Parmeshwar Devkota

Following the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, Vladimir Lenin had said, “To command revolution is easy, but to run a government is not easy”.
Lenin’s statement quite applies to Nepal Communist Party (NCP)-led government. The NCP mustered a comfortable majority in the House of Representatives (HoR) in 2017 federal polls. This political feat was not an outcome of a single leader’s performance. Nor did it result from seasonal tactics. Rather, it was the result of long and friendly association of the party and leaders with people and extensive and persistence struggle they had waged. The party’s stance on the national and international issues also paid off. Nepali people had cast votes for the party also by recognising the contribution of those leaders and cadres who laid their lives on the altar of revolution.
Instead of managing the comfortable majority garnered, the NCP leaders have got indulged in the inner disputes for power and posts. Their incompatible position on power sharing was the root cause of discord and split of the party.
David Hume says that a political party, which rises to power, works with the full commitment it had made in the election campaign which may suffocate oppositions in the House. But, the move taken by the NCP leaders has gone against Hume’s opinion. If they had worked according to Hume’s assumptions, it would have given a stable government. Therefore, the shortcomings in the ruling party have drawn the attention opposition’s attention.
With unexpected division in the NCP, the opposition leaders started issuing statements expressing their willingness to lead the country without solving their own internal bickering persisting from long time. They hanker for power, rather than solving internal problems and become lenient to other factions.
Such an attitude on the part of Nepali leaders helps remind us of a terminology coined by the then US President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who propounded a theory called ‘Domino Theory’ in 1954. It presumes that events occurred in one area or one political party might spread to other areas or the political parties. If Eisenhower’s theory is right, we will be forced to see the bickering in other major parties, too.
Political power balance creates atmosphere for the development of a modern society. If the country is stable, the neighbouring countries and friends around the world see us with respect and feel comfortable with us. Stability ensures the policy constituency. Though the Nepali society has made adequate sacrifice for stability and progress, it has not achieved them yet.
In order to minimise the occurrences of political agitation, leaders of various parties must work to avoid the domino effects. For that, a group of scholars within a political party can contribute to this. Scholars may include engineers, doctors, technocrats and citizens from various fields. Generally, such scholars are generally independent but they may have stake in the political party they belong to.
Therefore, a political party should unite them for the sake of a compromise among the factions, because they can influence the leaders of various levels indiscriminately. They can convince the power hungry leaders and bring them to a compromise. The party should instil ethical values among leaders and take voters into confidence so that people feel ownership of the party. Long ago, Edmond Burke had said, “…every human benefit, every virtue and every prudent act is founded on compromise”.