Nepal's search for a prime minister

Nepal: The search goes on.

Nepal has been desperately searching for a new prime minister for two months now. Since 2008, the Himalayan nation has been facing constitutional deadlocks one after another in its transition to a democratic process.
Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal (Communist Party of Nepal -- Unified Marxist Leninist) resigned under tremendous pressure from Unified Communist Party of Nepal (UCPN-Maoist) on June 30 after 13 turbulent months in office.
Since then, the Constituent Assembly has met five times to elect a new prime minister. But each of these rounds of election -- July 1, July 23, August 2, August 6 and August 23 -- failed to produce a government leader. Outgoing PM Madhav Kumar Nepal is now running a defunct caretaker government.
Earlier the Constituent Assembly (CA) nearly ceased to exist when its mandated tenure of two years ran out on May 28. It was at the last minute that a compromise was struck and the tenure of the CA extended for another year. The primary task of the CA is to draft a new constitution for Nepal. The Maoists supported the extension of the CA on condition that Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal stepped down.
More than two months of the extended time have passed but the members of the Constituent Assembly, instead of engaging themselves in the task of drafting the new constitution, are now engaged in a bitter wrangling over who should be the next prime minister.
Nepali politics is split into three sharp divisions. The ultra-leftists UCPN-Maoist led by Pushpa Kumar Dahal (Prachanda), having 231 seats in CA; the centrist Nepali Congress, the oldest political party of Nepal, having 115 seats; and the center-left CPN-UML with 108 seats in the Assembly. To win the election in the 601-seat Constituent Assembly a candidate has to muster a simple majority of 301 votes.
Unfortunately, all the three parties are at loggerheads with each other for the prime minister's berth. Two candidates are in the running for the PM's post -- Maoist party Chairman Prachanda and vice-president of the Nepali Congress Ram Chandra Poudel. Neither of these two candidates could garner 301 votes.
The reason for their inability to get the required numbers is that CPN (UML) and two smaller parties -- Madhesi Jana Adhikar Forum (MJF with 54 seats) and the Tarai Madhesi Loktantrik Party (TML with 21 seats) -- abstained from voting.
These three parties, with 183 seats among them, want the Maoists to return the land confiscated by them during the insurgency to the original farmers and disband the Maoist paramilitary youth wing "Young Communist League." They also want a consensus in the Constituent Assembly to elect a prime minister who will lead a national-unity government. Clearly, these three parties have emerged as the final arbiters on who will be the next prime minister.
Prachanda argues that, as the largest party in the CA, UCPN (Maoist) should lead the government. But the non-Maoist parties fear that if Prachanda becomes prime minister again he will manipulate the drafting of the constitution.
The shadow of India looms large over the political horizon of Nepali. It was India which brokered the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) that ended the ten-year insurgency in November 2006. When Prachanda first became prime minister (Aug 2008-May 2009), Delhi was irked by his strong anti-Indian stance. India now clearly distrusts Prachanda because of his ultra-leftist ideology and his ability to plunge the nation into chaos.
India probably would reluctantly agree to support India-educated Baburam Bhattarai, vice-chairman of UCPN (Maoist) as the next prime minister. But then Prachanda and Baburam are strong rivals and are engaged in intra-party struggle for leadership.
Though Nepal is totally dependent on India for food and energy supplies, the Maoists have repeatedly expressed their resentment over India's interference in Nepal. Relations between the Maoists and the Indian Embassy in Kathmandu are hostile.
It is against this background that India's Special Envoy Shyam Sharan (former foreign secretary and former ambassador to Nepal) visited Kathmandu during August 5-9. During his stay in the Nepali capital he had hectic parleys with all the leaders of the three main political parties. He also held a separate meeting with Baburam Bhattarai, which triggered a verbal duel between Maoist supremo Prachanda and Baburam.
The fifth round of elections was held on August 23 -- which again failed to produce a prime minister. Prachanda obtained 246 votes, while Poudel secured 124. The CPN (UML) and the two Madhesi parties sat on the fence. The voting pattern reflects the respective party strength in the Constituent Assembly. Prachanda blamed national and international forces for the division in the Constituent Assembly. The sixth round of voting will be held on September 5.
It appears that India is in no hurry to resolve the ongoing political impasse in Nepal. India would like to see the Maoists withdraw their candidature and allow the Nepali Congress get the prime minister's berth. To achieve its goal India has to steer the Nepali political parties towards building a consensus on major issues facing the nation. Shyam Sharan said that India would like to see a stable Nepal with "due progress in the ongoing peace process and the constitution making drafting task."
China, the powerful Nepali neighbour on the north, has so far not intervened in Nepal's politics but has urged Nepali leaders to resolve their differences quickly. Evidently, China does not want an unstable Nepal in its backyard.
It is a pity that these same political parties, which rose above personal interests and agreed to sign the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in 2006 for greater national cause, are now locked in a naked power struggle -- which has caused increasing public distrust.
Lack of an effective government has stalled the passing of the budget and other government business. If the political parties continue with their bickering over power sharing this poor nation of 30 million may once again plunge into chaos. All the blood shed for a multi-party democratic system would go in vain. The peace process will be jeopardized and drafting of the constitution will remain incomplete.

Mahmood Hasan, a former Ambassador and Secretary, is Policy Adviser, Center for Foreign Affairs Studies.