- Pradeep Gyawali’s report attributes CPN-UML’s election defeat to external propaganda, social media algorithms, internal sabotage, and organizational weaknesses like poor ticket distribution.
- The report strongly defends Chairman KP Sharma Oli’s record, characterizing the defeat as a minor setback that should not end his party leadership.
- Gyawali suggests a 39-point plan involving a "cyber army" and better digital communication to counter criticism and attract younger voters to the party.
- The UML’s review task force continues to analyze conflicting reports from Gyawali, Pokharel, and Badal to reach a consensus on the party’s future direction.
Kathmandu, Nepal: Former CPN-UML Deputy General Secretary Pradeep Gyawali has prepared a third report on the party’s defeat in the February 21 general election, adding another layer to the ongoing debate within the party over what went wrong.
The report blames a mix of external political developments and problems within the party for the election loss. It also strongly defends party Chairman KP Sharma Oli and his political record.
Gyawali prepared the report after earlier reports by UML General Secretary Shankar Pokharel and Vice Chairman Ram Bahadur Thapa ‘Badal’ failed to settle differences within the party over the reasons for the defeat and the party’s future direction.
External factors blamed
Gyawali’s report gives considerable attention to the political developments of Bhadra 23 and 24, saying they affected the election and hurt the UML.
It also points to social media, digital algorithms and what the report calls “internal sabotage” during the election campaign.
According to the report, younger voters were heavily influenced by social media content that was critical of the UML and Oli. It describes the campaign against the party as a “propaganda war.”
These are the report’s own assessments and have not been independently established as the sole reasons for the UML’s defeat.
At the same time, Gyawali acknowledges that the party had its own problems.
Party weaknesses also identified
The report points to weaknesses in the party’s organization, mistakes in ticket distribution and growing differences between party leaders and grassroots cadres.
It also mentions problems with party discipline, difficulties in attracting young people and weaknesses in the party’s political communication and use of digital platforms.
The report therefore does not blame the election loss entirely on outside forces. It calls for changes in the way the party is organized and operates.
Report strongly defends Oli
A large part of Gyawali’s report focuses on Oli’s political record.
Gyawali highlights Oli’s role during the promulgation of the Constitution, his government’s response to the economic blockade and trade and transit agreements with China.
The report argues that the latest election defeat should be viewed in the context of Oli’s longer political career and record in government.
It does not treat the election result as a reason by itself to end Oli’s leadership of the party.
‘One battle lost, not the entire war’
The report describes the election defeat as the loss of “one battle” rather than the “entire war.”
The message appears aimed at party workers who have been discouraged by the election result. It argues that the defeat should be treated as a setback and that the party needs to rebuild rather than lose confidence.
39-point plan for the party
Gyawali has proposed a 39-point action plan to strengthen the UML.
The plan calls for a stronger culture of criticism and self-criticism, greater efforts to bring young people into the party and improvements in the party’s organization.
It also calls for a stronger presence on digital platforms. The report proposes a mechanism described as a “cyber army” to defend the party’s policies and leadership online.
Gyawali has also called for greater discipline among elected representatives. The report says representatives elected with the party’s support should follow party decisions and face action if they violate party discipline.
Three reports, different views
The three reports reflect different views within the UML about the reasons for the election defeat.
Pokharel’s report places greater emphasis on internal problems, public dissatisfaction, organizational weaknesses and leadership issues.
Badal’s report takes a more supportive position toward Oli and argues against linking the election defeat directly to a change in party leadership.
Gyawali’s report is closer to Badal’s position in its defence of Oli, while also calling for changes in the party’s organization and digital outreach.
The disagreement is therefore not only about why the UML lost the election. It is also about how the party should respond to the defeat and whether its leadership structure should change.
Review process continues
The UML’s Election Review and Party Reorganization Task Force is continuing discussions on the reports.
The task force had earlier planned to study the competing reports and prepare a common document by incorporating areas where the members agree.
Gyawali’s report has now added another set of views to the discussion. The party still has to agree on how to explain the election defeat and what changes it needs to make after the loss.
For the UML, the next challenge is to reach agreement on both issues: what caused the defeat and how the party should move forward.
