President Ram Baran Yadav, on Sunday granted three more days to form a national unity government on the request of all political parties in the CA. The major political parties have their differences over how to move the peace process forward. The UCPN (Maoist) and NC who have fielded their consensus candidates of their parties are blaming each other for failure of reaching a consensus. “We are committed to completing integration and rehabilitation of the fighters under a consensus government, but NC seems reluctant to reach a consensus as it fears it will not have any issue once the peace process is concluded”, says Maoist leader Ram Karki.

NC has been blaming the UCPN (Maoist) for not being honest in its past commitments. “We have been insisting on implementation of the past agreements,” says NC leader Deep Kumar Upadhyay. “We have been more flexible from our previous position and have only demanded that arms in the containers be brought under the purview of the government and fighters be immediately regrouped.”

After the CA election, the Maoists led the government promising to complete the integration of their fighters in six months. But in the months that followed, the Maoist government came under pressure from all sides and resigned.

After they were ousted from the government and isolated, their position hardened and the peace process looked in jeopardy. Even the UNMIN, which was monitoring the peace process was criticised by other parties for ‘favouring’ the Maoists. But the parties overcame the trust deficit and took charge of the peace process after UNMIN’s departure early this year. The UCPN (Maoist) chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal handover of his fighters to the Special Committee in January, a week after UNMIN left. The Maoists also overcame ideological differences in the party line and committed themselves to peace and constitution.

Considering the international experience in conflict resolution, this is a remarkable achievement. But the parties do not realise the significance and prospect of the achievements made so far. They are engaged in dolling out small time political scores by playing down one another, and are putting the long term interest of the nation in jeopardy.

NC leader Upadhyay questions the Maoists’ intent.

“They ran the election with their arms locked in containers. They are the biggest parties and now NC has also agreed to accept their leadership. What is preventing them from handing their arms to the government?” While the Maoist leader Karki suspects foul play from within NC. “A faction in NC is not serious about the issue of integration and the entire peace process. NC has to fight against this tendency within the party first to find a common ground in this whole process,” says Karki.

These are just a snippet of the political cock-fights that the big two are engaged in.

Then there are genuine issues of contention regarding structure of the state, electoral process and governance. The fight for power seems to have eclipsed the debate on genuine issues. The longer parties take to form a consensus government, more unlikely are chances of a material progress in constitution drafting by August 31. The Maoist chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal on Sunday confessed in a program that there was no possibility of reaching a consensus within the time granted by the president.

“We discussed on forging consensus for the government formation, but in reality we are nowhere near to declaring a consensus government,” he said addressing a political seminar of Newa Autonomous State in Kathmandu.

Political parties know they are running out of time with just nine days left for them to finalise the fundamentals of the peace process so as to prepare a moral ground for another CA extension.

There is no need of a consensus in a democratic system. A majority rules and there is an opposition to maintain check and balance of the ruling party’s business. “But we are in a political transition where no one has either mandate or capacity to govern on their own. Therefore, a consensus government is more desirable,” says Karki.

Upadhyay also agrees that a national unity government is will bring all political parties together in taking decisions. “However, we cannot rule out the interventionist role of party leadership in the government,” he says. Nepal has seen three majoritarian governments after the CA election in 2008. In none of the governments, the prime minister could take decisions without party’s directives. UML led government had twice bowed down before the party’s ruling.

There will not be a national government unless the parties put national interest above party’s interest and sincerely look to forge common grounds for cooperation. In the long run, every political constituency can benefit from a healthy and competitive politics. But for that to happen, the parties must be willing to compromise on short-term political stakes.

Dewan Rai