An unusual tea-drinking campaign is brewing inside the CPN-UML after Chairman KP Sharma Oli used the words ‘awara’ and ‘uranthheula’ for party leaders and activists calling for changes in policy and leadership. Both of these are derogatory Nepali words—awara, derived from the Persian language, translates roughly to ‘aimless drifter; while uranthheula means immature or frivolous.

On Tuesday afternoon, several senior UML leaders were laughing over tea at the party’s Chyasal canteen in Lalitpur. The ordinary act of ordering tea had become politically charged after Oli said that some people sitting in the party office canteen and discussing his removal were awara and uranthheula.

Oli’s remarks have angered leaders seeking an overhaul in party leadership, prompting the UML Intellectual Council’s ‘Revival Campaign’ to launch a satirical ‘Awara Campaign’.

The campaign mirrors India’s ‘cockroach movement,’ where activists turned an insult from the Chief Justice into a political campaign. But unlike the Indian movement, which escalated into nationwide protests, the Nepali campaign focuses on internal party reform.

“Let all the awaras across the country come together and go to the party office in Chyasal to drink tea,” the Awara Campaign says. Gajendra Thapaliya, who heads the council, said the initiative was organised by leaders and activists supporting party restructuring. “We have launched the Awara Campaign across the country for party restructuring,” he announced.

The organisers have prepared a graphic, inviting supporters to Chyasal for tea, turning Oli’s insult into a political slogan. This is not the first time UML activists have responded to criticism through humour and satire. Before the Gen Z movement, when UML leaders and cadres were labelled ‘jhole’, they launched a campaign declaring, “I am a UML jhole.”

The latest episode is part of a growing dispute over whether the UML needs changes in policy and leadership following its poor performance in the March 5 election.

Several senior leaders—including vice-chairs Bishnu Paudel, Gokarna Bista, Prithvi Subba Gurung and Raghuji Pant, general secretary Shankar Pokharel and deputy general secretary Yogesh Bhattarai—have been discussing organisational reform, according to party insiders.

The debate has sharpened after a task force led by vice-chair Ram Bahadur Thapa reviewed the election defeat and proposed changes to the party’s policies and leadership. Pokharel, who served as the task force’s secretary, prepared the report, which was submitted to Oli. Leaders involved in the process say it has not been acted upon and the task force has not met since.

Pokharel has gone further, calling for a special general convention to amend the party statute and then restructure the leadership. He has argued that the UML must examine why voters from grassroots social and economic groups have moved away from the party and why young people have fewer opportunities inside its organisation.

“The classes and communities in the grassroots moved away from the communist party when it was in government,” Pokharel wrote on Facebook. “Why did this happen, and why did the enthusiasm among leaders and cadres for social change weaken?”

Pokharel added a serious review of these questions was essential for the revival of the communist movement.

His position has put him at greater distance from Oli, despite having been one of the chairman’s closest political allies.

Oli has publicly rejected the demand for restructuring. Speaking in his home district Jhapa on Sunday, he said the party did not need restructuring but revival.

“Restructuring means making the policy, destination, struggle and programme new,” Oli said. “This is not the time for restructuring; it is the time for revival.”

Oli made his ‘awara’ remarks at an event in Ilam the same day. “Some awaras sit in the party office canteen and talk about removing the party chairman. Is that a joke?” he said. “Some people are walking around collecting signatures to remove the chairman. There is no substance behind this.”

The remarks have not gone down well with some UML leaders. Central committee member Anand Prasad Pokharel described the language as unfortunate. “The suggestion for policy and leadership restructuring came from the task force and is now being raised by cadres at the grassroots,” he said. “The remarks seem to have been made as if the restructuring demand were directed personally against him.”

Khimlal Bhattarai, another central committee member, said such language would make the dispute harder to resolve. “Such words do not solve the problem,” he said. “They make it more complicated.”