There are signs of a fierce competition for leadership in the UML. The senior vice-chairman Ishwor Pokharel group, in the 'backup' of former President Bidya Bhandari, has intensified preparations to compete with Chairman KP Sharma Oli (Establishment). The Pokharel faction has prepared and made public a separate document, while the establishment faction has also intensified internal efforts to take over the leadership.

What kind of efforts are being made to take leadership in UML? What is the establishment's approach to competitors? Summary of an interview conducted by Kantipur's Ganga BC with General Secretary Shankar Pokharel on the upcoming general convention and current affairs:

From the 11th general convention of CPN-UML, whose policy is his leadership? Is it new ideas, new leadership?
In fact, we have started the tradition of organizing the general convention in two parts since the 10th national convention. The legislative general convention for policy and law formulation, and the national general convention for leadership development. In that sense, the main task of the national convention is leadership development. However, after the new leadership is elected, it prepares and passes proposals on current affairs. The national convention also has a responsibility to do in a state of transition. This does not mean that nothing happens in policy. The elected leadership concludes the general convention by passing proposals on current affairs.

We have prepared the party's strategic documents through the Legislative General Convention. The work of editing and publishing them is progressing. We have planned to distribute four documents at the General Convention. The documents contain the issues passed by the party's Legislative General Convention. Political, organizational proposals, decisions on amending the statute, the amended statute, and the decisions made by the tenth Central Committee meeting held after the Bhadra 23 and 24 incidents regarding how to take the Bhadra 24 incident and how to address and resolve today's challenges. We are presenting them there as a separate document. On the other hand, the main task of the National General Convention is now policy and leadership building. For leadership building, we must now move the party forward together in times of challenge. At such times, a change of leadership is not appropriate. The party believes that challenges can be met only by defending policies and leadership, especially when there are activities that are attacking the policy and leadership and causing damage to the entire nation.

We are in favor of the belief that we should take an experienced, capable and strong leadership team to face the current situation. Our (establishment) side broadly agrees that Chairman KP Sharma Oli should lead it. In particular, the entire party ranks have already approved it with a voice during the statutory convention. The incidents of Bhadra 23 and 24 have led some to think differently, especially about leadership. But the psychology and feelings of the general workers are not like that. In that sense, the party ranks are in favor of continuing the main leadership. The remaining leaders are in favor of different ideas. The party ranks are ready to manage them.

There are 40/50 leaders who aspire to be party office bearers. It seems like a challenge to manage them, doesn't it?
The number of people who have expectations during the convention is always large. But there is a limit to the power and power of management. In that sense, the main leadership and cadres will have to consider it. It was yesterday that a few people would be dissatisfied. It may be the same now, that is a different matter. But I don't think that will make such a big difference in the party movement. Because those who are dissatisfied. The party will manage them in time and put them to work. It has been done before.

Is it certain that KP Oli will become the president and you the general secretary from this convention?
The expectations of the cadres seem to be the same. However, we are generally in favor of building a team to strengthen the party president. Because the management challenges of the transition period will be faced under his leadership. It is natural for other leaders to have their own expectations and aspirations. In the end, there is a common view that everyone should accept whatever the party chairman says. I don't think there will be any problem with that.

There was talk at the 10th UML general convention that KP Oli had nominated you as his successor. Is there a break now?
Everything should be understood in relation to the time and situation. According to our legal system of yesterday, it was natural for people to make assumptions. Because the age limit of 70 years and the provision of two terms were in the statute. In that sense, people made assumptions. After the constitution was framed by the Constituent Assembly, we had expected that there would be no challenges to Nepal's democratic process. But the incident of Bhadra 24 has injured the constitution itself. Democracy is in crisis. Experienced and universally acceptable leadership is needed to face that situation. Not only the leadership within the party, but also the nation needs acceptable leadership that can be trusted.

Currently, KP Oli is under attack and siege from all sides. In such a situation, how can the party move forward by considering him as the main leader? I see some leaders and comrades trying to discuss and debate from this angle. We also have past experiences when extraordinary challenges arose in national politics. Especially after Magh 19, 2061, there is propaganda now that political parties and leaders failed. Such propaganda was also there then. But when the issue of political parties facing the challenge together came to the fore. After Magh 19, Congress President Girija Prasad Koirala was the target of the most criticism. The most effigies of him must have been burned, the most slogans raised against him. He became the universally accepted leader to face that crisis. Today, we are proud that a republic has been peacefully established in the country. If there had not been that level of leadership at that time, it would not have been possible to establish a republic peacefully.

Although the cooperation of political parties has worked in this. But Girija Prasad Koirala's contribution is also important in giving concrete form to that cooperation. If we look at the current situation in relation to that, we are facing another kind of challenge. The constitution made by two Constituent Assemblies has been injured. The country is headed towards regression. The conspirators have played on the feelings of our young people and carried out serious conspiracies. The young people had only two demands. They did not have the aspiration to govern. They wanted corruption to increase, good governance should be maintained, and social media should be used freely. That dissatisfaction was somehow combined with the capitalists and imperialists working under the Deep State formula to seek their own interests in the geopolitical conflict, who had aspirations for their security in geopolitics.

Anarchists who believed that an alternative political force could be built through social media-based populism played on our emotions in Nepal and caused an accident. The identity and strength of the nation were weakened. Naturally, strong leadership is needed to confront that and bring the country on the right path. Therefore, we went beyond the psychology of that 10th National Convention and came to the conclusion that we will continue with President KP Sharma Oli.

Former President Bhandari has put forward Senior Vice President Pokharel. What kind of competition will there be for the selection of leadership?
Now the Senior Vice President is an experienced leader within our movement. But he himself mentally portrayed himself as a character who would leave the party ranks. He himself believed that we should leave. We should maintain the age of 70. Instead, he believed that the former president should be brought in and established in the party leadership. He himself has sent the message that he is not ready for leadership. Since the former president's wishes were not fulfilled, he became the candidate he wanted. Ishwor Pokharel came from the psychology of saying that I am ready because the former president (Vidya Bhandari) said so. Can the party leadership be led by him at such a challenging moment? No. He should have taken the initiative to build the party in the same way from the beginning. I told him, 'If you wanted to come forward as the future leader, your activism did not manifest itself in that way. The cadres analyze the party ranks from the perspective of who can face today's challenges. You could not present yourself.'

If there were normal circumstances, leadership rotation, leadership reorganization, and generational transfer could be considered natural. In this extraordinary situation, unity is needed. I would like to ask him (Pokharel) whether the policy of competition was not appropriate when there was a need for unity in the party. He does not have a reasonable answer for this. I do not think that just by saying, 'I am mentally prepared for competition', he can create a credible environment to address and solve today's challenges. However, he is the leader of our movement. He is a leader. He is a person whom we all respect.

Senior Vice President Pokharel, while talking to Kantipur, has said that he is going to compete according to the principles of JABAZ, right?
JABAZ now naturally talks about promoting internal democracy. There is no disagreement about that. The party's legal system also has a system of competition in the absence of consensus. That is why unity is necessary for the benefit of the party and the movement in terms of time and circumstances. It is possible to compete in terms of methods and procedures. In that sense, the party cannot stop someone from saying that they will compete. But when the party says what it says, the party leaders and workers should be able to understand that truth for the benefit of the party and the movement. But if it is said that ‘no, it is our right to compete’, the statute has given it. The party’s principles have also given room for competition.

Is there a belief that UML has competed or not lately?
There are always two tendencies within the party movement. For example, competing, succeeding in competition, and failing are natural. Now, there is a tradition of continuously working on party building within our movement after competing and failing. There is also a tradition of leaving the party after competing and failing, becoming dissatisfied and engaging in undisciplined activities. Which tradition to choose is a matter of the individual. Whether the competition is done in a hostile or friendly manner determines the outcome. Competition within the internal life of the party should always be friendly. Friendly competition ends the situation of going out, but if competition is used as a matter of passion and excitement, it increases bitterness and bitterness naturally leads to the conclusion that one cannot remain in the party. Within our movement, I myself am a person who was defeated by competition at some point and established through work. Our party chairman himself is a leader who was defeated in the Eighth General Conference and continuously engaged in the party and established in the Ninth General Conference. There are many other examples of leaders who have continued to engage in party work despite being defeated and have reached important responsibilities again.

We also have characters like Bhim Rawal as an exception. Those who cannot accept the results and do not follow the methods made by the party. He rejected the arrangement that a person who had been elected as an office bearer at the 10th National Convention would also be a candidate for the Central Committee member. If he had accepted it, he would have been elected as a member of the Central Committee and the party could naturally have given him the responsibility of a standing committee member. After he refused to be a Central Member, the cadres did not consider it necessary to vote, and he was not elected. He also did not accept the responsibility of the Advisory Council given by the party. But he started speaking against the party and the leadership continuously. Ultimately, the party had to take disciplinary action. On the other hand, we had told Madhav Nepal that a person who had been the head of the party for 15 years, and that too under a single leadership, had come to contest. After losing the contest, he continuously started a campaign to weaken the party leadership. He led the campaign to weaken the party leadership. Finally, after the party was reestablished, he led the work of dividing the party in a conspiratorial way. We also have such negative experiences. In that sense, we expect that the comrades who are competing will not follow the path of Bhim Rawal and Madhav Nepal. All the comrades will follow the path followed by KP Oli and Shankar Pokharel.

If the party continues to work with integrity even after losing, the election can be established as an easy method for party building. There is a problem of accepting democracy as a culture. If democracy is to be successful, it is necessary to build a democratic culture.

What will the competition be like for the UML leadership?
Let's not go into mathematics. The current situation has revealed that a strong leadership is needed to face the psychological challenges of the cadres. It is imperative that those who assimilate that idea and that feeling under the leadership of KP Oli be established as the mainstream of the party. अब उहाँ (ईश्वर पोखरेल) हरुले मिलेर जाने चाहना राख्ने हो भने सहकार्यका सम्भावनाहरु छन् ।

तपाईंको महासचिवमै दाबी हो कि त्यो भन्दा माथिको पद ताक्नु भएको छ ?
अध्यक्षको नेतृत्वमा पार्टीलाई बलियो बनाउने कुरा हो । हामीले आफ्ना कुराहरु अध्यक्षलाई चाहनाका रुपमा प्रकट गर्ने कुरा आफ्नो ठाउँमा छ । अध्यक्षलाई सोच्ने अधिकार दिएन भने त्यो नेतृत्वले काम पनि गर्न सक्दैन । तिमी नेता भयौ तर हामीले मागेको पद दिनुपर्छ भनेर सबैले भन्न थाल्यौं भने त्यो नेतृत्वले आफ्नो सोच अनुसार पार्टीलाई हाँक्न सक्दैन ।

उपमहासचिव पृथ्वीसुब्बा गुरुङले महासचिवको दाबी गर्नुभएको छ नि ?
उहाँ आफै आएको त मैले बुझ्दिनँ । कार्यकर्ताहरुको एक खालको आकांक्षा प्रकट त हुन्छ नि । कार्यकर्ताको एउटा पंक्तिले अब अध्यक्षकै रुपमा तपाईंलाई हेर्न चाहेका थियौं भनेर मलाई भन्नलान् । अरु कसैलाई महासचिवका रुपमा भन्लान् । अरु कसैलाई सचिवका रुपमा भन्लान् । विभिन्न रुपमा कार्यकर्ताले आफूले मन पराएको व्यक्तिलाई यो रुपमा हेर्न पाए हुन्थ्यो भन्ने अपेक्षा अधिवेशनका बेला स्वाभाविक कुरा हो । हामी जुन साझा सोच बनाएर अगाडि बढेका साथीहरु छौं, हाम्राबीचमा कुनै प्रकारको समस्या छैन र हुँदैन पनि ।

यो जेनजी आन्दोलनपछि नेतृत्वमा पुस्तान्तरणको माग भए पनि एमालेमा त्यो सम्भावना देखिँदैन नि ?
जेनजी आन्दोलन राजनीतिक आन्दोलननै थिएन । युवाहरुको स्वतस्फूर्त विद्रोह थियो । त्यो विद्रोहलाई गलत राजनीतिक शक्तिहरु र तत्वहरुले आफ्नो स्वार्थका लागि प्रयोग गरें । त्यस अर्थमा युवाहरुको स्वतस्फूर्त आक्रोशलाई राजनीतिकतिर लगाउने काम त स्वार्थी तत्वहरुले गरेको हो । त्यसअर्थमा युवाहरु सडकमा आएको राजनीतिक विकल्प दिनका लागि होइन । अहिले त एक प्रकारले दुई दिनको घटनामा यत्रो परिवर्तन भयो, त्यस अर्थमा त्यसको श्रेय जेनजी अभियानकर्ताहरुलाई दिनुपर्छ भनेर मान्छेले चर्चा विश्लेषण गर्ने गर्छन् तर त्यो सत्य होइन । उनीहरु एक प्रकारले सडकमा आफ्नो असन्तुष्टि पोख्न आए । त्यसलाई स्वार्थी तत्वहरुले आफ्नो राजनीतिक स्वार्थमा चरम दुरुपयोग गरे । त्यस अर्थमा हेर्दा राजनीतिक जस्तो देखिन पुग्यो ।
 
एमाले चुनावका लागि तयारीमा हो कि संसद पुनर्स्थापनाको फैसला कुरेर बसेको छ ?
नेकपा एमाले लोकतन्त्रलाई जीवन पद्धतिका रुपमा ग्रहण गर्ने पार्टी हो । त्यसअर्थमा उसले जनतासँगको सम्बन्धलाई हरदम जीवन्त बनाइरहन चाहन्छ। यद्यपि चुनाव र सत्ता एमालेको लक्ष्य होइन । एमालेको लक्ष्य भनेको समाजको परिवर्तन हो । नेपाली विशेषताको समाजवाद निर्माण एमालेको ध्येय हो । तर हामी त्यसको प्राप्तिको बाटो सशस्त्र संघर्ष, विद्रोह भन्ने परम्परागत मान्यता छाडेर प्रतिस्पर्धात्मक पहल कदमीका आधारमा सरकारको नेतृत्व गर्ने र सरकारका माध्यमबाट परिवर्तनको बाटो लिने नीति अवलम्बन गरेको छ । त्यस अर्थमा हाम्रा राजनीतिक उद्देश्य, कार्यदिशा, कार्यनीति कार्यान्वयन गर्ने सन्दर्भमा चुनाव आवश्यक विषय हो । त्यसलाई हामी चाहिँ अस्वीकार गर्दैनौं किनकि हामी जुन बाटो हिँडिराखेको छौ‌ं । त्यो बाटोले चुनावको कुरा गर्छ । तर अहिलेको अवस्थामा चुनाव हुन सक्छ कि सक्दैन ? त्यो त फेरि विश्लेषणको विषय त बन्छ  ।  किनकि सरकार र प्रतिनिधिसभा विघटन दुवै संविधान सम्मत छैन भन्ने कुरा स्वत: स्पष्ट छ । र, त्यो विषय अदालतमा विचारधीन अवस्थामा छ । त्यसले चुनाव हुन्छ भन्ने खालको साझा मनोविज्ञान बन्न दिइराख्या छैन ।