Nepal is witnessing yet another round of political acrobatics with its prime minister shifting allegiance from the Nepal Congress to the Communist Party of Nepal (United Marxist Leninist), headed by former Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli. This has resulted in the formation of a new coalition government dominated by major Left parties. This move indicates a deeper trend of opportunism and self-interest among political elites, where individual gains consistently override ideological principles. The political landscape, marred by revolving alliances and shifting allegiances, reflects a stark reality where governance takes a back seat to personal ambitions.
Past alliances between the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoists) and the Nepal Congress, as well as the CPN (UML), highlight the transactional nature of Nepali politics, undermining the credibility of democratic processes. As Nepal embarks on another phase under a new coalition, the potential impacts on governance, stability, and socio-economic progress remain uncertain, raising questions about whether this government will prioritise the needs of the people or perpetuate the cycle of political instability and governance failure.
Domestic Impacts of the New Left Alliance
In the intricate dance of democracy in Nepalese politics, the recent manoeuvres surrounding Prime Minister Prachanda’s shifting alliances reveal a disturbing pattern of self-interest and political expediency. From cosying up to the Nepal Congress during the elections to seeking refuge in KP Sharma Oli’s party CMN (UML) for his premiership, Prachanda’s allegiances have been nothing short of opportunistic. The backdoor negotiations for key positions like the president and speaker, marred by Oli’s authoritative interference, highlight the fragility of political alliances in Nepal.
Prachanda’s sudden departure from the alliance with Nepal Congress, followed by a swift reunion with Oli, wasn’t as unexpected given the tumultuous nature of Nepal politics, where personal ambitions supersede democratic principles. The rift between Prachanda and Nepal Congress, aggravated due to disagreements over the post of national assembly chairman, further exposes the hollowness of promises of cooperation and integrity made by the political elite. Ultimately, Prachanda’s victory in securing the coveted position with Oli’s support not only highlights the erosion of democratic values but also raises serious concerns about the future of accountability and checks and balances in Nepal’s fledgling democracy.
While coalition politics is a familiar terrain in Nepal’s democratic landscape, the recent pattern of shifting alliances underscores a disregard for democratic principles and the will of the people. Despite the clear mandate favouring the Nepal Congress, Prachanda’s reliance on coalition partners for political survival raises questions about the integrity of Nepal’s democratic institutions. The Nepal Congress, in a bid to uphold democratic stability, has repeatedly extended support to Prachanda’s leadership, even at the expense of its own electoral mandate. However, Prachanda’s willingness to abandon alliances for short-term gains threatens to erode public trust and could prove to be a costly gamble in the upcoming elections.
This brazen disregard for the electorate’s preferences not only undermines the democratic process but also jeopardises the long-term stability and credibility of Nepal’s political system.
The aspiration to unite several parties under a single ideological banner has been an idealistic goal for numerous Leftist thinkers both within and outside Nepal. In pursuit of this objective, the two primary communist factions, CPN (Maoists) and CPN (UML) attempted to amalgamate in 2018. However, this endeavour faltered due to internal challenges and the legal impediment posed by the Supreme Court’s ruling against the merger.
The new coalition government in Nepal faces significant challenges, particularly in addressing the pressing issue of unemployment, as around 2000 Nepali youth are known to be seeking employment opportunities abroad daily. Additionally, careful navigation of foreign policy is a challenge, especially in light of recent developments such as the implementation of the Millennium Challenge Cooperation Pact with the US. Despite the potential benefits of receiving a $500 million grant for infrastructure and job creation, delays in executing the agreement due to frequent political transitions, have inflicted a substantial economic toll on Nepal. The dissatisfaction stemming from this delay has contributed to public disillusionment with the Prachanda government.
With Oli’s return to the political forefront and his pro-China stance, there are concerns that US-led development initiatives may encounter obstacles, further complicating Nepal’s efforts to address its developmental challenges.
China Factor in the New Alliance
The resurgence of the Communist alliance in Nepal undoubtedly brings satisfaction to China, aligning with its longstanding desire for a dominant communist presence in the country, as previously attempted in 2018 through various means. However, the failure of these efforts was attributed to Nepal’s internal democratic dynamics. With Oli’s reinstatement in Nepal’s political echelons, China sees an opportunity to advance its strategic interests in the region.
Foremost among its objectives is to sow discord between Nepal and India, thereby gaining leverage in the Himalayan region. Oli’s anti-India rhetoric conveniently serves China’s agenda, allowing it to peddle its influence in Nepal to its advantage. This calibrated approach poses significant challenges to regional stability and Nepal’s sovereignty, as it risks becoming a pawn in China’s geopolitical manoeuvres.
China’s desire to leverage the unity among communist parties in Nepal poses significant concerns, particularly regarding the potential signing of an extradition treaty. Such an agreement could prove disastrous for Tibetan refugees sheltering in Nepal, granting China unchecked authority to apprehend and extradite them. Moreover, while Nepal has joined the Belt and Road Initiative, this decision has not been ratified by the parliament, raising questions about transparency and accountability. The lack of public disclosure regarding treaty texts further underlines the opacity surrounding China-Nepal relations.
With Oli’s return to power, there is a growing risk that Nepal’s strategic autonomy may be compromised, potentially undermining its cooperative relationships with India and the US. Past instances of Chinese embassy interference in Nepali politics serve as a cautionary tale, highlighting the dangers of undue influence. The current Nepalese regime would be wise to avoid repeating such instances, as succumbing to Chinese pressure could jeopardise the country’s sovereignty and regional stability.
The Way Ahead
While China may have welcomed the revival of the Communist alliance in Nepal, India’s muted response suggests a recognition of the democratic norms underlying coalition changes. However, it is imperative for Kathmandu’s new coalition to safeguard its strategic autonomy and foster cooperation with like-minded democracies. The Communist alliance must also adapt to the evolving political landscape within the state, with the recent rise of centre-right parties like the Rashtriya Swatantra Party prompting concerns about the need for effective governance rather than ideological squabbles. Additionally, the uncertainty regarding the sustenance of the alliance between these political heavyweights casts doubt on its longevity, especially if one goes by recent political history.
Nepal’s political stakeholders, civil society, and the international community must vigilantly monitor political developments to prevent the exploitation of Nepal by authoritarian regimes like China, which thrive on instability.
The writer is an author and columnist and has written several books. His X handle is @ArunAnandLive. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely that of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18’s views.
Comments
0 comment