The overshadowed Madhesi politics has once again become a topic of debate. Leaders of Madhesh-centric parties have started to appear on the same platform. On the occasion of the eighteen years of the Madhesh movement on January 5th and the commemoration of Gajendra Narayan Singh, one of the pioneers of 'Madheshism' on January 10th, the Madhesi leaders not only appeared on the same stage, they also vowed to cooperate with the Madhesi forces from a new angle.

On January 1, under the leadership of Hridayesh Tripathi, it is said that there was an agreement to form a 'loose alliance' in the discussion between the Madhesh-centric parties inside and outside the parliament. Remembering Gajendra Narayan Singh on the 10th of January, the leaders have talked about blocking the front between the Madhesi parties in order to reach the agreement. These practices and efforts of alliance between Madhesh-centric parties have become the subject of media-discussion since two weeks. 

Some questions have been raised in this discussion. Like, why is there going to be a blockade between these parties right now? What is the purpose of this? What are the political bases of the protest? Is this blockade to create pressure on big parties or power bargaining or to increase Madhesh issues? After the Madhesh movement, the rapture that was in these parties, has it returned? What could be the conditions for regaining lost power and credit? In the meantime, this article has been prepared by focusing on these questions. 

First, the common and main reason for old-new, Madhesh-centric parties inside/outside parliament to stand together is the limit of the 'threshold' (minimum vote percentage) proposed in the electoral system reform bill. These parties have come together after the Congress-UML joint government tried to increase the 'threshold' limit for representation in Parliament through the proportional election system.

There is a constitutional arrangement that any party needs at least 3 percent of votes for representation in the House of Representatives through the proportional election system. This limit of vote percentage for the state assembly is 1.5. However, in order to improve the electoral system, the government has proposed a 'threshold' of 5 percent for the House of Representatives and 3 percent for the Provincial Assembly in the draft of the Bill on Election Management. 

This proposal has become the basis for bringing the Madhesh-centric small parties together. Madhesi leaders have criticized it as against the essence and spirit of federalism. The advocacy of a two-party system by some Congress-UML leaders from time to time has also made these parties suspicious. Similarly, when the issues of electoral system reform are being raised, it is being advocated to make a legal provision not to contest elections by forming fronts. This context has increased the psychology of fear in the Madhesh-centric parties. This psychology is the main reason for this alliance. 

Secondly, even though the Congress-UML coalition government was told to move forward with the seven-point consensus, the constitutional amendment has not been carried out with importance. Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli himself has indicated that this issue is not the main priority at the moment by saying that there will be no amendment of the constitution and that it will happen only in 2087. In other words, the constitutional amendment that the government is saying has become a matter of public consumption only. The government has not started the necessary homework to advance the constitutional amendment.

However, questions have been raised about the achievements of the Madhesh movement such as federalism and proportional election system in the country. While many comments and questions are being raised on this issue, the fear of losing these political achievements has brought the Madhesi parties together. Madhesh-centered parties can/cannot form a common opinion on constitutional amendment, it will become clear in the coming days. However, the issue of constitutional amendment is another reason for the attempt of frontline. 

Thirdly, this is another part of the front-line effort, the effort of electoral cooperation. Also, there are many examples of disunity between Madhesh-centric parties. Due to the bitterness of the past, even now there is a situation of conflict between some leaders of the Madhesh-centric party. Appearing on at least one platform from such a situation is also an achievement. It will be too hasty to predict whether there will be an electoral blockade or the unity of the party, which has become a scenario of coming to the same platform from an environment where there is no bitterness or even conversation. However, in order to recover the dwindling credibility and power, the Madhesh-centric parties may have started a front-banding effort targeting the 2084 general elections. 

But, are these efforts easy? Is it possible for the leaders of the Madhesh-centric parties, who are often divided and have a bitter relationship? After the political change of 2063, Madhesh woke up three times. The Madhesh movement that happened three times contributed to establish progressive political issues such as inclusive democracy, federalism, proportional election system etc. in Nepali politics. However, today those cases have reached a state of being abandoned.

The leadership born from the Madhesh movement came to power many times, but today, when those issues are becoming uninhabited, where is the leadership born from that movement? In 18 years, could that leadership play any role in establishing the Madhesh issue or was it just a witness to power and corruption? These questions also come naturally when trying to block the front. 

Madhesh-centric parties are currently weak in terms of power and balance of power. There is no point in having or not having a Madhesh-centric party when the government is made up of two big parties. He has to be satisfied with the part given by the big party. With the loss of public opinion and public trust and the weakening of power and strength, are the Madhesh-centric parties ready to self-examination now? Or is it the intention to increase the bargaining power again in the name of Morchabandi? Isn't it time for the leaders who have been practicing morchabandi to look back at the past and self-evaluate?

is especially after the people's movement of 2063 when Madhesh had a strong presence in Nepali politics. However, the emergence of the Madhesi party took place in 2008. At that time Vedananda Jha formed the Nepal Terai Congress by rebelling from the Nepali Congress. He is the one who raised the issue of Madhesh in an organized manner for the first time. When turning the pages of history, one remembers the role played by Madhesi parties such as Madhesh Janakrantikari Party, Nepal Sadbhavna Party etc. in promoting Madhesh issues. However, it is only after the change of 2063 that the voice of Madhesh became louder in Nepali politics. 

The character of 2063 was different from that of 2046. After this movement, marginalized communities also started to stand up for their rights. The movement was the result of a collaboration between parliamentary political power and the Maoists that emerged from the violent insurgency. And, the dictatorship was centered against the monarchy. As the movement restored democracy, the marginalized groups and the poor started waking up for their rights and at the same time there was a movement in Madhesh.

The movement that started on the grounds that the interim constitution issued on January 1, 2063 did not address the Madhesh issue, took the form of the Madhesh uprising, and the then establishment was ready to address the Madhesh issue. After the issues of Madhesh, including federalism, were addressed in the interim constitution, the first Madhesh movement ended. 

The Madhesi Janadhikhar Forum that led that movement was initially a common platform, later emerged as a political party. During the writing of the new constitution by the Constituent Assembly, Madhesh woke up again and again. In that sequence, parties like Forum, Terai Madhesh Democratic Party (Tamlopa) were born.

In the first Constituent Assembly, the Madhesi People's Rights Forum emerged as a strong regional party with 54 seats. Tamalopa also won 21 seats directly and proportionally. Both parties became national parties. After the emergence of new political forces in Madhesh, there was a wave of formation and organization of Madhesh-centric parties leaving the national parties like Congress-UML. Even through the election, Forum, Tamalopa emerged as a strong regional power. 

In the following days, mainly four characters were seen in the Madhesh-centric parties. The trust of the voters towards these parties was falling. First, to do anything for power, to get along with anyone. The theoretical, political side is secondary, the issue is ignored but the tendency to be ready to make any kind of compromise for power. 

Secondly, due to the development of power-oriented character, divisive thinking and tendencies also developed in the parties. There are instances of Madhesh-centric parties splitting dozens of times. Nepal Sadbhavana Party, Madhesi Janadhikhar Forum, Tamalopa etc. were the main parties after the Madhesh movement but they got divided again and again. Now these parties have neither their old identity nor their shape. 

Third, misrule and corruption. Although the whole country is affected by misrule and corruption, Madhesh politics is more affected by it. Recently, one of the MPs of Madhesh province, Rahwar Ansari, expressed his anger in the provincial assembly. It can be guessed how much Madhesh politics is suffering from this disease. His recent speech in Parliament went viral. He expressed his anger at the rise of corruption and misrule, and he quipped that Madhesh should be declared a 'red light area of ​​corruption'. The anger expressed in Madhesh province shows that this part of Madheshi politics is distorted. 

Fourthly, Madhesh-centric parties have a tendency to sometimes run under the guidance and influence of foreign power centers for power, and sometimes to be used by the country's biggest parties. Even now, when there is an attempt to block the front between the Madhesh-centric parties, there is also an understanding that this is being done at the behest and interest of external forces. 

Fifth, these above trends were seen not only in the old parties after 2063 that split through Forum, Tamalopa, but also in the parties that emerged as alternatives to those parties in the 2079 general election. The Janmat Party and the Civil Liberation Party are alternative forces that have recently emerged in Madhesh. However, it has been seen that this party is not different from the old ones due to the discussion within the Civil Liberation Party.

Upendra Yadav, who was born from the Madhesh movement, has so much desire for power that he does not think that he has anything to do with the movement or the issue. Sike Raut who came from the extremist stream, he is not free from controversy, although with his emergence from the electoral path, sympathy and hope for him has awakened in Madhesh, but in recent days he is also in controversy due to his personal affairs and character. 

In this background, how will the Madhesh-centric politics, which is trying to stop the front, proceed? Doubt. In the past too, these Madhesh-centric parties and leaders have not been seen blocking fronts. In the past, there are many examples of when people have to go to power, when they have to leave power, when their interests match, when they don't match, when they divide and block the front. Second, there are blockades during protests and street struggles. Third, according to the provisions of the law on political parties, even after the 3 percent threshold, there was pressure to unite small Madhesh-centric parties. As a