The discord between CPN (Maoist Centre) chair Pushpa Kamal Dahal and Deputy General Secretary Janardan Sharma that seemed to be deepening for a few months seems to have ended—at least for now—with the conclusion of the party's central committee meeting on January 7.

The dispute between Dahal and Sharma had worsened after Sharma presented a 14-page alternative paper at the party’s Standing Committee meeting last August calling for a review of Dahal’s decades-long leadership and suggesting that the party chair be limited to a ceremonial role as patron. Sharma’s demand had the backing of a few other influential leaders including Barshaman Pun, another deputy general secretary of the party.

The differences between the two leaders further widened after Dahal and the party leadership accused Sharma of intending to split the party. In retaliation, Sharma accused the party’s top leadership of spreading rumours against him.

Sharma accused the party headquarters of “misusing the state apparatus against those who express views differing with the party leadership”.

However, the dispute between the two leaders that seemed difficult to resolve has now been settled, as both Dahal and Sharma announced at the end of the party’s central committee meeting.

According to party leaders, the dispute has been settled after Dahal incorporated some demands raised by Sharma into his political document, which was presented verbally at the meeting. Say central committee members, the party chief promised to address his other demands during the general convention next year.

Dahal has included some issues related to party-building in his political document, which Sharma raised, said standing committee member Khagaraj Bhatta, who is close to Sharma.

“The conflict ended after the party chief promised to accept Sharma’s proposals,” Bhatta argued.

When the central committee meeting was in progress, the party’s standing committee also met. Leaders in the top body decided on the statements to be given by Dahal after the central committee meeting. Accordingly, the political document presented by Dahal was revised based on the suggestions from other standing committee members.

“The differences were resolved after the chairman incorporated other leaders’ suggestions in his political document,” Bhatta explained.

Some party insiders claimed that Sharma decided to soften his position as the party improved results in the local by-elections held on December 1 and the public perception of the party had been improving in recent months.

“He, along with other leaders who were challenging the party leadership, might have assessed that taking on the party leadership at this time could be counterproductive for their aspirations,” claims a party leader.

Amid this, the return of former Vice President Nanda Bahadur Pun into active party politics also might have forced the dissidents to re-think their stances, claimed a leader. Pun participated in the Maoist Centre’s latest central committee meeting and his comeback is seen as Dahal’s strategy to balance other influential leaders.

Dahal was searching for a powerful leader within the party when the two former Dahal stalwarts—Sharma and Pun—started raising questions over his long leadership.

“The return of Pun could be one reason the dissidents backed off,” the party leader said.

Until a few weeks ago, there were reports that the Maoist Centre and the Netra Bikram Chand-led Communist Party of Nepal were inching closer to unity. Leaders from both sides were saying that unification was likely. But suddenly, unifying bids halted.

Dahal’s initiative to take in the Chand-led force was also viewed as a strategy to sideline the two deputy general secretaries.

Asked if the two leaders—Sharma and Pun—made a compromise with Dahal after stopping Chand’s entry into the mother party, many leaders say that is not the case.

Politburo member Yubaraj Chaulagain said that the leaders seem to have deferred the issue till the next general convention, which the party chair has announced to hold next year.

This is not the first time the Maoist Centre’s second-rung leaders have compromised with Dahal.

Many leaders, therefore, described it as a repetition of the old tendency in the Maoist party in which second-rung leaders often raise issues but eventually settle after the party chairman commits to addressing them.

Dahal has long been managing intra-party conflicts and maintaining his grip on the party by manoeuvring between leaders. When Baburam Bhattarai and Mohan Baidya were in the party, Dahal played one against the other.

The Maoist party that waged a decade-long insurgency (1996-2006) joined mainstream politics in 2006 and became the largest political party through the first Constituent Assembly elections in 2008.

In the initial days of the party, Dahal’s conflict revolved mainly around Bhattarai and Baidya. Dahal would inch closer to one leader when he had differences with another.

Then, Dahal merged the party with Narayan Kaji Shrestha’s Unity Centre.

With Shrestha’s entry, Dahal had another card to play when Bhattarai and Baidya challenged him.

Later, Baidya, Thapa, Netra Bikram Chand, Pampha Bhusal, Dev Gurung, among other influential leaders left the Maoist Centre to form a party under the leadership of Baidya.

In 2015, Bhattarai also left the Maoist party and formed Naya Shakti.

After that, Dahal faced no serious challenge from within the party until the Standing Committee meeting in August last year.

In the meeting, three deputy general secretaries—Sharma, Barshaman Pun, and Haribol Gajurel—raised the issue of leadership change. Gajurel even floated a proposal that all the office bearers of the Maoist Centre should resign and the party’s top body should be restructured afresh. However, nothing happened.

CP Gajurel, a former leader of the Maoist Centre who joined Baidya to form the new party, says that dissenting voices against the party chairman only reflect unfulfilled personal demands. He alleges that as soon as their personal interests are served, they end their hostility with the party chair.

“Our case was different. We had ideological differences with Dahal, which led to the party split,” CP Gajurel told the Post. “But now the leaders differ with Dahal but settle when their personal issues are addressed.”

But Haribol Gajurel argues that there is no reason for continuing to quarrel with the party chief after he pledged to address the concerns. Most dissident leaders including Gajurel had called for a special general convention.

Lekhnath Dahal, another Maoist lawmaker, said that after the exit of Bhattarai and Baidya, no leader left in the party can seriously challenge the party chief.

“Bhattarai and Baidya were contemporaries of the chairman having similar status in the organisation,” Lekhnath Dahal told the Post. “There are no comparable leaders now.”

But there are some leaders in the party who see Sharma's opposition differently. Sharma had eyed the position of general secretary during the eighth general convention held in December, 2021. However, when another influential leader, Barshaman Pun, also contested the post, Dahal appointed Dev Gurung as the party's general secretary instead. Sharma distanced from the party chief after this episode.