US embassy cable - 03KATHMANDU426

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 KATHMANDU 000426 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR SA/INS 
LONDON FOR POL - RIEDEL 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/06/2013 
TAGS: PGOV, PTER, NP, Political Parties 
SUBJECT: NEPAL:  UML ADVOCATES ALL-PARTY GOVERNMENT 
 
REF: A. (A) KATHMANDU 0292 
 
     B. (B) KATHMANDU 0312 
 
Classified By: DCM ROBERT K. BOGGS.  REASON:  1.5 (B,D). 
 
------- 
SUMMARY 
-------- 
 
1.  (C) The Communist Party of Nepal - United Marxist 
Leninist (UML) began a month-long campaign on March 6 to 
create public support for an all-party interim government. 
Although UML sources were optimistic about garnering support 
for the plan from the other Parliamentary parties, none has 
so far publicly voiced support.  Unfortunately for UML leader 
Madhav Nepal, however, news of the campaign has been crowded 
off the front page by coverage of a threatened split within 
the UML leadership.  The UML will have to demonstrate that it 
can maintain unity within its own ranks before it can expect 
to persuade other parties to accept its leadership in an 
all-party government.  End summary. 
 
----------------------------------------- 
UML FLOATS ALL-PARTY GOVERNMENT PROPOSAL 
----------------------------------------- 
 
2.  (SBU)  On March 6 the Communist Party of Nepal - United 
Marxist Leninist (UML) began a month-long campaign to 
generate public and multi-partisan support for an all-party 
government to replace the interim government appointed by 
King Gyanendra in October.  According to UML Central 
Committee Member Jhala Nath Khanal, the campaign will consist 
of mass meetings, seminars, and press conferences to be held 
at the national and district levels.  Khanal said his party 
is confident its proposal will win the support of the other 
parties that had members in the previous Parliament.  (Note: 
Implicit in the proposal is that an all-party government 
should be headed by the leader of the largest party--UML 
General Secretary Madhav Kumar Nepal.  End note.) 
 
3.  (SBU)  Khanal admitted that the UML so far has no firm 
commitments from other parties to support the proposal.  The 
most difficult to persuade, he conceded, will be the Nepali 
Congress, whose President G.P. Koirala continues to insist on 
reinstatement of the previous Parliament as the only 
acceptable alternative.  The UML has not yet formally 
presented its proposal to King Gyanendra, but will do so once 
it can demonstrate that the Parliamentary parties support its 
approach.  Khanal asserted that "some people closely 
connected to the Palace" had indicated the King would approve 
it. 
 
4.  (C)  The UML has not yet discussed the proposal "in 
depth" with the Maoists either, Khanal said.  He raised the 
subject in February with unidentified Maoists who attended a 
conference in Switzerland with him on conflict resolution. 
The Maoists' reaction was ambivalent, he reported--"not 
against it" but unsure how an all-party government could be 
turned to their advantage. 
 
----------------------------- 
GAUTAM STRAYS OFF PARTY LINE 
----------------------------- 
 
5.  (SBU)  Unfortunately for Madhav Nepal, media coverage of 
his party's campaign for multi-partisan unity was 
substantially overshadowed by press speculation of a 
potential split (again) in the UML's upper ranks.  Bamdev 
Gautam, erstwhile leader of a breakaway, further-left faction 
that reunited with the UML one year ago, reportedly was 
censured by the Central Committee on March 6 for expressing 
pupblic support for the proposed constituent assembly 
advocated by the Maoists.  (Note:  The official party line is 
that the UML is "open" to discussing the idea; privately, UML 
leaders have told us they do not support the proposal.) 
Khanal attempted to downplay the controversy, suggesting that 
the media had exaggerated the rift and denying that Gautam 
had been ordered to appear before the party's disciplinary 
committee. 
 
-------- 
COMMENT 
-------- 
 
6.  (C)  While the political parties have been united in 
their opposition to the non-party government appointed by the 
King in October, multi-partisan agreement on what should 
replace that government has continued to elude them.  Despite 
Khanal's optimism, we have seen no signs that the other 
parties, which have more typically advocated proposals that 
ensure their own leadership in an alternative interim 
government, will sacrifice their partisan interests to put 
Madhav Nepal into office.  The Maoists, who regard the more 
moderate UML as ideological traitors, may also play spoiler. 
Gautam's decision to buck party authority by advocating the 
constituent assembly--the Maoists' trademark demand--just as 
Madhav Nepal is trying to position himself as a national 
leader has the Maoists' fingerprints all over it.  Gautam's 
very public position will make it difficult for Madhav Nepal 
to project himself as capable of leading an all-party 
government when he cannot even ensure full support within his 
own party. 
MALINOWSKI