Spread the love

By Our Reporter

Conflict in the Nepali Congress has reached to a boiling point now. The latest move by the Sher Bahadur Deuba faction to call its own Central Working Committee (CWC) meeting has pushed the party into open duality. Two committees, two claims to authority, and two competing narratives about who really runs the party. That is not a minor disagreement. That is a split in practice, even if not yet on paper.

This crisis in the NC has been building for years, hidden behind temporary unity during elections. The recent defeat only removed the cover. Gagan Kumar Thapa’s resignation, which was meant to show responsibility, instead opened the gates for a deeper power struggle. The trigger this time looks procedural, but it cuts deeper. The CWC meeting that handled Thapa’s resignation was called without informing the Deuba camp. In a tightly knit party, that might pass as an oversight. In a fractured one, it is seen as exclusion. It signals that one side feels confident enough to move ahead without the other. That is rarely a sign of unity in politics. It is a signal of parallel authority.

The Deuba faction’s response was predictable. If you are not invited to the table, you build your own. The decision to hold a separate CWC meeting is not just symbolic. It formalizes the divide. Now the party has two centers of discussion, possibly two lines of strategy, and certainly two versions of legitimacy. At that point, calling it a single party starts to sound like a technicality.

What makes the situation worse is the tone of accusations. Leaders close to Deuba have been accused of staying inactive during the election, even working quietly against the party. These are not routine complaints. They strike at the core of trust. Once a party begins to believe that its own members sabotaged it, cooperation becomes nearly impossible. Every decision is then seen through suspicion.

At the same time, the Deuba side questions the legitimacy of the current leadership. The dispute over the general convention and the committee formed through it is now in court. When political disagreements move into the legal arena, it usually means internal mechanisms have broken down. Courts can decide legality. They cannot restore trust.

Meanwhile, the party’s actual job, rebuilding after a defeat, sits in the background like an ignored responsibility. Cadres are confused about which leadership to follow. Local structures are likely to slow down or stall. Voters, already disappointed, see a party that cannot manage itself. That does not inspire confidence.

The generational angle adds another layer. Thapa is seen as a face of change, at least in public perception. Deuba represents continuity, experience, and control over the party machinery. In theory, this could be a productive tension. In practice, it has turned into a contest for dominance. When that happens, the debate shifts from policy to personality. And personality battles rarely produce stable outcomes.

The risk now is not abstract. A formal split is no longer unthinkable. Parallel meetings, competing claims, and legal battles are early signs of that path. Even without a formal break, a prolonged internal fight can weaken the party just as much. Leaders spend their time countering each other instead of engaging voters. The organization loses direction. Supporters drift away.

Nepal’s political space is not waiting for the Congress to sort itself out. Newer forces are already gaining ground. A divided Congress will struggle to present itself as a credible alternative. Legacy helps, but it does not win elections on its own. It needs clarity, discipline, and a shared purpose. At the moment, those qualities are missing.

Still, the situation is not beyond repair. Both sides have incentives to step back. A split would damage everyone involved. The party’s long history and wide network still offer a base to rebuild from. But that requires something that seems in short supply right now, restraint.

The immediate task is simple to state and hard to execute. Recognize each other’s legitimacy, agree on a common process, and focus on rebuilding the party before fighting over who controls it. That sounds obvious, which is probably why it keeps getting ignored.

For now, the Nepali Congress stands in a strange position. It is not being defeated by rivals. It is being pulled apart from within. And if this continues, the party may not need opponents to lose ground. It will do the job on its own.