The Weekly Telegraph Date: Wednesday 12 May, 2010 Govinda Raj Joshi, Central Committee Member, Nepali Congress Q1: The agitating Maoist Party has already lifted their indefinite general strike. Yet, the ruling parties seem resolute with their earlier stance. Is it the lust for being in power that is hindering the politics of consensus? Joshi: No. You are wrong. There is no such thing as lust for being in power at least in the case of Nepali Congress. Yes, we are in the government but I can assure you that we can even quit the government but yet may continue with our support. We are a responsible party and thus we are constantly looking for solutions to the current political impasse. Rather, it is the Unified Maoists’ party that is exhibiting its lust for power. But government formation should not be made the primary objective. Our concern is for institutionalizing the democratic order. To safeguard the democratic order is primary, but not the government. Q2: The Unified Maoists’ party is demanding formation of a National Unity Government under their own command and the ruling parties seem not to be in a mood to give up. In between, the country has fallen into an unending deadlock? After all there is the limit, how long can the country withstand this impasse? Joshi: I have already told you that for the Nepali Congress being in the government is not the priority. The Maoists want government at any cost. They cannot prove their majority in the parliament, neither can they forge consensus between the parties instead continue to pressurize the government to resign from the streets. This is undemocratic. Isn’t it? And this undemocratic measure adopted by the Maoist party has created the deadlock and it has come this far ahead because of this adamancy. For the Nepali Congress, drafting of a democratic constitution and logical end to the peace process is the prime objective. We want the Maoist to abide by all the agreements that they have signed in the past. We want them to cooperate with the government in the integration of the Maoists’ Militias. They must dissolve the paramilitary structure of the YCL and return the seized properties. Q3: Rather than proving majority in the parliament, isn’t that the politics of consensus should be the need of the hour? Joshi: Look forceful consensus is not acceptable. How can the Maoists force us accept Chairman Prachanda as the prime minister of the country? How can we accept amendment in the constitution as per their wishes and preferences? How can we accept Prachanda as the supreme leader of this country? No…such forced consensus is not at all acceptable to us. Unless and until we become confident that there remains no threat to the democratic order from the Unified Maoist party, we cannot accept their demands. The Nepali Congress is not at all confident that the Maoists believe in the ideals of the democratic principles and procedures. Not even the UML and the 22-parties in the government are satisfied. Q4: How can you say that the Maoist spose a threat to the democratic order? Joshi: Do you think that they believe in the plural democratic system of governance? No they don’t. Do they believe in judicial supremacy? No, they don’t. Their Kharipati meeting has already rejected the two ideals of democracy. It is the proof that the Maoist party is a dictatorial party and is longing for one party absolute rule in the country. The birth of the Maoist Party which has taken place in the midst of violence and terror, this in itself is a proof that they are the biggest threat to the democratic order. Our party on the other hand is an out and out a democratic party. We want to institutionalize the democratic order. We want freedom of speech, we support plural democratic set-up and parliamentary system of democracy. Thus there is remarkable difference between the Nepali Congress and the Maoist. What we primarily want from the Maoists party is their total commitment to the democratic systematic be seen both in words and deeds. Q5: So whom do you adjudge responsible for the current deadlock? Joshi: Look I am one of the committed cadres of the Nepali Congress. But, I do not reject the fact that Nepali Congress too has committed blunders in the past and it too had contributed to some extent in bringing the country to this sorry state as it stands today. The UML is equally responsible. Both the parties, NC and UML are responsible because we have used the Maoists’ against one another. In the midst of hurting one another we continued to abide by the demands of the Maoist party. The Maoists have always been clear with their agenda, our fault has been that we overlooked or ignored their hidden ultimate goals. Q6: The Maoists have freshly taken a step back. What is the possibility of consensus at this critical juncture? Joshi: To tell you the truth, the notion of consensus is itself a conspiracy against the Nepali Congress. We are a democratic party and in democracy there is no consensus as such. Democrats always believe in majority. What majority decides should be abiding to all? Consensus in not the ideal of democracy it rather signifies Communist principles. We cannot continue to abide by their diktats, there is the limit, it is enough now. The Nepali Congress must correct its past mistakes. Q7: Do you mean to say that parties should allow the deadlock to continue and head towards further confrontation? Joshi: We are heading for further chaos and confrontation that is true. And, the confrontation will be mainly because we have failed to draft the constitution within the deadline set by the people. If we extend the CA tenure then it would not be as per the people’s mandate. The major problem has been that we could not prioritize constitution drafting process. If the constitution would have been drafted on time, there would have been no deadlock. We could have held general election and handed over power to an elected government. Q8: Finally, tell us where is the country heading towards? Joshi: I do not see light at the end of the tunnel. We can nevertheless get out of this situation but it is going to be very difficult, though it is not impossible.