Submit your Article

Prime Minister KP Oli for once made sense and appeared statesmanly during his May 3 address to the country. Making a U-turn from his earlier public stand that Covid-19 was an innocuous disease that responded to ingestion of turmeric and boiled guava leaves, this time, speaking from inside a glass box and through a surgical mask, he appealed to the people to take the virus seriously. Oli also urged them not to heed rumors and to only listen to experts. He rounded off by expressing his government’s seriousness in combating Covid-19—in English. 

A calculated performance it was, coming hot on the heels of his promise of seeking a vote of confidence in the federal lower house—a vote he could very well lose. If he does, Oli could announce fresh elections in six months. As the number of daily infections and deaths mount, Oli seems to have realized that his pitch of an ‘easy virus’ could backfire as an electoral strategy. People now want the truth, however painful, and expect their prime minister to lead the anti-virus crusade. There could be no better vote-garnering strategy right now than honoring that expectation. 

Oli knows that even though he may lose the parliamentary vote, an alternative candidate is not on the horizon. The only viable candidate, Sher Bahadur Deuba of Nepali Congress, does not seem interested in taking over when there is a high chance of him being discredited for mishandling the pandemic. Better to stay in opposition and continue pointing fingers at Oli. The Oli government’s failure on corona-control, Deuba reckons, will be to the electoral advantage of Nepali Congress. Moreover, he could better plot his comeback as party president from outside the government.   

Relations between Oli and New Delhi continue to thaw, partly because of Oli’s foot-dragging on the BRI and his support for the MCC compact, a part of the broader US Indo-Pacific Strategy. Oli’s support for China was always exaggerated: He was only cashing in on the anti-India public sentiment in the aftermath of the 2015-16 border blockade. Otherwise, Oli’s relations with the South Block have always been top-notch. 

Deuba understands India will not look kindly on him if he disturbs New Delhi’s new Nepal strategy. This, in his calculation, will make it difficult for him to keep the party presidency and return to PM’s chair.

However you see it, Oli seems to be in it for the long haul. Even with his checkered governance history, the master strategist is banking on people’s immediate electoral dilemma. Will they vote for Nepali Congress under Sher Bahadur Deuba, the four-time, largely ineffectual prime minister? How likely are they to back a Dahal-Nepal coalition that has no other agenda than to unseat Oli?

The electorate will continue to be divided in the upcoming elections, and Oli could very well benefit from it again. 

“The one who plants trees, knowing that he will never sit in their shade, has at least started to understand the meaning of life,” said Rabindra Nath Tagore almost a century ago. Tagore, probably the most respected renaissance man of Asia, is revered as a household deity in Bengal with the nickname Kabiguru. He has such a revered place in Bengali culture that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's two-year-long 'bearding up' was widely suspected to be a poorly attempted imitation, in looks only of course, of the Nobel Prize winning poet, playwright, painter, composer, reformist, educationist and philosopher. Modi apparently wanted to woo the Bengali 'Bhadralok' before the 2021 Bidhan Sabha elections. But the Bengalis were not impressed by this cheap imitation and the ruling TMC, under Mamata Banerjee, won a landslide victory despite the anti-incumbency factor of two terms.

Modi's style of politics has perception management at its center. Singling out Modi for this would be slightly unfair, however, given that even greatest leaders like Gandhi or Lincoln, or even Obama, took great care in their messaging. It’s documented that Lincoln depended wholly on the network of friends among journalists and newspaper owners to propagate his ideas and breed a wave of popularity. But the controversial rise of Modi-Amit Shah duo in the BJP, and consequentially in national politics, marked a new era of Indian politics. As a successor to the subtle and gentle Congress PM Manmohan Singh, Modi shone in extreme contrast with his flamboyance. 

This change in Indian politics synchronized with a transformation the world over that got associated with two phenomena: the rightist wave, and the post-truth era. One signifies the rise of strongly rightist male authoritarian leaders like Putin, Modi and Boris Johnson; the later is the phenomenon of the diminishing of the gatekeepers in the arena of information. As social media becomes the feeder of news to us, and the traditional media houses have largely vanished as the main source of information and analysis, we have seen a new era in politics. Although this is an ideal condition for a democratic set up and the unjust power of big media tycoons is limited by this openness, with tools available now to reach every mind directly, the access has been highly manipulated to promulgate fake news.

The rightist wave was driven by a majoritarian politics aided by the post-truth perception management. This understanding is an obvious logical connecting of the dots and the extrapolation is applied to understand politics everywhere for last few years, including here in South Asia. At first glance, there seems no problem with this simplification, but I have always been skeptical of such over-simplified versions of history. I am of the opinion that the social media and information age aided by the fourth technological revolution in the first two decades of the 21st Century has brought insurmountable changes in how people communicate. This in turn has spawned new methods and practices in the arena of political communication.

But, for this same reason, politics the world over has become more and more localized, and hence what we see is a series of events resulting from local conditions. But looking at all these events from a distance, and as humans have a tendency to look for patterns in everything, we have clubbed some events together to make the generalization of the idea of a wave plausible.

This simplification was mostly popularized by lazy liberal intellectuals the world over, including in India, where they were not ready to look at the indications of social upheavals. The rise of the BJP in India owes to a legacy that leads back to more than a century, and it gained foothold because of a strong feeling of resentment in the religious majority because of the perceived neglect and uprooting of the mainstream culture. In America, the rise of Trump was a result of similar resentments among the white people.  

There is no denying that past events impact the outcome of future events and there can also be some domino effects. But a simple example from 2013-2014 from Delhi illustrates that people's voting patterns are driven by complex factors and it’s difficult to overly generalize politics. In 2013, the AAP had won almost half the seats in the Delhi Bidhan Sabha, whereas in the Lok Sabha elections six months later, the party did not win a single seat, while the BJP won seven out of eight. But the biggest surprise was in the Bidhan Sabha elections nine months after that: when the AAP again won 67 out of 70 seats. This rollercoaster turn of events in a timeframe of less than a year is intriguing, and speaks a lot about the collective intelligence behind people’s voting patterns. 

With such a complex display of electoral behavior within a short time in such a compact political zone, generalizing a pattern for the world over in today's times is foolish. Even right now, some thinkers are misreading the Bengal elections. Shashi Tharoor, an author of more than 18 books and Congress MP, tweeted: ‘Bengal is a decisive win for the "idea of India", an inclusive, pluralist India where your religion or region don't matter. It shows BJP's electoral juggernaut is not invincible. And it reasserts the value of a federal India where States resist the overweening power of the Center.' Tharoor is obviously happy that somebody is able to put a break in BJP's momentum even if Congress itself hasn't been able to win a single seat. 

But a closer scrutiny of the voting behavior comes from Prashant Kishor, the main elections strategist credited with the TMC’s outstanding victory. He said that 'no matter how polarized an election is, no party can get more than 50 to 55 percent of the majority community. In BJP strongholds, 50-55 percent of Hindus voted for them but the TMC concentrated on the 45 percent.'

Even though many commentators are projecting this result as Bengali people’s rejection of the BJP's Hindutva drive, the fact that the BJP is at 77 seats, and a close second in most of lost seats, speaks a lot about the creeping reach of the idea. If anything, the 'Royal Bengal Show' has not only shown the limits of majoritarian politics, it has also proved the limits of an overly simplified generalization of political events. This tells us to stop the unjustified fear of a majoritarian wave the world over and look for localized solutions to crucial problems. But above all, to paraphrase the Kabiguru saying, it shows us that 'the one who plants the right ideas in society, knowing that he/she will never really be able to benefit from it, has at least started to understand the meaning of politics.

The prime minister regularly cites unproven Covid-19 cures—salt-water gargle, turmeric consumption, various nasal exercises. This has added to people’s sense of complacency. For the more scientifically minded, such antics reduce their trust in his government. KP Oli’s party, CPN-UML, still holds political gatherings in the presence of many unmasked attendees. No wonder government exhortations to the public to take the contagion seriously and adopt safety measures have fallen on deaf ears. They have simply stopped trusting government officials. 

The opposition parties should have held the government to account on its criminal neglect of public safety. Yet the leaders of Nepali Congress, CPN (Maoist Center) and Janata Samajbadi Party too have failed to convince their electorates on the virus. Nor have they stopped organizing political gatherings, again in violation of Covid-19 safety norms, even as they harangue the Oli government for its failures on contagion-control.

If our political parties cannot help the country deal with its most pressing problem in generations, it bears asking: what good are they? How can they claim to work in public interest? Moreover, the rulers, across the party lines, are seen as representing the interests of only a small segment of the society. People from other ethnic and class groups thus view those in power with deep suspicion. 

I can't think of a single top political leader today who commands broad public support. The main problem is our senior politicians’ sense of entitlement and their failure to see beyond pure power politics. 

As the country battles a deadly pandemic, their focus continues to be to either hold on to power or, for others, to get there, which unfortunately is the ultimate goal of their politics—no, no higher purpose to serve for this elderly bunch. The generation of leaders currently at the helm cite the sacrifices they have made—most notably, their long years in prison—for the cause of democracy. They act as if the state ought to repay their dues. 

No top Nepali leader is thinking about building a constituency by saving people’s lives from the deadly pandemic. They are either ignoring the pandemic or trying to twist it to their political advantage. PM Oli wanted to use the pandemic to prolong his tenure, Prachanda sought to unseat him citing the government’s failure to tackle Covid-19, and Deuba is now hoping to keep his party presidency by indefinitely putting off vital NC gatherings. Other leaders of big and small parties have acted no better. 

People are irrational. It is the duty of political leaders to make them see reason, even when people don’t want to see sense. Yet Nepali leaders who command attention, including the Kumbh-returnee ex-king, have, in this time of national crisis, been busy pandering to people’s basest instincts to boost their public image. The health and wellbeing of the people they claim to represent are really irrelevant. The Covid-19 pandemic has again exposed the narrow horizons of our political leaders who are working for themselves and no one else.  

The March 7 Supreme Court verdict annulling the Nepal Communist Party merger has allowed the Janata Samajbadi Party, Nepal (JSPN), the fourth largest in parliament, to play the kingmaker’s role in government-formation.

“It’s a rare occasion in Nepali political history that the fourth largest party is being seen as the kingmaker, especially when the largest two parties between them have close to two-thirds majority,” says Laxman Lal Karna, a JSPN leader.

Potential kingmaker it may be. But the party is still undecided over whether to side with Prime Minister KP Oli and help him retain his government leadership or to join the anti-Oli alliance to topple the incumbent federal government.

The CPN (Maoist Center), which is desperate to unseat Oli, is waiting for the JSPN as well as the main opposition Nepali Congress (NC) to come up with their formal decisions.

There is a long story behind the formation of the JSPN that is now jointly led by a former prime minister, many former ministers and other towering political figures in Tarai-Madhes.

Fissions and fusions

The JSPN came into being 11 months ago following the merger of Samajbadi Party Nepal (SPN) and Rastriya Janata Party Nepal (RJPN) in the wake of PM Oli’s attempt to split the Samajbadi Party and reach two-thirds governing majority. After realizing that the prime minister was trying to split the SPN by enticing some of its lawmakers into the government, the SPN decided to merge with the RJPN so that the lawmakers plotting the split would be unable to secure 40 percent parliamentary party seats needed for a formal split.

Political parties led by Upendra Yadav and Mahantha Thakur had won 50 and 20 seats respectively in the 2008 Constituent Assembly elections that followed the 2007 Madhes movement. But the two mother parties soon split into many fringe parties, mainly owing to disagreements over joining the government. As a result, their agendas lost their luster and they lost seats in subsequent elections.

Major political parties including Nepali Congress, CPN-UML and Maoist Center pushed through the new constitution in 2015 amid disagreement from Madhes-based political parties. Their grievances over constitution brought them together again as they realized that they wouldn’t be able to do much as separate entities.

The RJPN was subsequently formed after the unification of six parties and the SPN came into being after the merger of two parties. Their alliance again did well in 2017 national elections, especially in Province 2.

Both forces sought votes from the Madhesi, Tharu and other disgruntled communities who wanted the constitution amended to address their concerns. The SPN had even joined the Oli-led government in return of a promise to amend the constitution.

But the Upendra Yadav-led party was forced to quit the government after his differences with Oli started to widen, and when Oli seemed in no mood to amend the national charter. Yadav resigned as deputy prime minister after Oli transferred him from Health to Law ministry, without Yadav’s knowledge.

Differences between Oli and the new outfit of JSPN, the united Madhes-based party, further widened after the prime minister dissolved the parliament in December. The party took to the street against the government move.

After the verdict

After the Supreme Court reinstated the parliament and undid the NCP merger in the first week of March, the two ruling coalition partners, CPN-UML and CPN (Maoist Center) turned into arch-rivals. Congress, which was already in opposition, has also since taken the side of the Maoists to oust Oli. The JSPN, meanwhile, is waiting for the Maoists to pull out of the government before it commits to anything.

In this context, both the governing UML and the opposition NC and Maoists, have to rely on the JSPN to form a majority government. The supposed kingmaker party currently has 32 (eligible) seats in the parliament.

Reportedly, even as the JSPN continues to engage with the Maoists, relations between the ruling UML and the JSPN are thawing after the prime minister promised to address at least some of the latter’s demands.

The JSPN has formed an informal team to negotiate with Oli on their demands of registration of a constitution amendment bill in parliament, endorsement of the citizenship bill, release of its jailed leaders and cadres including lawmaker Resham Chudhary, and withdrawal of criminal charges against the same.

“We seek action not commitment this time. The prime minister has sought some time for homework,” says Karna, a member of the JSPN talks-team. According to Karna, to take the talks forward, the party awaits a timeframe from the prime minister.

“Other forces have also committed to addressing our demands but we don’t trust them yet as they are undecided on who should lead the government. Moreover, the chief among those forces, the Maoists, have yet to withdraw their support to the government,” he adds.

JSPN leaders say they are answerable to their voters and supporters who want their leaders released and political cases against their cadres withdrawn. In a recent interaction with civil society groups, Mahant Thakur said cases against Madhesi cadres were not withdrawn due to the state’s discriminatory policies.

Drawing the line

“The JSPN has drawn attention of major forces that always ignored its role in the past,” says Tula Narayan Shah, a close reader of Madhesi politics. “The major parties undermined this force both during constitution making and government formation. Madhes-based parties helped major forces form government without any conditions. This time, the JSPN has clearly outlined its conditions.”

According to Shah, JSPN’s stock in Madhes would rise if it succeeds in getting its demands addressed. “Any force that is critical of Kathmandu gets public support in Madhes. JSPN is demanding release or withdrawal of cases of those jailed or sued for protesting against Kathmandu. If this happens, the party will be welcomed with open arms in Madhes,” Shah says.

Asked whether another faction of the JSPN, led by Baburam Bhattarai and Upendra Yadav would agree to join the Oli-led government, Karna, who belongs to the former RJPN faction, says they won’t have a problems if the government address Madhesi demands.

But JSPN leader Pradip Yadav, who is believed to be close to Upendra Yadav, says that the party will decide only after key demands are addressed.

“Though we have some differences in the party, our common goal remains to press the government to address our concerns,” says Pradip Yadav. “There should be broad discussions inside the party on this.”

Analyst Shah claims that if the JSPN manages to gets its demands addressed, the Yadav-led faction would be positive about rejoining the government. “Those now against the idea of JSPN joining the government were earlier backing KP Oli without any concrete agreement. If the party joins the government after the grievances of Madhes are addressed, Madhes will welcome it,” he adds.

This achievement could also help the JSPN secure more votes in upcoming elections. Its leaders claim the party will sweep Province 2, which has 32 constituencies, and it may also win significant number of seats in Province 1, Lumbini Province and Sudur Paschim Province.

Present and future

The JSPN’s biggest challenge is to remain intact until the next round of elections. UML sources say Oli could try to pull some JSPN leaders into UML fold right before elections. The leaders who were earlier eager about joining Oli government by breaking away from the SPN are still interested in joining the UML, claims the leader who is close to Oli.

Some structural issues could also come in the way of JSPN’s continued unity. Though the SPN and the RJPN were united at the top, the unified JSPN remains a divided house at the grassroots, something that Karna too acknowledges.

Analyst Shah says it is way too early to predict future elections. But he reckons that the JSPN will do well. “CK Raut is a potent force. But I don’t think he will be in a position to challenge the more traditional parties at least until the completion of two more electoral cycles,” he says.

After that, Shah adds, Raut’s political star could rise as the educated youths of today who back him come of age and vote in future elections. “CK Raut has a bright future in Madhesi politics, in my reading,” Shah says.

Back in present, if Oli fails to win a vote of confidence in parliament, the JSPN may even get to lead an election government with the support of NC and Maoists. But right now that remains a matter of speculation. “Prachanda jee has offered prime minister’s position to our leader Mahanth jee. But then it is upon the one making the offer to create right conditions to make that happen,” says JSPN’s Karna.