E-Kantipur

When historians evaluate Nepali Congress, they will probably declare the upcoming convention one of the most important events in the history of Congress since its inception. Congress is in transition in many ways. First, it has entered the phase of ideological re-orientation. Second, the party membership is no longer confined within the traditional ‘keepers’ of Congress. Third, it has opened up space for marginalised groups and ethnicities. Last and most importantly, Congress is no longer confined to the total control of individualistic leaders. Congress henceforth will walk the path of change, the implications of which may be positive as well as negative depending on how the leadership addresses the issues brought up during and after the convention.

There is a deeper divide in Congress today than that existed during its inception. For a long time, the divide was ideological and was therefore justified. In a democratic party there should always be a room for discourse, debates and differences. Mahendra Narayan Nidhi and Krishna Prasad Bhattarai vehemently opposed Bisheshwor Prasad Koirala’s idea of unleashing violent revolution in Nepal. However, the divide that was once ideological has been blurred and has morphed into individualistic struggles. Every single Congresi—whether in the camp of Sher Bahadur, Sushil Koirala or Bhim Bahadur Tamang or none of these three—finds other Congresis inferior to them. There is a deep mistrust. There is a friction in the party not only among Sushil, Sher Bahadur and Bhim Bahadur camps; but between and among multiple attitudes and ideas even within a single camp. However, along with the mistrust runs a strong commitment for the party which was woven together by a collective worldview instilled by party’s stalwarts since the days of inception. 

It remains to be seen whether the Congress will be able to keep its house in order. The rise of young Congressis in the rank and file of party suggests less positive and more negative future for Congress. This is not to suggest that the new generations of party workers are incapable, but rather that they have grown-up in the age of extreme commercialisation witnessing the political culture of corruption, nepotism, favoritism practiced by Congress particularly in the post-1990 era.

To make matters worse, the new generation of Congresis are endowed with excessive hunger for personal growth by hook or crook and often lack patience, respect for elders and ideological orientation. How this young breed will be oriented by the leadership will largely shape the future of Congress. And what kind of leaders

will assume the leadership position

is vital for the re-emergence of Congress as a party that is responsive to public demands and at the same time shape public minds for the larger good of the nation. 

Unfortunately, looking at the current list of presidential candidates, Congress is likely to further squeeze both its political base and impact. Congress will be forced to face a leadership crisis unless it takes a collective approach for the same. “With all due respect to their contributions for Congress and democratic movement, it’s like choosing between death and suicide,” say Mahadibeshan representatives when asked about their preferred presidential candidates in the upcoming convention. Both Sher Bahadur Deuba and Sushil Koirala have very little to offer to the cadres, party and nation.

Bhim Bahadur Tamang, on the other hand, stands out as a leader with virtually no support in the party. And it also remains to be seen whether those now supporting Tamang will remain with him when the time comes for negotiations for vital posts. 

In comparison, Sher Bahadur Deuba displayed his guts to stand against the authoritarian regime of Girija Prasad Koirala. He fought for his existence when he was in the party. After being expelled by Koirala, he went on to lead the Nepali Congress (D). He was by no means an agent of change in the new party, but neither did he resist change. Under his leadership, NC (D) aggressively incorporated federalism and secured the representations of Dalit, Madhesis, Janjatis and women within the party rank and file.

However, Deuba failed to consolidate his achievements as a leader and could not manage the stalwarts in his own camp. Though it was during his tenure that the first peace talks were held, he also proved notorious for misusing power and injecting horse-trading culture in the parliamentary system.

Sushil Koirala, on the other hand, grew up as a stalwart of Girija Prasad Koirala. This is, however, not to undermine his personal contribution to the party. But the fact remains that politically Sushil’s advancement in the party leadership is owed to his commitment to Girija Prasad Koirala. Sushil’s latest attempt to galvanise the ‘Koiralas’ in one camp under his leadership is to revert party power back to the Koiralas. He consistently remained loyal to Girija Prasad and history will remember him for playing a crucial role in defeating Krishna Prasad Bhattarai as well as compelling Ganesh Man Singh to quit the party. In the list of second generation leaders, there are very few names both with the character and capacity to lead the party. Many leaders with sound character have no hold over party rank and file and those with a stronghold have foggy characters.

However, there are the likes of Bimalendra Nidhi who have consistently displayed both the character and capacity. In the words of Chandrakishor, a columnist for Kantipur, “Nidhi, in spite of his capacity to lead Congress both regionally and nationally, is unfortunately entangled in his own district.” Of course, farther down the line there are the likes of Gagan Thapa and Biswo Prakash Sharma who have the capacity to renew Congress.

Congress has limited leadership options, but such a limitation by itself cannot be viewed negatively. Though there are limited presidential candidates, it does not bar Congress from inducting fresh members in its central committee. These fresh faces, even if they fail to institute radical reforms, will at least take NC ahead collectively. Congress is at a crossroads and the kind of leadership it chooses and how it sketches its political map will ultimately define its future. 

(The author is executive director of Centre for Consolidation of Democracy, a think tank that works closely with Nepali Congress)

Post Your Comment

Please note that all the fields marked * are mandatory.
* Full Name
* Address
* Email Address
* Comment
* Captcha	Get another CAPTCHA code
Note:	Comments containing abusive words or slander shall not be published.