KATHMANDU, May 24: The CPN-UML led by KP Sharma Oli currently appears to be standing at one of the most complex turning points in its internal political history. On the surface, the party still looks strong at the center of power. Inside, however, deep dissatisfaction has emerged over leadership, working style, and decision-making practices.
A striking development came when General Secretary Shankar Pokharel, widely seen as one of Oli’s closest allies, signaled that the party cannot move forward in its current state. That shift has pushed internal power dynamics into a new phase.
During Saturday’s secretariat meeting held at Oli’s residence, Pokharel did not explicitly call for resignation. Still, his message clearly pointed in that direction. Leaders present at the meeting said he stressed that “the party cannot continue like this,” “a review is necessary,” and “the current situation is not workable.”
ICC T20 World Cup: England set Nepal a challenging 185-run targ...
For those closely observing UML politics, this is no minor signal. Pokharel has long been regarded as one of Oli’s most trusted strategists and ideological partners, often standing firmly beside him during difficult political moments. His call for review and reform is now being interpreted as a sign that Oli’s grip within the party may be weakening.
Earlier on Friday, four vice-chairpersons had already raised the need to explore leadership alternatives. On Saturday, three deputy general secretaries and five secretaries also reportedly expressed dissatisfaction with party operations. Together, these developments suggest that Oli is gradually losing majority backing within the secretariat.
The dispute inside UML is not limited to individual leadership. It is rooted in deeper issues: centralized decision-making, limited internal consultation, weak coordination between government and party structures, and a growing intolerance toward internal criticism. Many leaders argue that dissenting voices have increasingly been pushed to the margins.
Supporters of Oli argue that his leadership has strengthened the party electorally. Critics, however, say that excessive centralization of power has weakened internal dialogue and collective leadership. The current open dissent in the secretariat is being seen as a reflection of that tension.
Pokharel’s remarks carry added weight because he is not acting as a lone critic. Instead, he has emphasized the need for review and restructuring to address the party’s crisis. This shifts the debate beyond leadership retention toward a broader question of organizational reform.
Oli remains a dominant figure in UML politics, with significant control over organization, government influence, and sections of public support. Yet weakening backing within a key body like the secretariat is a politically serious signal. A general secretary openly stating that the party “cannot move forward like this” is not just dissatisfaction. It functions as a warning.
The central question now is whether UML will begin an internal reform process or whether the gap between leadership and dissenting factions will widen further. Without timely dialogue and collective decision-making, the party risks deepening its internal crisis.
-1200x560-1779450784.webp)
