US embassy cable - 02KATHMANDU2295

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 KATHMANDU 002295 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR SA/INS 
LONDON FOR POL - RIEDEL 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/28/2012 
TAGS: PGOV, PTER, NP, Government of Nepal (GON), Political Parties 
SUBJECT: NEPALI CONGRESS STILL HOLDING HARD LINE AGAINST 
INTERIM GOVERNMENT 
 
REF: A. (A) KATHMANDU 2189 
 
     B. (B) KATHMANDU 2091 
     C. (C) KATHMANDU 2060 
 
Classified By: AMB. MICHAEL E. MALINOWSKI.  REASON:  1.5 (B,D). 
 
------- 
SUMMARY 
-------- 
 
1.  (C)  The polarization between the Palace-appointed 
interim government and mainstream political parties 
continues.  Nepali Congress President and former Prime 
Minister G.P. Koirala, who maintains that the previous 
Parliament should be reinstated, led a rally November 26 
against the King's October 4 dismissal of the previous 
government.  More such demonstrations may be likely. 
Hardliners within the Nepali Congress are urging against 
compromise with the Palace, according to a high-ranking party 
source, who expressed concern that Koirala's continued 
intransigence--and thus a protracted stalemate between the 
parties and the Palace--could play right into the plans of 
the Maoists.  End summary. 
 
-------------------------------------------- 
PARTIES STILL SITTING OUT ON THE SIDELINES 
-------------------------------------------- 
 
2.  (SBU)  Despite the November 18 Cabinet expansion (Ref A), 
no one from any of the seven Parliamentary parties--with the 
exception of the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister 
themselves--has accepted a position in the interim government 
appointed by the King October 11.  (Note:  Ref A incorrectly 
reported that Land Reform Minister Badri Narayan Basnet is a 
member of the National Democratic Party.  In fact, Basnet is 
a former member of the Nepali Congress.  End note.)  Party 
activists on either side of the aisle lament that the King is 
trying to prove he can go it alone without the parties, 
claiming the monarch is heeding too attentively the views of 
recitivist Palace insiders who paint all politicians as 
corrupt, ineffectual, self-interested hacks.  Interim 
government efforts to accomplish what successive democratic 
governments could not--i.e., dealing with the Maoists and 
cleaning up corruption--thus garner suspicion, rather than 
support, from party leaders who feel themselves increasingly 
sidelined and rendered superfluous by the King. Many are 
particularly alarmed by the anti-corruption crusade (Ref C), 
interpreting it as another Palace ploy to discredit the 
democratic parties' legacy.  (Note:  For some politicians, 
their personal levels of culpability in assorted scandals 
likely also figure prominently in these feelings of disquiet. 
 End note.) 
 
3.  (C)  At the same time, some party leaders appear jealous 
of the new government's efforts to reopen talks with the 
Maoists and may, according to some sources, be actively 
attempting to thwart such overtures.  One 
politician-cum-human rights activist alleged recently that NC 
leader G.P. Koirala actually is urging the Maoists, 
apparently through his own human rights channel, not to open 
talks with the "illegitimate" interim government appointed by 
the King. 
 
4. (C)  But despite their displeasure with the King's move, 
the parties still appear clearly perplexed about how best to 
respond.  The positions of the National Democratic Party and 
the Nepal Sadbhavana Party (the third- and fourth-largest 
parties respectively) are particularly sensitive, since the 
current Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister hail from 
their respective upper ranks.  One Nepal Sadbhavana Central 
Committee member told us his party was acutely displeased 
when Badri Mandal, their acting President, accepted the post 
of Deputy PM--a step taken, according to the source, with no 
prior clearance from the party leadership.  The National 
Democratic Party, or Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP), 
although traditionally allied with the Palace, has still 
avoided nominating anyone (with the exception of PM Lokendra 
Bahadur Chand) to the Cabinet.  Communist Party of Nepal - 
United Marxist Leninist (UML) leader Madhav Nepal seems to be 
quietly sitting on the fence, neither directly confronting or 
criticizing the King nor explicitly endorsing his action. 
The UML has so far shown a reluctance to engage in street 
demonstrations, although a mass meeting is planned to be held 
in Kathmandu Dec. 13.  UML leader Nepal has intimated that 
his party would like the King to replace the current 
technocrat Cabinet and Prime Minister with an all-party 
government (and a PM yet to be named), and may have deferred 
public displays thus far in the hope of pursuing "quiet 
diplomacy" with the King.  So far, however, the Palace has 
given no indication that it is entertaining any suggested 
revisions to the Cabinet. 
 
---------------------------- 
KOIRALA OUT IN FRONT AGAIN 
---------------------------- 
 
5.  (SBU)  But if the UML, the RPP, and the Nepal Sadbhavana 
are downplaying, at least for now, their displeasure with the 
current set-up, the Nepali Congress Party, under the quixotic 
leadership of five-time PM G.P. Koirala, shows no such 
reticence.  The 79-year-old Koirala has kept up a steady 
chorus of dissent, charging the King's dismissal of the 
previous government was "unconstitutional," and warning 
darkly of unspecified dangers to democracy posed by the 
interim government.  On November 26, the Nepali Congress held 
concurrent mass rallies in eight different cities across the 
country; another rally was held in a ninth location just a 
few days later.  With the exception of the rally in Pokhara, 
each of the rallies was fairly well-attended, according to NC 
spokesman Arjun Narasingh K.C., with the Kathmandu meeting, 
addressed by none other than G.P. himself, drawing thousands 
of participants.  Some of the attendees carried banners and 
signs criticizing the King's October 4 dismissal of the 
previous government.  Koirala was somewhat more circumspect 
in his public remarks, avoiding direct criticism of the 
monarch, suggesting instead that the King "take corrective 
measures" by reinstating the Parliament dissolved last May. 
(Note:  November 29 editions of Nepali dailies quoted Koirala 
as warning that his party might support withdraw its support 
of the constitutional monarchy in favor of a republic absent 
ameliorative measures taken by the King.  The NC Party 
spokesman told poloff the former PM once again had--as is 
apparently so often the case--been misquoted.  End note.) 
 
---------------------- 
MAOISTS INTO THE MIX? 
---------------------- 
 
6.  (C) Koirala's strong words against the monarch have won 
him admiration and kudos from an unlikely quarter--the 
Maoists--who have praised him as the one true democrat brave 
enough to stand up to the King.  (Needless to say, a complete 
reversal of their view of him during his tenures as Prime 
Minister.)  NC spokesman Narasingh K.C. told us he fears that 
Koirala may be increasingly distancing himself from the 
political mainstream with his harsh rhetoric, boxing himself 
more and more into a corner that will leave him little room 
for maneuvering.  Self-interested opportunists within his own 
party are counseling against moderation and compromise, 
urging him to insist on the reinstatement of the previous 
Parliament--a proposal which enjoys the dubious distinction 
of having been rejected by all other parties and the King--as 
his bottom line (a line which has no resonance among the 
people, either).  The Maoists, who thrive on contention and 
discord among domestic political forces to further their own 
aims, are also encouraging a hard line, spokesman K.C. said. 
 
7.  (C)  Narasingh K.C. said he had attended an all-party 
meeting November 28 called by a far-left coalition (some with 
covert links to the Maoists) that had gained no seats in the 
previous Parliament.  The left-wing parties tried to convince 
the Nepali Congress and UML representatives (the only 
mainstream parties in attendance) to participate in mass, 
all-party demonstrations and protests against the King's 
action.  Neither the UML representative nor he agreed to the 
proposal, Narasingh K.C. said.  If they did, he observed, the 
agenda could be easily hijacked by the Maoists.  We are 
getting "dragged to the Maoists' side" by the political 
impasse, he complained, since there seems to be little 
latitude left for compromise and understanding between the 
Palace and the NC. 
 
8.  (C) In a December 3 meeting with UML Central Committee 
member and former Deputy Prime Minister Bamdev Gautam, the 
Ambassador encouraged the political parties to work together 
with the Palace to present a united front against the 
Maoists, adopting as a basic principle that the insurgents 
cease their violent activities.  The Ambassador also warned 
that security forces are fearful the Maoists might try to 
infiltrate street demonstrations and mass rallies planned by 
the parties, in a bid either to discredit the mainstream 
political parties or to provoke an over-reaction from the 
Government.  Gautam said he recognized this danger.  He 
reiterated the UML position calling for an all-party 
government, perhaps formed under the auspices of Clause 128 
of the Constitution, but noted that there had been no further 
discussion between the Palace and his party for the past two 
weeks. (Note:  Clause 128 authorized the formation of the 
first interim Cabinet "consisting of representatives from the 
main political parties," before national elections could be 
held, under democracy.  UML logic holds that since elections 
cannot be held because of security conditions, Clause 128 
offers a constitutional precedent for forming an all-party 
interim government until the situation improves and national 
elections can be held.  End note.) 
 
---------- 
COMMENT 
---------- 
 
9.  (C) It is a little disheartening to reflect that the 
Nepali Congress can mobilize its party machinery to rally 
thousands of people in Kathmandu and elsewhere to protest the 
King's action but seems unable to organize a program of 
similar magnitude denouncing Maoist attacks against their own 
party workers in the field, or against the frequent 
Maoist-called general strikes that are so debilitating to the 
economy and society.  The current impasse is absorbing most, 
if not all, of the interim government's attention.  Asserting 
its legitimacy is distracting this government from addressing 
more urgent matters--like the insurgency--in much the same 
way fending off the constant threats of no-confidence votes 
and party splits had preoccupied previous governments.  So 
far, however, creative resolutions to the stalemate have not 
been forthcoming.  Reinstating the previous Parliament 
appears to have the support of no one save G.P. Koirala, does 
not appear to have any constitutional basis, and would likely 
face a Supreme Court challenge.  (Note:  The Supreme Court 
has already ruled the dissolution of Parliament in May to be 
legal.  End note.)   Given the perennial contentiousness of 
Nepali party politics, the all-party government proposed by 
the UML would seem to have too many moving parts to prove 
workable.  That said, an interim government in a multi-party 
democracy--even one formed with the best intentions--should 
be able to demonstrate some support from some of those 
parties as a minimum requirement.  If that government is 
facing a violent insurgency that claims to have broad-based 
popularity, that support becomes even more crucial.  Without 
it, this government will remain severely restricted in what, 
if anything, it can accomplish toward a long-lasting solution 
to the conflict.  We, along with the British, have quietly 
been advising both the Palace and the political leaders to 
compromise on their public postures, which are becoming 
increasingly inflexible, to achieve a government that more 
accurately represents the multi-party democracy it seeks to 
preserve.  Unfortunately, however,  dialogue between the 
parties on the Palace on a more feasible ruling formula, 
e.g., a reshuffled Cabinet, which combines qualified 
technocrats with representatives from all the Parliamentary 
parties, seems for the moment to be at a standstill.  End 
comment. 
 
MALINOWSKI