Ishwar Pokharel Calls for Leadership Change in UML

Kathmandu. UML leader Ishwar Pokharel rarely comments on internal party disputes publicly, except for the party's official stance. It is heard that he starts speeches with 'We UMLs' and ends them with 'We UMLs'.

However, in an interview with Rato pati's 'Warpar', Pokharel opened up. He expressed the view that KP Sharma Oli should step down from the chairmanship and pave the way. Pokharel had faced Oli for the post of chairman in the last general convention. 

'Restructuring of leadership has become inevitable, I am ready to make way for the new generation. The root of the problem is at the top, and the solution must also be sought from the top,' he said. He stated that the party needs to be restructured in terms of policy, method, and leadership by transforming pain into strength. He assesses that Nepal's communists are currently at a 'risky point'. 

Focusing on these overall issues, here is an edited excerpt of the conversation with UML leader Pokharel (details can be seen and heard in the video): 

It has been a long time since the elections were completed, has UML formally reviewed the election results?

CPN UML has not formally reviewed the elections yet. Institutional meetings of the party are required for review. Due to the health condition of party chairman KP Sharma Oli and some other technical difficulties, the meeting could not be held.

Although some informal discussions were held under the acting chairman, they cannot be called a comprehensive review. The meeting that will be held after the chairman becomes fully active will conduct a serious and objective review of the elections.

When the party chairman is sick or goes to the hospital, the entire party stops, and without him, even the review doesn't happen? Is there no one else in UML besides him?

From the outside, that impression must have been created. However, in a vibrant party, not all processes revolve around the leadership. Some general review work is ongoing. But for determining the results of such a big election and the future course of action, a meeting with the chairman is essential. Once he is free from this complexity, we will convene comprehensively.

What is your personal view on the election review? Your party leader, standing on the rostrum of the parliament, accused algorithms, the army, employees, foreign powers, and various foundations of causing the election defeat. Are you also of the same conclusion?

You heard what the parliamentary party leader said in parliament, that's one aspect. But subsequently, the secretariat meetings have clarified some of those points to avoid confusion. Our official stance has been released through the spokesperson. If there is confusion outside regarding some of the statements made by the parliamentary party leader, the institutional decision will resolve it. 

How many parties named UML are there?

There is only one UML, but sometimes differences in expression can be seen.

How do you view the election results? Did UML win or lose?

To put it in simple and clear terms, CPN UML suffered a shameful defeat in this election. Whether looking at vote count or seat count, the result was not what we expected. This cannot be considered just a normal loss; it is a kind of shock. It must be seriously reviewed. Somewhere, there were serious problems in our policies, methods, and activities, which led us to face this result.

What is the main reason for this defeat? Leadership weakness or something else?

There are multifaceted reasons for this. Firstly, there was a lack of clarity in our policies. Secondly, the collective leadership system we were adopting weakened. The 'check and balance' system within the party became lax.

Instead of methods and procedures, individual desires and work styles began to dominate. When the party does not function institutionally, its impact is seen in elections. Due to all these reasons, we had to face defeat.

After such a big defeat, shouldn't the leadership resign on moral grounds? 

The question of morality always remains. But before that, a review must happen. Only after the review clarifies who is responsible for how much weakness, will the issue of responsibility arise. 

Are you in favor of leadership change?

There are three methods for leadership change. First, the concerned person realizes the situation and paves the way. Second, the issue is raised in the party's statutory platforms, creating pressure. And third, moving forward through a general convention or special convention according to the bylaws. These measures must be adopted as needed.

UML is currently demanding reviews in the lower committees. Isn't this like applying soap to the head and washing from the feet? Shouldn't the review be from the top leadership?

Your argument has merit. In fact, the assessment of such a serious situation should start from the top. We need to look from the top about where the errors occurred in leadership, policy, and decision-making processes. The secretariat seeking suggestions from lower committees might be to understand the psychology of the grassroots workers? But this seems a bit reversed. As a responsible worker of UML, I say that if the root of the problem is at the top, the solution must also be sought from the top.

You are a leader who has been building this party since 2031 BS. How much does it hurt to see UML in this state today?

Naturally, it hurts. When the condition of the movement to which one has dedicated their life becomes precarious, there is pain, but pain alone is not a solution. Pain must be transformed into strength for restructuring in terms of policy, method, and leadership. If we do not reform ourselves, we cannot move forward.

You always say - if anything is not updated, it becomes outdated. Is UML heading towards becoming outdated?

This is the law of nature. Whether it is UML or any system, if it cannot adapt and update itself in time, it becomes outdated. Either we must reform, or we must perish. There is a large section within UML that believes we must reform. We have the strength to dust ourselves off and rise again. Our past challenges were even more difficult than these, but we have come back.

Chairman KP Oli says the election was lost due to external conspiracies, while you say it was due to internal weaknesses. Which is true?

It is a bad habit among communists to blame external forces to cover up their weaknesses. Conspiracies are always happening, and opponents use tricks in competition. But the leadership must have the capacity to overcome them. If you are in state governance and do not know what is happening around you, it is not others' fault, but your own failure. If internal matters are strong, external conspiracies cannot do anything.

You had suggested to KP Oli to take a ' सम्मानजनक बिदाइ' (respectable farewell) at the 11th general convention. Do you still stand by that? 

I had said in the closed session of the general convention that good things happened during his tenure, but there were also many weaknesses. If those weaknesses are not corrected, it will harm the party and the country. Therefore, he should take a respectable farewell and pave the way for new leadership. This continues even now. Restructuring of leadership has become inevitable.

If the leadership is restructured, who will come? Are you yourself trying to come?

Who will come is determined by the party's internal democratic process. But if you ask my personal opinion, leadership should be handed over to the new generation now. We should bring forward new and active colleagues.

I myself am ready to make way for the new generation. It will be beneficial for the future of UML if youths with political spirit and willpower come forward.

There are discussions that former President Bidya Devi Bhandari will return to the party and take leadership. 

Bidya Bhandari is a leader with a long political background. If she wishes to return to the party and play a role, she should be welcomed. The hassle regarding her membership renewal and the disrespectful treatment she received is extremely unfortunate and prejudiced. Neither the party's bylaws, the constitution, nor international practices prevent her from entering active politics. Trying to stop her is malicious.

India's communists ended up perishing because they did not reform. Isn't the path of Nepal's communists also the same?

Nepal's communists are currently at a 'risky point'. If we do not reform in time, our fate may also be the same. Either we must reform, or we must perish. I believe Nepal's communists will reform.

Many workers who supported you in the general convention are complaining about not getting tickets or responsibilities now. Are you accused of not being able to protect your people?

I am not just the leader of one faction, but the leader of the entire party. There is a process for ticket distribution in elections, but in some places, that process was not followed. I trusted that my leadership and the chairman would exercise discretion, but in some places, that discretion was lacking. It is natural for workers to feel pain and dissatisfaction.

How do you view the performance of the current government? It seems to be moving at a very fast pace, doesn't it? 

The current government has a numerical advantage. New colleagues have joined, and I wish them well. But I am observing a trend where processes and procedures are being violated in the name of work. This 'haste' will cause long-term damage. 
To do good work, the method must also be good. Work done by bypassing procedures may taste sweet for a while, but it does not strengthen democracy.

Will UML not move forward under KP Oli's leadership anymore? 

It is very difficult to move forward under his leadership now. This is not just my personal opinion, but what the situation indicates. We cannot move forward without reorganizing and restructuring the party. Therefore, a respectable farewell and the formation of new leadership is the best option at present.

Video/Photo: Manoj Khadka/Rato pati