Party Unity : Ideological Basis A Must

Yuba Nath Lamsal

The recent remarks of the Maoist chairman Prachanda's on the possible unity among the leftist forces have sent quick and serious ripples in the Nepali political spectrum. Some centrist and rightist political groups are busy in readjustment, realignment and polarization following the Maoist supremo's remarks which was later echoed by CPN-UML general secretary Madhav Kumar Nepal. CounterThe two factions of the Nepali Congress are more seriously doing groundwork for the unification. Similarly, the chairman of the Rastriya Janasakti Party Surya Bahadur Thapa, immediately after returning from the Delhi sojourn, hinted the need for forging a "democratic alliance" to counter the left forces.The talk of the left unity has, of course, created paranoia in the rightist camp. It is because the leftist parties dominate the interim parliament and, if the constituent assembly polls are held on the united platform, there is a strong likelihood of left parties sweeping the elections. Political parties are assets in the multi-party democracy. There must be different political parties on ideological ground. At present, three political forces are representing different ideologies and these three forces are dominating Nepali politics.

However, all of these forces are divided and fragmented. Nepali Congress represents the centrist ideology with democratic socialism as its official document, although in practice it has been promoting capitalism and Westminster type of democracy. The Nepali Congress was the only party that had been representing the centrist politics for more than five decade. As the Nepali Congress remained united as the only centrist party, it dominated Nepali politics and remained in power more than any other political force in the post 1990 political era. But it was divided four years ago as a faction led by its Sher Bahadur Deuba broke the relation with the mother party and formed a new group called Nepali Congress (Democratic) party.The Nepali Congress, right from its inception, championed and fought for multi-party political system, political freedom, human rights and open society. For its unflinching faith in multi-party democracy, the western countries supported the Nepali Congress as the only democratic force in Nepal. But much change has taken place in Nepali politics over the years. All other political forces have come up embracing multi-party democracy and open society more vocally and vibrantly.

However, the western countries still view Nepali politics and political parties with the same old eyes. The leftists are strong in Nepal. If all the leftist parties were combined, they are in majority. But Nepali communists are always divided and fragmented. As a result, they always remained in opposition. At present, more than a dozen communist parties exist in Nepal and each party claims to be the genuine representative of the poor and downtrodden people. Now CPN-Maoist and CPN-UML are the strong and mainstream leftist forces in Nepal. They have equal number of seats in the interim parliament and equal share in the cabinet. The difference between the two is that CPN-UML was established as a second largest force through the verdict of people in the last general election. CPN-Maoist has been established as a force through the armed revolution, and it has recently joined peaceful and competitive politics.

In terms of popular verdict, it is yet to be tested. The rightist force is also in existence in Nepal. This force, too, is fragmented. The monarchy and feudal system is its ideological base and support. Since the monarchy, the patron of feudalism, is on the verge of crumbling, the rightist force is seeking a new ideological ground and tactics for its survival and existence. It is trying to create a new political alignment so that its existence and identity would remain intact. For more than three-decade during the king's absolute regime called the Panchayat system, this palace pampered rightist force enjoyed political power summarily suppressing the people's fundamental rights and party activities. Strangely, these rightist forces are trying to portray themselves as the democratic force and forging an alliance with the Nepali Congress to counter the rising left force in Nepal. The two factions of the Nepali Congress advocate the same ideology and political and economic programme. Both the factions revere BP Koirala as their source of inspiration. Similarly, all the communist parties believe in Marxism, Leninism and Maoism.

All of them revere Marx, Lenin and Mao as their international leaders and source of inspiration. The rightist parties support he monarchy and feudalism. Although some of them have lately spoken of a republican set up, it is their tactical move to survive in the changed political context and serve their long-term goal and interest. In a multi-party democracy, parties with similar ideology and programmes should not remain divided and fragmented. The parties should be created and united on the basis of ideological basis. If the alignment and polorisation is just for power devoid of ideological basis, the unity would not last long. Such alignment among the differing ideological bases would be disastrous for themselves in the long-run. It would create a crowd of visionless and opportunist people instead of a party with committed and dedicated cadres. We have a bitter experience of the past. After the 1990 political change, the major political, parties especially the Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML, welcomed everyone, including those who had been tainted in corruption and misuse of power during the Panchayat regime.

These people entered the Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML with a design to defame and damage the image of the parties. They were, to a large degree, successful in their mission. When king Gyanendra took over power, these people jumped into the royal camp. The political parties did not understand this design. Now the rightist elements are talking of a 'new democratic alliance', which could be another plot to damage the parties. Moreover, there should not be any paranoia among other political forces as the Nepali communist parties can never be united. The history is witness that Nepali communists have never learnt lesson from the past and they will prefer to remain in a small groups rather than in creating a strong and united party.

Caution

The Jana Andolan II succeeded because of the unity of the eight parties. The mission of the Jana Andolan II has not been over. The mission would be over only after the election to a constituent assembly. Thus, the unity among the eight parties must remain intact until the election to a constituent assembly. The move for a new equation excluding the leftist force could be a conspiracy to derail the ongoing political and peace process. We can easily imagine who could benefit if the present political process was derailed. The political parties especially the Nepali Congress, CPN-UML and CPN-Maoists need to be extra cautious in this present scenario.

Source: The Rising Nepal, May 22, 2007