Narahari Acharya, Prakash Man Singh, Bimalendra Nidhi and others are also in a position to contribute to materialising the very concept of collective leadership in the larger interest of the party.
In fact, the NC has enjoyed collective leadership throughout its history, except during the few years of GPK’s one-man show. At the inception, it was led by the Matrika-BP-Subarna Shumsher trio. Then it was the BP-Ganesh Man-KP trio until the death of BP in 1983, and then Ganesh Man-KP-GPK till 1991. All these alliances produced historic results like the dawn of democracy in 1951, impressive election victory in 1959, referendum in 1980 and restoration of democracy in 1990 respectively. Any honest evaluation would reveal that collective leadership has paid off better for both the party and the country.
Unlike from those great leaders of yesteryear, it would be impractical to expect the same kind of delivery from the highly self-centred leaders of today. They must turn to the pages of history for inspiration if their heightened egos prevent any of them from working cohesively for the larger good of the country’s future.
Post Your Comment