Due to the activities of parties accustomed to changing power by playing parliamentary math, the power in Nepal's politics keeps changing like the weather. Because the party leaders are changing the equation based on ambition, ego and selfishness rather than ideas and philosophy, the Nepali society also lives with the suspicion that the government will change every moment.

There is now widespread suspicion that the KP Sharma Oli-led government formed on the basis of the consensus of Congress and UML 10 months ago will collapse. The leaders who play the role of 'architect' in the formation of this alliance pretend that there is no problem. In this context UML general secretary Shankar Pokharel Durga Khanal of Kantipur and Kulchandra Neupane

: 

10 months ago between Congress and UML, the alliance and the government that was formed until the next election have started to crumble now?

The reasons we changed the power equation, the reasons and understanding of the key leadership also remain the same. Some people are striving for suspicion, confusion, creation and change. So every two months, the main leadership has to keep saying that the alliance will continue. Actions taken by parties dissatisfied with the power equation have implications for society.

Let me tell you an interesting thing - soon after the government was formed, there was talk of making a secretary an ambassador. He refused. After two months, this government will be replaced, instead of being formed now, let's form a new government after two months. Even the people of the secretary level were under the illusion that the government would not last even two months. The government formed from that point has now lasted for 10 months. 

After the suspicion that the coalition government will not work, has the dimension of relations with neighboring countries also worked? 

There is a tradition of saying that the government does not run because the neighbor did not invite for a visit. He did not like it, so it seems that he is making an opinion that such a government will not last for long and he is lobbying for it. But I don't think that the neighbor will make unnecessary efforts for change by disagreeing with the major parties. 

It was a tradition to go to India after becoming the Prime Minister. What is the sign that there is no such visit? It is a matter of his 'interest' who calls/does not call

. Will Nepal's power equation be affected on that basis? How to build a relationship with the neighborhood is also a matter for him. Why should we worry? The policy of the current power equation is to give priority to the neighborhood. Has there been any ups and downs in the relationship between the two countries? It didn't happen. If there is a visit, the relationship is good, if not, the relationship is bad? Foreign Minister and other ministers have gone to India. Bilateral meetings are being held and agreements are being reached. Leaders and officials are coming from both North and South. They are also going from Nepal. And where was the problem in the relationship? It should not be assumed that the Prime Minister's visit is an important and sensitive matter. It is wrong to associate such matters with the stability of the government. 

Recently BJP leader Vijay Chathaiwa came and met many leaders of Nepal. Have you come to understand the state of mind of the alliance?

If the leaders of two neighboring countries or world powers come and want to meet the leaders of Nepal, it is not appropriate to say that they will not meet. In that sense, such things should be taken for granted. Is there any issue of government change through such meetings? If someone does these kinds of activities, they must be invisible, right? Is it visible? 

A photograph of Yogi Adityanath, a Chief Minister of India, was also seen at the royalist demonstration. Propaganda was done preferentially in India. After that, there are those who suspect that the government and the system itself can be changed.

The Nepali ambassador in India has met the relevant leader and asked about this matter. In response, he said, "Please don't understand that I have consented to the activity associated with my name," then this matter was over. As far as publicity in the media is concerned, the Nepali media has the mindset of increasing views, while the Indian media works more on sensationalism. So just because it was discussed in the Indian media, we do not understand that it is the Indian point of view.

In the past, due to similar events, the alliance was changed, so there is a suspicion that something similar is about to happen now, isn't it? 

Prachanda's 'directed conduct' mainly worked in the previous government changes in Nepal. Otherwise, I don't see a problem. Congress and UML are parties with independent decision-making capacity. Prachanda also makes decisions in a guided manner. In that sense, there is a difference between the view of now and the time when Prachanda was decisive. You have to understand this thing. Prachanda's directed plan dominated Nepali politics until the two parties merged. In that sense, the equation would have changed. Not so now. 

What is Prachanda's directed conduct, can you explain?

Let's not explain that. There is no need to repeat what everyone understands in Nepali politics. Nepali people also understand it well. 

In the past, there was a political dispute over who would head the Securities Board during coalition changes. Now the matter of appointing the governor is connected. Is it not because of the problem in the coalition that the governor could not be appointed for so long? 

Within the ruling coalition, no matter who runs the ministry, political appointments should be made with consensus and equal status. So discussion does not mean disagreement. Now there are some procedural problems in implementing what we have concluded.

What are those problems?

One member of the selection committee has resigned. A member had to be appointed again. As we proceeded to search within the cadre of the National Bank, the issue of how to solve the problem of appointing relatively 'junior' people to 'senior posts' came up in the process. After resigning, he resigned on the basis that he will remain as an independent expert and the appointment will be easy. But it took time to accept the resignation. The reason for this is not the problem between the parties, but the complexity of the process that took time.

Do the Congress leaders suspect that the resignation was not accepted because of the UML?

It doesn't matter what a leader says outside. He who is in dialogue is confident.

Even though the finance minister has instructed to accept the resignation, if it is not accepted, does it mean that the resignation has been told not to be accepted from above the finance minister?

is not like that. It is a matter decided after discussion. No problem with that. It is only procedurally complicated.

There were three objectives of constitution amendment, economic prosperity and good governance while forming the ruling coalition. But even after 10 months, there doesn't seem to be any progress in these three subjects? 

 This is important. If this cannot be done, there is no justification for the alliance. 6 ordinances were brought based on the conclusion that the law itself has created complications to make the work effective. Industry professionals have taken it as a positive effort. The Good Governance Commission has been formed on the basis that structural reforms and issues that need immediate delivery should be identified and worked on. 

The economy is improving. There is no difference in the projections made by the World Bank, ADB and the Government of Nepal for the coming year. Foreign exchange reserves, current account status, monetary liquidity, bank interest rates for investment are all indicators of economic improvement. These are good. An improvement in revenue has started to be seen. But the capital expenditure has not increased as expected. Development projects were 'on hold' for a long time due to money problems in the treasury, with many projects not being studied. Because of that, a kind of problem appeared in the capital expenditure. 

The irony of Nepal is that there are rumors of a change of government every two months and its impact on the administrative structure. It is also said that the bureaucracy is discouraged due to the investigation process of the regulatory bodies. As we have said, if the law makes it unsafe for you to work, the law can be reformed. That is what the Good Governance Commission is for. Demoralization of employees cannot deliver. A long-standing condition does not suddenly change miraculously. The results of my tenure as Chief Minister of Lumbini also show that a small administration can do a lot in this administration as well. But larger administrations are a bit more complicated. It may take some time. 

Although the economic indicators are positive, why is the market not moving?

has not become an environment of internal trust. The rumor that the government changes every two months has also worked. Let's invest with confidence, what kind of minister and what kind of prime minister will come after two months? What will the environment be like? Because of that, the market has not been able to run. 

While the permanent bodies of the state are working on good governance, a separate commission has been formed. But the prime minister, who is the head of the commission, has not yet decided to make public the property details of the ministers. What is the concept of good governance among these contradictions? 

There is a legal obligation to present property details. However, there is no legal obligation to make it public. If there is a situation to be investigated, it will be received by the relevant agency. The commission was formed because of questions about good governance. It is not of permanent nature. 

Shouldn't a person in public office be transparent and accountable?

This is a personal matter. Some want to be transparent. Some want to stay in reserve. This is human nature.

A working group could not be formed for 9 months on the issue of constitutional amendment, right?

Due to the structure of the National Assembly, there was a situation where an agreement had to be made to amend the general law. An Ordinance itself became a condition to be held. Regarding the amendment of the constitution, it was not seen that the two parties could move forward only together. Two-thirds of both houses had to wait for some time. Constitutional amendment is a sensitive issue. It is not appropriate to continue the discussion on the constitution when there is instability in the streets. One should enter only in a calm environment. The major parties are leading the way in creating the environment. In principle, we agree that the constitution should be reviewed. After saying that we will cooperate until 084, it does not mean that everything should be finished tomorrow. Until the election, we will also work on amending the constitution. 

Constituent Assembly has reached the maximum consensus of the constitution, while revising it only on the basis of the agenda of the two parties or seek adoption by all?

Even if the majority agreed, one side already had a disagreement, that fact should not be forgotten. It is to work under the plan to increase acceptance of the constitution. 

If the plan is to increase the acceptability of the constitution, then Maoist and other parties can also help in the National Assembly, right? 

The Maoist party, which raised loud slogans in favor of the landless, squatters, now stands against the ordinance brought to solve the land-related problem. Therefore, it is difficult to get support for the approach based on whether it is in power or against. Communication becomes easier when the shock of losing power subsides. If the focus is out of power, the environment is created. The environment has not been created yet. 

There are many topics that need to be amended in the constitution. How do you see it?  A

review can be done. But, will the Nepali society be made like that of the Constituent Assembly? What has hindered the progress will be amended. Why go into everything? 

What do you think is the main obstacle is only the electoral system? 

volatility is the main obstacle. Parliamentary democracy and inclusiveness went into a 'hybrid model'. When discussing the electoral system, some make noises that they are against inclusiveness. Both parties have said that inclusiveness is a feature of Nepali democracy, there is nothing wrong with it. If the current infection can be resolved, we will enter this process soon.

How can we believe that the Constitution will be amended if there is a problem with the creation of the working group?  The two parties have already announced the creation of a

task force. We have come to the conclusion that we should increase the size of the team as we suspect that working with a small team would go against inclusiveness. The task force consists of experts led by political parties. 

America has recently decided to stop supporting MCC. What will happen to the projects in Nepal now? 

project is the need of Nepal. As much as possible, the government takes the initiative to get support according to the agreement. In case of not getting it, we should proceed by making alternative arrangements for resources.

This incident has come to a situation where Nepal should also review the model of foreign aid? 

is now an accidental event. Donors should be listened to rather than our priorities in grants. It is not possible to have a single approach in all policies. Regarding internal debt or external debt, the ideas that have come in Nepali society are anti-development. In terms of debt, international standards have been set for the ratio of debt to GDP. If you look at it from that angle, Nepal's debt is low. Large projects cannot be carried forward with internal revenue alone. You have to take a loan for that. Road projects are being built with the loans we have taken.

But, is there anger about the delay? 

We are all people in the society. The contractor in charge of the construction does not work on time. We try to get donations from the public rather than helping those who are working. Our habits are also not in the direction of speeding up. Delay is more harmful than corruption. Like, now Kulmanji is high in society. However, how much did the state have to pay when the Upper Tamakoshi project was delayed under his leadership? 

Now the civil society intellectuals must change the 'leadership'. They have started campaigning that the main leadership of the party should be changed. How have you taken it? 

Around 058 there was more criticism against Girija Prasad Koirala than now. But the subsequent mass movement made Girijaprasad Koirala a hero. Society is not like this. Do you not understand the psychology of Nepali society? If we look at the immediate event, it seems that it is. But if we look at the ups and downs of politics as a whole, all these things are occult and temporary. There is a kind of despair, frustration and dissatisfaction in the society. There is an escape in the youth. This is a fact. However, it should be seen from the perspective of how objective it is.

What the current top leadership has done, they can no longer do it, there is more voice that the leadership should be handed over? 

is not like that. On what basis can you understand what you can and can't do? It should be understood in the plan. If it is in the new generation, it should come with a plan. We are also in the leadership. The newcomers in the party are people like Gagan Thapa in Congress and me in UML. And we are telling them to do this and that. They have said that they will do what we say. Is it not called leadership? We are also in the role of working and directing based on the responsibilities we have received. At one time the youth led the revolution and nation building. But at other times it is difficult for the youth to come into leadership. It should be studied not only in the context of Nepal but also in world politics. A society established on the basis of the contribution made by the older generation does not advance anywhere by displacing the older generation at once. It takes time. The older generation should not make their image from just one thing.  Is there still a question of

at once? Isn't the current leadership generation working in state power since 062/063, even since 048? 

Let me tell you a story about this - since 2047 when the RPRPA party of the former Panchas was formed, Chand (Lokendra Bahadur Chand) and Thapa (Surya Bahadur Thapa) became two groups. There were 20 MPs when he arrived in 2011. Both leaders became Prime Minister in turn. Chand nominated Prakashchandra Lohani and Thapa nominated Pashupatishamsher Rana in Birgunj Mahadiveshan to hand over to the new generation after a quarrel between them. Pashupati won the election. But less than 6 months later, Thapa formed another party with Lohani, who was nominated by Chand. This is a living scene of Nepali politics. Therefore, it is not easy to accept the new. 

Is it because Nanda Bahadur, who was vice president in Maoist party, is active in party politics again and UML is also trying to make former president Vidya Bhandari active? 

She (Vidyadevi Bhandari) is not very old in terms of age. In terms of position, the person who is the president, who is the guardian of the entire nation, who has been awarded the republic honor by the party, is in a way above the party. Let's not comment on him. The party always welcomes the role of parents. 

If the former president comes into party politics, then the opportunity to ascend to your leadership will be closed, right? 

President is not a political position? Expressing opinions, concerns and interests about political matters is not unusual. Workers may have said, but bringing him back to party politics has not been discussed in the party. 

How appropriate is it for a person who has become president to join party politics, what is your opinion? 

This topic is not only related to the particular party, but also to the perspective of the nation as a whole. Political parties make an opinion after discussion and consultation. We will make it too. However, saying that Maoists have made a point of view does not mean that everyone should follow it. If necessary, we will discuss and draw a conclusion. There is no discussion now. Being active in a party is a party thing. 

Don't you think that sometimes you have to go ahead on your own to deal with so much public anger, frustration, and opposition to the party? 

The power that this movement has given, that power is the transfer of status in facing challenges. The combination of generations is the basis of politics and dynamics. The fact that the older generation is disengaged from responsibility does not mean that the new generation is not ready. He leads when the older generation is needed, then the new generation comes. This natural law of social dynamics should not be made a subject of contradiction. 

Now questions have been raised about the state of democracy within the party. Even in UML, internal democracy is shrinking. To exercise competition in the name of agreement in the convention  left? Challenging the

consensus has not stopped anyone from entering the fray. Whenever the leadership and the party are surrounded and attacked, naturally the party insists on consensus. Emphasis on competition when in favorable conditions. 

Are you referring to the siege leadership or the party? 

is in both. There are two main parties in the government now. But why is Prahar led by UML and UML? Congress's Ramesh is a writer on home administration. In the movement, the cordon is broken, there is a lathi charge. The slogan goes against our leadership. 

In the prime ministerial system, the question will be raised about the main leadership?  If the prime ministerial system is to be considered as

, then both of them should be connected. When it comes to that, you also write that a certain minister did it, not that the Prime Minister did it. At the time of taking it, it is not called the Prime Ministerial system, in Apjas it is reminded of the Prime Ministerial system.