Prachanda's suicide-projection of Congress

Just like the conflicting interests of Sher Bahadur Deuba and KP Sharma Oli on the matter of giving a vote of confidence to Prachanda on December 26 last year. Isn't the identity of the proposals and conclusions of the conference and meeting of these two parties seen this time? A serious question has been raised.

Why are Thapa and Sharma publicizing the idea that they should announce 'no alliance with anyone' so quickly in the elections to be held after four years, and Shekhar Koirala, who became a victim of the desire to become the prime minister in the latter part of his life, is filling more air? It seems like an incomprehensible puzzle. Doesn't it seem that Prime Minister Prachanda is looking for a time to go to Congress 074's tanko by saying, 'You want to ally with whomever you want, so secure your power and the upcoming elections'? Also, it can be assumed that the UML has been in power since the beginning except technically. UML has completely forgotten its adversarial role by becoming a good beneficiary of all the shares with Prachanda. Congress's uproar must have made UML more zealous at this time.

Deputy Chairman Purna Bahadur Khadka has submitted a report to the Congress meeting as a proxy of Chairman Deuba, "taking into account the situation where instability may occur and learning lessons from past experiences to decide the necessary policy in the case of the necessity of forming a coalition government for the formation of the government". It is likely that the Congress General Committee will pass this resolution. But one after another mess in Koshi province and Shekhar-Gagan's anti-government and series, it cannot be said why Prachanda should continue to carry the Congress. Just as Prachanda is feeling that the main companion of the alliance, the Congress, is becoming an obstacle in the hustle and bustle of 'showing the country something new in the current third term'. Not only did Deuba stop him from taking action above Balakrishna Khan in the Bhutanese refugee case, but the platform for acquitting the political leadership in the Lalita Niwas case was also created by the Congress. On the pretext that Prachanda could not rise above Maharaputra in the gold case, the Congress has been putting pressure on Prachanda in all other matters as well.

From the outside, there is no theoretical difference between these two parties, especially between Prime Minister Prachanda and Chairman Deuba in terms of government management. But the daily pressure of Deuba to 'not move too much' in Prachanda's hoothooti may have become problematic. As soon as the government takes steps in favor of good governance, an earthquake will start in the Congress circle. An incumbent minister waved the national flag and returned to the authority after giving a statement. The Minister of Finance will certainly not have a suicidal desire to become another Minendra Rizal in the Congress by putting any deficiency in Deuba's ouster. So much so that the last time the finance minister held a press conference five times a week, he could not even clarify what he was trying to convey, his miserable condition has been revealed. Having to deal with such problems now is the natural outcome of the coalition formed by the current fragile parliament.

Again, for Prachanda, the pressure manifested in Deuba's short expression must have felt much easier than Oli's Haikom. Prachanda did not understand that as easy as it is to keep Deuba on the right side, it will not be easy to shake the Rajendra-Ravi duo with Oli tomorrow. It cannot be said that a leader like Prachanda does not anticipate the danger that it will be very difficult to stop the international arena, no matter how much Oli is criticized.

It is not only now that the Congress has stopped seeing anything below power and especially the Prime Minister's chair. A recollection of his ruling political history reveals Congressional tendencies. Seven Prime Ministers have been elected as Prime Ministers from the Congress in different parliamentary periods of Nepal and they have been re-elected 18 times. All of them were able to sit on the chair for more than 22 years and 11 months. Out of the seven Prime Ministers, four were only from the Koirala family. He served as Prime Minister for only 13 years and 10 months.

There is a history of 10 times the prime minister from this family alone. In this too, when Matrika, BP and Girija repeated as prime minister nine times, only three brothers ruled for 12 years and four months. Krishna Prasad Bhattarai was the prime minister twice and got to sit in the chair for one year and 11 months. Suvarna Shamsher Rana became the prime minister for only one year in 2015 as interim prime minister. Deuba has been the prime minister five times since 2052. Out of the total 22 years and 11 months of the prime minister's tenure, Deuba's share falls to 6 years and 2 months. Deuba's hunger has not yet died. However, it can be easily understood that at this time, the bitterness against Prachanda within the Congress is just an attempt to prevent Deuba from becoming the prime minister for the sixth time. Even if Shekhar-Gagan exerts great power, it is unlikely that Deuba's parliamentary score will be reduced in mathematics.

The latest central committee meeting of the Congress clarified that the crisis over the coalition government is not limited to the pleasure of Deuba and Dahal. Another General Minister Bishwa Prakash Sharma, who seems to be softer than Thapa, has also challenged Deuba by saying that issues such as whether or not to form an alliance or whether to continue the existing alliance or to leave the alliance should not be influenced by occult ideas that are made at the individual level. But he has presented the fact in the report that both electoral and government alliances are beneficial for the Congress. It is natural that the congressmen are scared after Barshman Pun, who can become a striker from within the Maoist party in the coalition reshuffle as expected by Oli, publicly expressed the need for a review of the alliance.

In any case, the Congressmen have no choice but to support the general parliamentary tradition as the head of government wants to increase efficiency by changing the ministers. Congress vice president Khadka, who believes that 'delirium of populism, authoritarianism and revival has increased', is not trying to make the coalition government effective and why is the Congress party also trying to take ownership of the good work done by the government? If the common Congressmen fail to understand that the Maoists are in a more comfortable position to change the alliance than the Congress, they will have no choice but to regret it. Gandhi's saying that 'Earth has given enough to satisfy the needs of every person, but not to satisfy the greed of every person', which politician will remember such a heavy establishment in Nepal at a time when India is stuck?

It is self-evident that UML and Maoists are more concerned than the Congress if the distance between the two main left-wing parties in the country is increasing. Just as the Congress is accused of being Prachanda-margi, the Maoists are many times more concerned that the left-wing character of the Congress party is disappearing. Pointing to this, Prachanda said in the Legislative Assembly, "Unbeknownst to us, wherever the bourgeois said it, it went that way." In this, the northern neighbor is also satirizing Prachanda by saying 'communists should get along'.

There are definitely some options to change the alliance with the Congress. If Oli supports him as it is rumored, Deuba will easily become the Prime Minister and show Prachanda. If you want to show Prachanda even more, Deuba-Shekhar-Gagan will make Oli the prime minister. Apart from that, if the Congress troika can coordinate, the Congress can get the Prime Minister from the non-left alliance by bringing together all the Masina parties except the UML and the Maoists. For that, it is possible to give Ravi or Rajendra as prime minister.

If this can be done, the arithmetic that can shock both Prachanda and Oli at the same time is maintained in the parliament. That is what should be done according to the class character of the Congress. Such an alliance can be the Congress route instead of the Prachanda route for the socialist journey of Gagans. It will also help the fragmented left to see its true ground. As the options for the Congress seem to be, there is a much easier option for Prachanda.

After the second people's movement, anti-Koirala people and those who did not even like Deuba, inflated Gagan as a hero of Congress liberation. Socialist thinkers Pradip Giri and Narahari Acharya have also put Gagan ahead of Koirala and Deuba to create psychological pressure on the elders by putting Gagan on the ground, and the ideological flip-flopping displayed at this time has made it clear. However, the Congress and the Maoists are not easily compatible elements.

BP Koirala was cursed by the courtiers as soon as he returned to the country calling for national reconciliation in 033 after repeated armed revolutions failed. Many times more than that, the fact that Prachanda has led a multi-party competitive governance system by ending his armed war in a peaceful manner has been criticized from within the Congress since the beginning. In that mood, the tendency to reject even Girija Prasad Koirala's strong agreement is even stronger within the current Deuba Congress. However, the recent elections have made it clear that the Congress was not happy to join forces with Prachanda to become the first party. Ironically, at the moment, Gagan Thapa, who is considered the Congress icon of the republican movement, is leading Prachanda's opposition front.

There is an interesting episode in the Congressman's life. At that time, the vocabulary of those who challenged BP and the words of those who attack Prachanda at this time have seen a strange harmony. The person who obstructed Nepal from getting membership of the United Nations, who made dirty statements about Nepal's international personality, who invited a foreign country to merge Nepal into his state, who was proud to live under the protection of foreigners and who went on a trip to Europe with a foreign circular, is now a national Slogan is giving.'(New Message Weekly, 22 Dec 2033).

There is no doubt that BP is the leader of anti-national elements. He sent those elements with guns and bombs to destroy Nepal and the Nepali people, and he is the one who has returned to the country today. At that time, the Darbaria Mandals used to say through their newspapers, at this time, the followers of Gagan and Rabindra Mishra are cursing Prachanda daily in the same words and language.

As Pradeep Giri said while portraying BP Koiral, Prachanda, who has the ability to dress even his political aspirations in a theoretical garment, has saved the "charismatic" personality of Max Weber's words even though he has repeated this work many times in the 18 years of the peace process. In this way, the inappropriate and untimely manipulation of Prachanda who keeps any favorable or unfavorable situation under his control is sure to be suicidal for them. Leadership scholars have discussed the theory of great leaders. On the one hand, there is a theory that a leader is nothing. On the other hand, there is an insistence that the leader is everything.

Especially becoming a leader and making a leader is the situation and environment of the time. Sometimes a great leader forgets his limitations and strengths in the celebration of his greatness and power. I fall victim to the ego that I can do whatever I want. Forgetting family, caste, class and society, not an individual, even a party can do whatever it wants, nor can a powerful state do it (Giri Pradip: 2078).'' It will be useful to do.