NC, UML Say No To Poll Alliances

The two major parties have opted to contest the next elections without forging an electoral alliance. This sends a clear message to smaller parties that relying on big parties for improved outcomes is not a viable option. In their separate top-level party meetings, the Nepali Congress (NC) and the CPN (United Marxist-Leninist) decided to contest general elections in November 2027 without forming poll coalitions. 

After the NC made a formal resolution, the UML followed suit, much to the dismay of the smaller communist parties. Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, who is also the UML chair, even declared that his party would not join any left-wing alliance. Previously, he had refused to be part of the Socialist Front, which was revived after Prachanda lost power following the formation of the Congress-UML coalition government some two months ago. After announcing that they would contest elections independently, the NC and UML stated that they would launch campaigns to bolster organisational structures and expand them to all constituencies in order to improve their general election outcomes.

Obviously, the decision by the two major parties came after they suffered unexpected “deception” from the third major party, the CPN (Maoist Centre), and its chair and former Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal Prachanda, who has remained at the forefront of the government leadership since the last general elections in November 2022. In fact, the Maoist Centre had enjoyed the trappings of power for the past 17 years, since the erstwhile Maoist insurgents joined the mainstream of politics in 2008. 

Coalition culture

Although the former militants failed to win a majority in parliament frequently, they remained in power due to what many referred to as a “continued coalition culture,” in which the Maoist Centre, led chairperson Prachanda, ranked third but wielded power and pushed the first and second largest parties to the brink. The Nepali Congress and UML remained on the receiving end. 

Prachanda even boasted that his party possessed a magical number that allowed him to lead the government on multiple occasions. However, the NC and UML recognised Prachanda’s “cunning nature” and formed their own coalition government, ending Prachanda’s premiership some two months ago. Given his party's recent decline in popularity, Prachanda is unlikely to return as prime minister after the two parties decided not to form new coalitions to contest elections. The Maoist Centre, the CPN (Unified Socialist), and other parties are now concerned that they will struggle to get better outcomes in future polls. 

Before forming the present government, the NC and UML were both concerned that if one of them did not make agreements with smaller parties such as the Maoist Centre, the other would form alliances with former rebels and therefore win elections. They have now agreed to rule the country jointly; they are no longer afraid of any such alliances. As a result, political watchers believe they have decided to run in elections independently. It is a foregone conclusion that these two parties are the ones who will occupy first and second positions in general elections. In the past, the Maoist Centre and Unified Socialists received a considerable number of votes only by forming electoral alliances with either the Nepali Congress or the UML. 

With the latest decision, many analysts believe that contesting elections without electoral alliances will put all parties' real strength to the test. While this would provide an accurate picture of any party’s political position, the move would also help strengthen the country’s democratic legislative system. The principle of democratic parliamentary multi-party polity dictates that the party with the most votes must form the government, while the party in second place serves as the main opposition. Parties finishing lower than the second-placed party should act as responsible opposition, acting as pressure groups against the ruling dispensation. The culture of forming poll alliances did not provide parties with such opportunities.

In the meantime, though the two largest parties opposed any future electoral coalitions, some say that such agreements may assist minor parties by expanding their presence in parliament, resulting in increased representation for smaller parties. This can lead to a more diverse and representative legislative system. Similarly, in systems with a large number of minor parties, like ours, alliances can assist in the formation of more stable coalitions. Poll coalitions allow parties to provide voters with clearer alternatives and a more predictable outcome in terms of government formation. It also helps to reduce political fragmentation by bringing together organisations with similar ideals or policy goals, such as various communist parties in the country.

Negative implications

However, poll alliances may sometimes have negative implications. It can boost representation, but it can also undermine political pluralism by marginalising tiny parties that choose to remain independent. This can lead to concentrated control among a few major parties, such as the UML and NC, reducing the variety of the political system. Alliances can erode individual parties' identities and cause voter unhappiness if parties appear to surrender their fundamental ideologies for political gain. Collaboration between competing parties can influence voter choice, giving voters the impression that their alternatives are limited or manipulated. Political coalitions created merely for political reasons, without a clear policy aim or ideological similarity, may encourage short-term opportunism. When many parties create an alliance, voters may struggle to hold individual parties accountable for their actions. This shift in responsibilities can weaken democratic accountability. 

To sum up, the decision made by the two biggest parties is likely to bring our "derailed politics" back on track. Yet, given the ever-changing landscape of Nepali politics and the frequent breaking of pledges, it is premature to expect an unwavering commitment from our parties. However, after being duped by smaller parties such as the Maoist Centre, two major parties devised a strategy to render Prachanda and other smaller party leadership ineffective in their attempts to maintain or regain power by coaxing or coercing major parties to form electoral alliances with them in order to improve poll results and increase bargaining power.

(Upadhyay is a former managing editor of this daily)