By Deepak Joshi Pokhrel

On the eve of the Christmas celebration, the UML Secretariat met on December 25 to strip Bhim Rawal, former vice chair, of his party membership. The meeting decided after assessing the statements and activities of Rawal and found that it was against the party’s official line. Bhim Rawal was the former vice chair of the party and had also served as deputy prime minister of the country. He had a very cordial relationship with party chair KP Sharma Oli. However, his relationship with Oli began to sour after he accused Oli of abusing his authority.

Over the years, UML, the second-largest party in the present parliament, has been mired in internal feuds and bickering. It has seen many factions, sub-factions, and interest and sub-interest groups within the party. The media often reports wrangling among the leaders of CPN-UML over power sharing and other petty issues is not understandable, which is what led them to spit venom against each other, which is detrimental to the party in the long run.

The UML secretariat meeting on December 25 ousted the former vice chair of the party for his statements and activities, which were viewed as against the party’s official line. Following the ouster, Bhim Rawal has become the talk of every household. He organized the press conference to tell the people that he was expelled from the party because he had opposed the party’s decision to accept the land donated by Min Bahadur Gurung. However, people doubt the claim of Rawal, as it has been reported that he was eyeing the chair of the party and was attempting to sideline Oli.

During the UML’s convention in 2021, Rawal openly challenged Oli by running for the chairmanship against him. Oli had wished to be elected unopposed, but Rawal insisted on contesting. This led to elections multiple times.

Very strange and surprising that he has been reaching out to dissident leaders of other parties, including the Nepali Congress and Maoists, and forming a group. By doing so, he has clearly sent the message that he intends to form a party under his leadership.

Not so long ago, Madhav Kumar Nepal quit the UML, citing dissatisfaction over party leadership. He had joined hands with other leaders of the opposition, including Maoist Center chair Pushpakamal Dahal, and launched a campaign against Oli. Sadly, their bonhomie failed to create any substantial impact, and no one knows whether Dahal and Nepal are still moving along or have parted their ways. Given the present political status of Nepal, he must be regretting his decision to quit the party.

Every party, be it the Nepali Congress, Maoist Centre, UML, or other fringe parties, has strengths and weaknesses. Similarly, there will be diverse views and opinions over the issues, likes, and dislikes among the leaders in the party. This makes the party vibrant and thriving. Any dissent and simmering voices within the party should be settled amicably.

Clearly, this has not been the case in any political parties. The leaders seem to quit the party to form the new one under their leadership. It also seems that position and power are their only goals and not their political ideology. This is where our leaders have failed and failed miserably.

When leaders within the party confront each other over power sharing and petty issues, it gives the opposition the opportunity to weave a story telling the people that how can we trust the ruling party, which cannot even manage its internal wrangling and bickering? This is what the main opposition is doing at the moment.

Dahal is firing a salvo at Oli, saying he has been misusing his authority and running the party in an oligarchic manner. He even says that Oli is becoming autocratic with each passing day. It seems our former Prime Minister, Dahal, has forgotten that he was also accused of being a self-centric leader when he sidelined and disregarded the contribution of a comrade in arms Baburam Bhattrai in fighting the repressive forces. Dahal should refrain from making such statements, and he needs to be honest with himself. 

Along with Dahal, the senior leaders of other parties are coming down heavily on the party leadership of Oli, saying that the ousting of Rawal reflects the autocratic tendency of Oli. Some political pundit argues that Oli’s decision reflects intolerance toward dissent and a regressive approach. However, there are many who justify the action as necessary.

The just-concluded by-election in many parts of the country has been a very big setback for the UML. It lost in many places that it considered to be its bastion. We all know that the general election will be held after a couple of years. This is the opportunity for UML to reposition itself as the biggest party in the country. However, this will be a daunting task if the internal feud continues to thrive in the party. As things stand now, UML should understand the adverse impact of such internal feuds and wrangling. It should also make all possible efforts to ensure that any dissenting voices within the party are settled through dialogue and negotiation. It should not allow the opposition to point fingers towards it for its failure to handle internal issues.