Bhandari’s Return : A demo-crazy moment

Returning to party politics might seem normal for many, but when it comes from someone who has served as the country’s President—not once, but for two full terms—it becomes a different story. Despite some controversial stands she took and mannerism she displayed ,  many gave Bidhya Devi Bhandari the benefit of doubt , and  thought she was actually  a unifying national figure, above party politics, bureaucratic wrangling, and partisan political agenda.

Nepali politics often draws sharp lines around irregularities and aberrations , and Bhandari’s return has reignited  a debate.  She  is back in  the limelight , with overdose of public  criticism, after her recent announcement that she is back in the Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist Leninist. Justifying her move, she said she wants to contribute to making Nepalis happy, and Nepal prosperous.

UML Chairman and Prime Minister K P Oli and Bhandari have been together in politics standing like rocks for each other in success and crisis for nearly three decades, but this time Oli has cold-shouldered her move. Oli knows he will be the ultimate , if not the first, target of Bhandari’s plunge in politics.

Ethics is not a strong component of Nepali Politics, but Sher Bahadur Deuba, Oli’s ally in power currently , called Bhandari’a ct as ‘unethical’ during the summit level meeting of Nepali congress and the UML recently.  Deuba and some of his Party leaders criticized this ‘unethical issue’ during the NC Central committee  recently asserting that it could not be ignored as internal issue of the UML.

Interestingly, neither UML or Nepali congress or any other party objected to Nanda Kishore Pun , vice President under Bhandari during her both terms,  joining the Maoist-centre party and occupying Vice Chairman’s post two months ago. But Bhandari was not as lucky as she faces multi-pronged disapprovals , from Oli to Deuba and many others.

As Head of the state, she was the Supreme Commander of the Nepal Army , like the King was before , and was bestowed with the constitutional role of appointing a Prime Minister and other constitutional dignitaries , administering them oath of office and was the first on the protocol list ,signifying she was not a leader of the ‘Part ‘ but of the ‘whole’ , and that any one getting back to the Party was unthinkable.

The natural question being asked to her in the new context is;  can she do any thing more now what she could not do  as the President? She could not even get her husband Madan Bhandari’s mysterious death investigated . She had favorable governments  under Oli and all the resources in command, but what apparently lacked was the will an commitment to go for it. And that lack of will always cast a doubt over delivery of her promises, if she makes any.

Initially, when she contested by-election and won from the constituency that Madan had represented , had naturally created an impression that she was her political heir , following his way and
values. But she chose to be part of a politics of factionalism and servility in the Party, that did not glory to what Madan was identified with.

Oli made it unmistakably clear—a clear rebuke to Bhandari’s aim– that time is still far away to imagine an UML without him at the helm. Some senior leaders including Ishwar Pokhrel , known for his disenchantment towards Oli, have stood by her , but Bhandari has not even chosen to counter Oli on issues and personality yet. If there is nothing to criticize Oli and his policies about, what justifies her unprecedented plunge ? .

Oli , by his utterances and acts has left , he is an ‘Oligarch’, a totalitarian and absolute intolerant of dissent of any kind.  So he may not treat Bhandari in this avatar differently.   And Bhandari is unlikely to succeed and have people rally around her unless she convinces people by her speech and actions that she is different from the current lot of politicians , failure in delivery and governance, and perceived as corrupt.  She also needs to dispel the image of being an Oli follower , rather than some one carrying Madan’s legacy, all these years.  That she denigrated the dignity and  the honour of President’s office will be an allegation from different quarters through out.

Before she actually goes all out, she needs to seriously ponder and decide;  what more a former President should expect to get from a country that is so much chaos and uncertainty , and what actually she hopes to give to the people who have helplessly endured corruption and poor delivery by the rulers of the republic?