For months after 2/1 the Nepali Congress was still not for a Constituent Assembly. That proves it was not any kind of royal pressure but its own inherent status quoism that the Nepali Congress refused to do business with the Maoists during the 1996-2002 period so as to make possible a safe landing for them so as to bring them into the mainstream. During several rounds of peace talks, the Congress refused to go beyond some mere cosmetic changes to the 1990 constitution.
Those among the seven parties that might have been desirous of the idea of a Constituent Assembly stayed complacent, and let Girija Koirala call the shots. I remember one news clipping of a meeting of the NC central committee. The majority spoke in favor of an Assembly. Girija kept quiet during the meeting. Two days later he spoke at a public event. He was against the idea of an Assembly, and so that was to be the party line!
That is not democratic. It should not have been Girija but the majority in the NC central committee that should have decided the party line.
The biggest reason the democrats are not getting as much public support as they should is because they keep hinting they want to go back to the 1990s. October 2002 to date has been the worst period of governance since 1990, no doubt, and the post 2/1 period has been a fiasco. But the 1990s were not really a great democratic period. And the democrats need to face that fact head on.
I read in the news that Girija met with the king for two hours before he went on his Delhi pilgrimage. I am all for dialogue. I think all political players should meet each other on a regular basis. But if the king were to sense he can break up the democratic coalition any time he wants to by giving a few select concessions, he has little incentive to comply.
As they say, know they enemy, not that I see the king as an enemy, but he is a political opponent of the democrats, sure. There are a few conclusions I draw from his public acts.
One, he is a fairly smart guy. He is not particularly charismatic. But he takes pride in mastering administrative details. He is not an idealist. He is a realist. He does not expect the army top brass and his underlings to respond to him because he is king. Instead he doles out money, because money works. One of the first things he did after he became an activist monarch was to give himself a major pay raise. This guy can smell money from a hundred miles away.
Two, he is not going to do the Birendra thing, pick up his binoculars, and see people in the streets, and give in. Right before Deuba was inducted back in the second time, there were major street protests going on. He defused the sitution by holding "consultations" for a month. And he did manage to split the democratic coalition. Girija at that time had declared Deuba a persona non grata. To him personal vendetta was more important than the democratic cause. The king conveniently made use of that split. First of all, the "movement" is nowhere close to that boiling point. Second, even if it gets there, the king will attempt to similarly defuse the situation, divide and rule. So the democrats need a strategy to get to that boiling point, and then they need a clear strategy to keep the democratic coalition intact. To their credit, their program is simpler and much clearer this time around. A four point agenda is an easier rallying point than a 18 point one. On the other hand, there also has to be a Plan B. What if the endgame gets complicated? What if the end is not a peaceful negotiation among the three forces? What if it is more like a revolution and the king gets thrown out and exiled? What is the democrats' gameplan for that? How will they stay center stage when that happens?
The four point agenda is a major step of progress. Girija traded the idea for a Constituent Assembly to stay put with his idea of parliamentary revival. But the four point agenda has to be kept alive and breathing. There has to be a willingness to constantly face reality. To revise strategy as circumstances change. Finetune as you go along.
The democrats' singular aversion to hitting back amazes me. If you don't respond, the mud sticks.
The king says the democrats have been corrupt. What do the democrats say to that? Nothing. Instead point out all the money the monarchy took from the people over centuries, the current king's major pay raise, the money doled out to the army top brats, the massive increase in the military budget, and now both Tulsi Giri and Kirti Nidhi Bishta have emerged major punching bags on the issue. But no. The democrats are not hitting back. Instead they just repeat the four point agenda like a mantra.
The king says the democrats have not dealt with the Maoists good enough. What do the demcrats say in response? Nothing. Instead point out it is the king's aversion to the idea of a Constituent Assembly that is the greatest roadblock to peace. Point out the insurgency shot through the roof after he started experimenting with his idea of a "constructive" monarchy. Just look at the spread of the insurgency nationwide, and look at the death figures, and of human rights violations and disappearances. His has been a reign of terror.
So when you get hit, you hit back.
More important, the democrats need to repackage themselves, reinvent themselves. If democracy in future is going to be same old, same old, there is little incentive for the people to come out in support.
Sure there was some massive corruption in the 1990s. What do the demcrats propose now that will make the situation different in the future? What are the democrats going to do about inner party democracy? This is a major sticking point. Girija has got to be the most undemocratic democrat there is. If you are a Congress person, the party line is decided when the guy addresses a public gathering, not at the central committee meeting. He is the guy who gives you a ticket to contest elections, or not. He is the one who gives you money for the election. That arrangement is ridiculous. He would rather the party split than reform and split it did. How does that make his mentality substantially different from that of King G? King G deems to speak on behalf of all Nepali people, Girija deems to speak on behalf of all NC people. Democracy is where people themselves speak on their behalf.
The reform has to be carried out now. Before the movement can gain momentum. Progress does not depend on what the king or the Maoists do. It depends on the democrats' willingness to do some basic homework.
I gladly offer my Proposed Constitution as a starting point to such discussions.
Comments At Sajha.
Comments At SEBS.
In The News
