This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 KATHMANDU 000996 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR SA/INS 
LONDON FOR POL - RIEDEL 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/22/2012 
TAGS: PGOV NP GON
SUBJECT: AMBASSADOR'S MEETING WITH OPPOSITION LEADER 
 
REF: KATHMANDU 995 
 
Classified By: AMB. MICHAEL E. MALINOWSKI.  REASON:  1.5(B,D). 
 
-------- 
SUMMARY 
--------- 
 
¶1.  (C) In a May 23 meeting with Ambassador Malinowski and 
British Charge Mitchell, Opposition Leader and General 
Secretary of the Communist Party of Nepal - United Marxist 
 
SIPDIS 
Leninist (UML)  Madhav Nepal said that he is is prepared to 
go along with the dissolution of Parliament and to 
participate in fresh elections called for November 13.  He 
issued a caveat, however, that he would first have to get 
approval from the party. While expressing some concern that 
the move might be manipulated by "old forces," i.e., the 
Palace, to reassert its interests, Nepal blamed former Prime 
Minister G.P. Koirala for provoking a confrontation with 
current Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba which, in Nepal's 
words, left Deuba no other alternative but to dissolve 
Parliament or to tender his resignation.  After some 
hesitation, Nepal did not rule out the possibility of UML 
participation in an interim Cabinet.  The Ambassador and his 
British counterpart stressed the need for political maturity 
at this critical juncture and advised Nepal that their two 
governments will watch developments--and the behavior of 
parties and individual political leaders--closely.  This 
crisis presents a crucial opportunity to restore good 
governance, better counter the Maoists, and eliminate 
corruption.  Despite his generally positive comments, we 
expect Nepal will wait to see which way political winds are 
blowing before making any public commitments.  End summary. 
 
----------------------- 
THE VIEW FROM THE UML 
------------------------ 
 
¶2.  (C)  On May 23 Ambassador Malinowski, accompanied by 
British CDA Andrew Mitchell, called on Communist Party of 
Nepal - United Marxist Leninist (UML) General Secretary and 
Leader of the Opposition Madhav Kumar Nepal to glean his 
reaction to the surprise May 22 dissolution of Parliament and 
call for fresh elections November 13 (septel).  Nepal 
squarely blamed former Prime Minister and ruling Nepali 
Congress Party President Girija Prasad Koirala for provoking 
a confrontation with Deuba over extension of the emergency in 
the party's Central Working Committee (CWC) meeting (Reftel). 
 Koirala's sole motivation in the entire matter, Nepal 
asserted, was his desire to return to power.  Nepal 
complained that Koirala is ever ready to sacrifice the 
national good for personal ambition and gain.  Venting on the 
former PM, Nepal described him as the most corrupt person in 
the country  and as one whose word could not be trusted. 
After corraling support in the CWC, Koirala was moving so 
aggressively against the PM among the party MPs that Deuba 
was left with only two alternatives:  resign or dissolve 
Parliament.  Deuba was only doing what he had to do, Nepal 
observed, describing the move as constitutional.  The UML is 
prepared to accept the decision and to participate in 
elections in six months.  (He issued a caveat, however, that 
he would first have to get approval from the party.)  That 
said, however, he expressed some concern that the dissolution 
of Parliament not be manipulated by "old forces," i.e., the 
Palace, to regain some of the power lost since the 
restoration of democracy in 1990.  Elections must be free and 
fair, he emphasized.  He did not speculate about whether the 
security situation will affect the ability to conduct such 
elections beyond noting that his party would accept the 
results of a free and fair election with no more than 30 
percent voter turnout. 
 
¶3.  (C) Both the Ambassador and the British Charge noted the 
intrinsically undemocratic nature of the CWC action the 
previous day.  How can a political party, whose leadership is 
elected only by its members, force a decision on the 
government, which is elected by all voting citizens of Nepal? 
 The Opposition Leader--himself a party leader--initially 
responded with arguments in favor of the primacy of the 
party, but eventually began to see the logic of the point of 
the two envoys. 
 
------------------------ 
UML IN INTERIM CABINET? 
------------------------ 
 
¶4.  (C) If Deuba appoints a new Cabinet, the Ambassador 
asked, would the UML participate?  The current crisis also 
presents an opportunity for political leaders to do exactly 
what they always talk about doing--better combating the 
Maoist insurgency, tackling corruption and instituting good 
governance.  A smaller, multi-partisan "blue-ribbon" interim 
Cabinet might be just the way to do it, he pointed out. 
Nepal initially expressed some ambivalence about the 
prospect, stating that, if asked, he would first have to 
consult the party Central Committee.  The Ambassador and the 
British CDA both emphasized that as long-standing friends of 
Nepal, their governments are frustrated by the lack of 
political maturity so apparent in Kathmandu.  Their 
governments hope to be helpful, but at the same time have a 
responsibility to their taxpayers to ensure that aid is well 
spent, and have taken serious note of statements by Koirala 
himself, as well as others (including the Opposition Leader), 
that Nepal does not need foreign assistance to counter the 
insurgency.  While acknowledging that such statements are 
often made for domestic political advantage, both envoys 
noted that their governments could use assistance given to 
Nepal in other places, if future Nepali governments and Prime 
Ministers (including Madhav Nepal) did not want the 
assistance. The time to sacrifice petty partisan interest for 
the greater national good is now, they stressed; their 
governments would be looking for signs of such commitment. 
The Opposition Leader--who has himself made recent public 
statements asserting national sovereignty and discounting the 
need for foreign aid--took the hints on board.  While 
reiterating the need for prior party consultation, he no 
longer as readily dismissed the possibility of working in an 
interim Cabinet. 
 
--------- 
COMMENT 
--------- 
 
¶5.  (C) The UML leader has good reason to be amenable to new 
elections and even the possibility of serving in an interim 
Cabinet if asked.  The Opposition is the only likely 
beneficiary of the internecine warfare now raging within the 
majority party.  If Deuba and his Cabinet are expelled from 
the Nepali Congress--and that remains a distinct 
possibility--the largest and oldest Nepali party could 
disintegrate into rival factions, clearing the way for the 
UML (newly bolstered by its reunion with the ML in February) 
in the next elections.  But Madhav Nepal is too seasoned a 
politician--and has been too long in the Opposition--to tip 
his hand yet.  We expect he will wait to see which way the 
political wind is blowing before deciding how his party can 
best capitalize on this new situation. 
MALINOWSKI