The dissolution provoked countrywide protests as the people saw in it an attempt by Oli to stick to power without the people’s mandate. A writ petition was filed challenging the dissolution in the constitutional bench of the Supreme Court. Last Monday (Feb. 22) the apex court ordered the reinstatement of the Parliament, summoning of the Parliament within thirteen days and called for early elections. As there was wild jubilation in Kathmandu, Foreign Minister Pradeep Gyawali said the government would “accept” the Supreme Court ruling but there was no question of Oli resigning as Prime Minister. He is likely to face a no-confidence motion when the House meets on March 7.

“Likely to” because by themselves the Prachanda-Madhav Nepal faction cannot oust Oli. They just don’t have the numbers (about 90 in a House of 275). They can do so only if the Nepal Congress joins hands with them. But the NC is maintaining a stoic silence, not indicating what they will do if a no-confidence motion is moved in Parliament. The result is that the door has been thrown wide open for horse-trading – something never heard of in Nepal politics.

The political crisis in Nepal is an extension of the intense factional fight between the two rival factions in the ruling NCP. The party has not yet formally split but the inevitable may not be delayed much longer. Already, both factions are trying to win the support of other political parties to form a coalition. Leaders of the Nepal Congress (NC) are being eagerly sought after and feelers have reportedly been sent out to NC leader Sher Bahadur Deuba that he will be acceptable as prime minister. According to the Kathmandu Post, the NC has decided to wait and watch the developments in the NCP before responding to any overtures of any faction.

The NCP has not yet formally split. But a formal split will raise new questions which the Election Commission will have to settle. A formal split will require either or both factions to seek registration as a new political party. The EC has said that it can recognize the Nepal Communist Party only which was formed in May, 2018, which is co-chaired by Oli and Prachanda. It will be a tricky issue if each faction claims that it is entitled to the name Nepal Communist Party. Then membership verification and a lot of other questions will arise.

China had tried desperately to avert split in the NCP but failed. Its ambassador in Kathmandu worked overtime to keep the two factions together but in vain. Oli and Prachanda have met several times to resolve their differences but each time they met, they came back with their differences more unbridgeable. Last September also, the two agreed to a power-sharing deal, raising hopes of their personal differences being resolved but in the end it fizzled out. It is not so much ideological or programmatic differences, but the incompatibility of the personalities of the two leaders that lie at the root of the crisis.

As far as the differences between the two factions of the Nepal Communist Party (Oli and Prachanda) are concerned, these have reached the point of no return. The formal split has not yet taken place because each faction wants to be sure of its majority in the Upper House of Parliament before formalizing the split. Both factions are reportedly wooing the Nepal Congress because without its support neither faction can get a clear parliamentary majority.

Since the current crisis began, China has openly meddled in the internal politics of Nepal, while India has wisely kept herself aloof from it, calling it an internal matter of Nepal. China has invested heavily in infrastructure projects like hydropower development in Nepal while private investors from China have invested in small-size enterprises, shops, etc. But economic interest apart, China has a much larger stake in Nepal in the context of Sino-Indian rivalry. Beijing wants Kathmandu to be on its side vis-à-vis India. This the Oli Government has not agreed to – at least till now.

If the present stalemate continues and neither faction of the NCP is able knock together a stable parliamentary majority, there may be no alternative to dissolving the Upper House and go in for fresh elections. Both factions are frantically trying to avoid this by indulging in horse-trading. Things will become clear when the House meets on March 7. (IPA Service)