<p>The election of the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist Leninist) Madhav Kumar Nepal as Nepal’s new Prime Minister has brought to an end the political crisis created by the resignation of Maoist leader Prachanda a fortnight ago. But it is likely to be only a temporary solution. Nepal has the support of 22 parties across the political spectrum and has a simple majority in the Constituent Assembly. But his election was boycotted by the Maoists, who are the biggest group, and some other parties. The Maoists have also denounced the election and has said that the new government being formed is under directives from foreign powers. The reference is to India. The Maoists had blamed India for the situation that led to the resignation of Prachanda also. In view of the Maoists’ hostile attitude to Nepal’s government its stability will be in serious doubt. This is especially so because the issues that led to Prachanda’s resignation are yet to be resolved. <br /><br />Nepal does not have an established democratic tradition and the recent problems may be seen as teething troubles of a young republic. It has a proliferation of political parties — monarchist, liberal and professing different shades of communism — and they need to work together to ensure that the peace process is not threatened. The immediate challenge for the new government is to work out a solution to the issues involving the relationship between the civilian authority and the armed forces that came to the fore with Prachanda’s sacking of the army chief and the President’s refusal to endorse the order. Ultimately it is the civilian authority that should prevail but the Maoists should realise the practical problems involved in implementing a clause of the agreement that led to their joining the political mainstream. The new Prime Minister had an important role in drawing up the agreement and is at present the head of the committee that is drawing up the country’s Constitution. He should take it as his responsibility to consolidate the gains of the democratic revolution and build a consensus in which all parties will have to make compromises.<br /><br />India obviously has vital interests at stake in Nepal on account of long cultural and historical ties and for security and economic reasons. It has sometimes overplayed its hand and this has been resented by sections of the political class in Nepal. It should not be seen as taking sides in the country’ s political tussle between parties and allow them to work together and resolve their differences on their own.</p>
<p>The election of the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist Leninist) Madhav Kumar Nepal as Nepal’s new Prime Minister has brought to an end the political crisis created by the resignation of Maoist leader Prachanda a fortnight ago. But it is likely to be only a temporary solution. Nepal has the support of 22 parties across the political spectrum and has a simple majority in the Constituent Assembly. But his election was boycotted by the Maoists, who are the biggest group, and some other parties. The Maoists have also denounced the election and has said that the new government being formed is under directives from foreign powers. The reference is to India. The Maoists had blamed India for the situation that led to the resignation of Prachanda also. In view of the Maoists’ hostile attitude to Nepal’s government its stability will be in serious doubt. This is especially so because the issues that led to Prachanda’s resignation are yet to be resolved. <br /><br />Nepal does not have an established democratic tradition and the recent problems may be seen as teething troubles of a young republic. It has a proliferation of political parties — monarchist, liberal and professing different shades of communism — and they need to work together to ensure that the peace process is not threatened. The immediate challenge for the new government is to work out a solution to the issues involving the relationship between the civilian authority and the armed forces that came to the fore with Prachanda’s sacking of the army chief and the President’s refusal to endorse the order. Ultimately it is the civilian authority that should prevail but the Maoists should realise the practical problems involved in implementing a clause of the agreement that led to their joining the political mainstream. The new Prime Minister had an important role in drawing up the agreement and is at present the head of the committee that is drawing up the country’s Constitution. He should take it as his responsibility to consolidate the gains of the democratic revolution and build a consensus in which all parties will have to make compromises.<br /><br />India obviously has vital interests at stake in Nepal on account of long cultural and historical ties and for security and economic reasons. It has sometimes overplayed its hand and this has been resented by sections of the political class in Nepal. It should not be seen as taking sides in the country’ s political tussle between parties and allow them to work together and resolve their differences on their own.</p>
