What will be the stand of new Congress leadership on these vital issues and how will the party move forward in implementing the new constitution? Mahabir Paudyal and Ashok Dahal caught up with Dr Koirala Thursday afternoon.
First of all can you talk a bit about the achievements of the thirteenth convention?
The convention was held under fluid circumstances. The sudden demise of Sushil Koirala had created a vacuum in the party. It was held at a time that a constitution had been promulgated under his leadership, but the provisions of which must be implemented in the coming years. The convention was a success in the sense that despite the problems facing the country, it could be held with participation of leaders from across the country. But the important question, as you hinted, is: What has convention done for the common people?
So what has it done for the people?
The most challenging task ahead is implementing the constitution and within this challenge is another challenge of addressing issues raised by Madheshi and various other groups. But for me an even greater challenge is maintaining stability in Nepal, which for the past 65 years has remained politically unstable and whose development has been thus hampered. If we have a politically stable atmosphere, we could make a leap in development. This is what people expect from Congress. Their main concern is how Congress will provide for their livelihood. The convention has generated hope in people. The onus is on us to meet this public expectation.
You said Congress needs to address Madheshi demands. That’s easier said than done.
This is why I call it one of the major challenges. But I would say we have not understood Madhesh holistically. To understand Madhesh issue, you have to plumb its depth. The way I see it, we have not tried to understand Madhesh in depth. You need to meet the leaders of the Madheshi parties who represent Madhesh, reach out to the Madheshi people at the grassroots, as well as to Madheshi intellectuals because these parties may not be fully representing Madheshi voices. We need to know ground realities. Then Congress will have to bring all Madheshi forces together on a common agenda. Only then can we have fruitful discussions. The country needs peaceful settlement of current crisis, not more dispute. We have the constitution with all the democratic values enshrined in it. The need of the hour is to bring stability by taking Madheshi forces into confidence. Whether we will be able to do so depends on how determined Congress is.
Madheshi forces have been demanding two Madhesh-only provinces. How will Congress address this demand?
Madhesh is different in different places. Eastern Madhesh represents one section of Madheshis, western and far-western Madhesh another section and central Madhesh yet another. What do these three Madheshes have in common? Can Congress recognize that commonality and use it to bring them together in a way that their rights are ensured but at the same time the rights of other people are also not impinged upon? Congress will have to act like a catalyst to make it happen.
But how do you do that?
Let our Central Committee be formed first. Party President Sher Bahadur Deuba then will expand it. Then Congress will discuss Madhesh in its Central Committee. We will then hold meaningful dialogue with Madheshi parties, intellectuals and Madheshi people.
Is the Congress party against two Madhesh-only provinces, the bottom-line of Madheshi parties?
Like I said, there is no uniform voice in Madhesh as to how many provinces there should be. Some are demanding two; others say there should be three. There is thus a disparity. This is why I say we must bring them all together first and find common ground. As for the rather rigid stand on two provinces, time must make us practical. Now is the time for us to talk to each other with seriousness and review these issues in a new light. One way of doing this could be by bringing Madheshi forces into the government so that they feel more responsible towards finding a solution acceptable to other parties as well. But like I said, we will get a clear picture after the first meeting of Central Committee. Our President has assured top priority for Madhesh demands.
You are of the opinion that federalism, republicanism and secularism need to be reviewed, aren’t you?
I have been misquoted here. What I meant was we need to review, readdress and revisit all of our past political decisions. When you are holding party’s General Convention after five and a half years, shouldn’t these issues be reviewed as well? This is what I meant. There is no harm in reviewing the party’s stand on the issues you just mentioned.
Another implication of my remark is that we now have a constitution. So we should now aspire for political stability and development. Should we keep wrangling over issues that could potentially destabilize the whole nation? There are strong feelings about religions and federal issues. I feel that we have gone too fast with these. I fear whether we will be able to institutionalize federalism. It will take time for people to understand what a federal state is and how it should work. If we make states totally autonomous, it may invite instability. We need to have a strong center too.
So should these issues be put on hold for the moment?
Not really. My concern is when we are implementing entirely new ideas we need to think really hard if they could cause destabilization in the future. Destabilization is the last thing people want. It is easy to create chaos in a poor country like ours. Float an issue which is not relevant for the time and provoke certain communities or groups. In a country’s history there are times when certain issues must be addressed immediately, but there are other issues which can be taken up later. The issue facing us at the moment is balancing our relation with India and China, while also ensuring our stability, independence and sovereignty and thus making Nepali people feel that they are at home. My point is we need to seriously discuss those burning issues, keep reviewing them. But this does not necessarily mean going back from what has already been granted in the constitution. But we should be careful not to let these disputed issues linger for long.
Nepali Congress was a divided house before the General Convention. Have the old cleavages been removed?
If you believe in democracy, you must wholeheartedly accept result of this convention. While talking to active members of Congress, I found them distressed by the perennial dispute between establishment and rival factions. This has pushed the party literally in a shambles. This division has been seen even in the party rank and file. Party cadres have been saying for years that this divide must be bridged.
This convention has made a paradigm shift. The party will henceforth have to be run according to the mandate of the convention. Besides, you should evaluate us based on how we will move ahead, not on how divided we were in the past. I and my party president will work together to bridge this division. We need to be accommodative. Like I said, the challenges before the country are great. Nepali Congress as the largest force must stand together to face them.
People want to know how new leadership will accommodate Ram Chandra Poudel.
There is no question of not accommodating him. He has done a lot for Congress. The new president will give him dignified space. Poudel is an experienced leader, who can offer so much to the party. President Deuba has already indicated that he will recognize him as such.
Nepali Congress is criticized for deviating from BP’s path of socialism. How will you, as BP’s son, carry this ideology forward?
We must understand socialism first of all. Socialism is the future. A recently released report by OXFAM shows that one percent of world population has more wealth than the remaining 99 percent. Sixty four individuals have more wealth and property than 50 percent people at bottom half of the income ladder. How can you justify it? The world needs to review how our economies have created this dangerous divide. The gap between the rich and the poor is increasing. The rich are getting richer and the poor poorer. This is going to be a big challenge for China, India, Nepal and many other countries in the world, which will ultimately be a recipe for revolt. This can be averted with strong political, social and economic agenda and their timely implementation. This is the socialism that BP had in mind. People understand socialism in a communist sense. BP was clearly in favor of democratic socialism. Socialism for Congress cannot be any different. This principle will stay within Congress forever.
Congress is also held responsible for adopting policies that widened the gap between the rich and the poor.
There is an alarming social dimension to it as well. Our social fabric is literally being torn apart. Young people are going abroad. We are getting remittance in return, but at what cost? Suicide rate is increasing and divorce cases are on the rise since the youth in their prime are not in the country. This is not what our society used to be like. The people who are in their prime go out of the country and live there for 15 to 20 years. When they come back, how will the country rehabilitate them? The idea of democratic socialism will be meaningful only when it can address these issues.
Congress leaders have been talking about toppling KP Oli government even as vote count for CC members is yet to be completed.
There are two sides to this issue. Nepali Congress is the largest party in the parliament. It led the constitution process and promulgated it. So it also has the responsibility to implement it. So it is natural that the largest party should be at the helm. On the other hand, we need to be mindful of not ushering in another era of instability in the name of leading the government for the implementation of the constitution. What if this move pushes away UML and other parties while the need is for all parties to work together? If we make a new coalition without first taking the current coalition into confidence, there could be another bout of instability.
These are critical times. We should not take such important decisions without serious discussion. If we dislodge PM Oli we also will have to face the consequences of that action. What if UML does not support us in implementing the constitution? So the issue is not whether Oli should stay or go. The question is whether we can stand together to face the challenges ahead. We have a challenge to implement the constitution. We have just emerged from blockade which has had serious impact on our economy. There is post-earthquake reconstruction to be completed. Our Central Committee will assess all these issues and come up with right policies.
Your election to General Secretary has been viewed as a step towards leadership of Nepali Congress. Is that the case?
I am a product of the past. Shashank Koirala today is what he is basically of his experiences, his political affinity and his upbringing by his father and uncles. I see my role not so much just as party president. There may be a lot of pressure from within the party for my stake in presidency. But there are other senior leaders who are more capable, who have contributed much more for the party. I have been a medical doctor for half of my life. They have more right to that post than I do.
I believe just having BP’s blood does not make me his sole inheritor in the party. It’s a huge responsibility. My goal is not to become the party president or prime minister. It does not attract me as much as Nepal’s development and political stability.
