Longevity of the Oli Government?
By NARAYAN MANANDHAR
Even before newly elected Prime Minister Mr K.P. Oli has finished his formal oath taking, people are already speculating on the longevity of his government. The inordinate delays in Cabinet expansion due to internal dissent within his party, the appointment of a record number of Deputy Prime Ministers and also equally colourful combination of his ministers possibly leading to a jumbo sized cabinet give a tell-tale sign of government insecurity. Now, the Prime Minister himself is admitting that he does not like to cling on to the power like a “lizard clings to a tree” and that the government is not going to last like “sun and moon light”.
A journo has made a comment that this government has been formed at the most ominous hour; therefore, it does not have the luxury of having a honeymoon period. With the ongoing standoff with India over unofficial ‘blockade’, and Southern plains burning on fire, Nepali Congress, the largest party in opposition and with the economy at the rock bottom, one can fairly imagine the government sitting on a frying pan. Normally, new governments are allowed to enjoy a honeymoon period of three months. It is doubtful whether this government will have one.
Going by the formal rule of the game, the expected life of this government is a maximum of two years. As per the new constitution, the tenure of the Legislature-Parliament is fixed up to 21 January 2018. The track record of former PMs since last 30-35 years gives an average tenure of about one year. By this standard, Mr Sushil Koirala was lucky to have survived for nearly two years.
Instability and uncertainty is a distinct feature of Nepal’s politics with which comes many anomalies, horse trading, overnight shifting of alliances, bargaining, corruption and outright bribery and deceit. Given the structure of Nepal’s politics and a demand for inclusiveness, this distinct feature is not going to be resolved anytime in near future.
Probably, understanding this distinct feature of Nepali politics, the drafters of the new constitution have inserted a provision to disallow MPs to register no-confidence motion “up to first two years of appointment of the Prime Minister and if a no-confidence motion fails, another motion cannot be tabled within a year of its failure.” However, this provision is waived during transitional period; yet the constitution still speaks of having “no more than one vote of no-confidence motion shall be moved against the same Prime Minister within six months”.
Former Prime Minister S.B. Deuba is probably the first person to spell an omen on this government. His prediction is that the Oli Government will not last more than 100 days. However, his party Nepali Congress has decided to allow a grace period of 100 days. The implied meaning here is that the party will not register no-confidence motion before the expiry of honeymoon days. Deuba specializes in manoeuvring no-confidence motions. However, his close aide Bimalendra Nidhi likes to be as diplomatic by commenting that NC will do nothing to topple the government. The reason: it will fall on its own. Going by the size of the Cabinet and idiosyncratic personalities of the ministers, to borrow PM Oli’s rhetoric, we can assume the government to “drop like mangoes”.
Ongoing standoff with India and political agitation in Terai-Madhes will ultimately lead to downfall of “Oli-garchy” government. Dr Babu Ram Bhattarai who recently defected UCPN- Maoists camp, has already commented that people are looking for an alternative to Oli Government. The catch here is that Oli’s downfall may greatly ease conflict resolution process but it will be naïve to assume that the standoff situation alone will help to topple this government, especially because it seems to be currently working in the opposite direction. The longer the standoff, the longer gets the tenure of this government. Therefore, the inherent interest of the government lies in prolonging the crisis situation. The analysis may look absurd but this is how things are muddled in politics. Oli’s forty-five minute long address to the nation, on 15 November, has been purely designed primarily to prolong, rather than resolve, this standoff situation. At the end of his speech, one can find a warning message: this government has not been formed at a normal course, therefore, not only the future of political parties in coalition but also of the whole country depends on the role of this government.
The call to internationalize the current issue giving reasons like pending humanitarian crisis, the rights of a poor, weak, earthquake crippled, landlocked country in transition etc. is primarily motivated to prolong the crisis situation. With Nepal entering into the joint statement released at the end of PM Modi’s visit to UK and Nepal’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressing its displeasure, UK has also been dragged into the stand-off situation.
The demands by political parties from Tarai-Madhes were purely internal or unilateral issue, i.e., they could have been resolved one sided, internally by Nepal. Either by design or default, with the involvement of India, the issue has been transformed into a bilateral matter. Now, the government is determined to make the issue international. One should remember that as we move away from unilateral to bilateral to multilateral issues, we are essentially complicating the situation. This is exactly what the present government is busy doing – prolonging its stay onto power by complicating the problem.
There is another motivational factor prolonging the crisis situation. Keeping aside the opportunities created by artificial shortages (smuggling, black marketing, artificial price hikes, access to inside rationing), the government is free to make discretionary decisions, avoiding glaring eyes of the public, the opposition and the media. Normal accounting, budgeting and auditing works can be easily ignored or bypassed citing reasons like emergency and saving the lives of the people.
It is difficult to determine the tenure of this government because it will spare no efforts to hang onto power. With his frail health, Oli may be happy to throw towel, but his coalition partners, especially UCPN-Maoist will never allow him to do so. When they lost elections in 2013, the Maoists have gambled away their savings made during last six years when they joined the peace process in 2006. With no recourse to reliable resources, Maoist cadres were literally starving. It is now their time to rest and feast. Why would they give up so easily and so quickly?
Let us move back to the question that I made at the start: How long this government is to survive? It is may be difficult to predict the longevity but what is not difficult is its unceremonious, catastrophic humpty dumpty like fall. Just mark my words.
