By Deepak Joshi Pokhrel A popular question is often raised during the lunch break or coffee talk by people across the country. Is our politics dominated by three leaders -- Pushpakamal Dahal, KP Sharma Oli and Sher Bahadur Deuba -- from the Maoist Centre, UML and Nepali Congress respectively? This is the most moot question at present. There is a saying that difficult moments create leaders. On the contrary, leaders in our country create difficult moments as they can fish in turbid water. When we assess our leadership right from the restoration of democracy, we will find that majority leaders are self-centered, egoistic stubborn, ruthless, unaccountable and incompetent. However, in recent times, Nepal’s politics seems to be undergoing a unique transition phase which could pave the way for a generational leadership change. This is evident that the incumbent PM Oli has expressed his desire to hand over the reins to a female prime minister. While such political rhetoric should be taken with a grain of salt, this announcement could be the curtain raiser of significant leadership in Nepali politics. In the Nepali Congress, the two general secretaries,  Gagan Thapa and Bishwa Prakash Sharma, have been pushing the agenda for party reforms and renewal against the wishes of the party establishment. Sharma has put forth the proposal to implement the term limits for party leaders. But as expected, the proposal is not popular with the party leadership though party rank and file support it. The proposal states a two-term limit for party leaders who become PMs and one-term limit for those who become President and a four-term limit for members of the parliament. Given the prevailing context where senior leaders do not intend to hand over the leadership, this proposal seems very relevant and logical. But it is reported that NC president Deuba was irked by the proposal saying he will not step down just because someone says so. While Deuba is hell-bent on not to step down, many see Sharma or Gagan Thapa as the next prime minister nominee. However, it is too early to say this. The voice for leadership transition is also gaining some currency in the UML. Many senior leaders have strongly argued for leadership transition within the party. During the just concluded two-day politburo meeting, the party chair hinted at handing over the rein very soon and the party is working tirelessly to nurture new leadership. This indeed is a welcome remark on the part of the party chair. It remains to be seen whether this is a political gimmick or his intentions are noble. Maoist Centre’s chair Dahal in an event held in Kathmandu said that the party is working hard in grooming the successor of the party chairman. While Dahal was hinting at a leadership transition, the party senior vice chair Narayan Kaji Shrestha has been bolstering his prospects to stake his claim to its leadership after Dahal. Shrestha's popularity within the party has grown in recent times especially when he was the face of the past government campaign against corruption. These developments in major three parties have infused some hope among the people that senior leaders are now ready to step down on the moral ground. While the leadership transition is gaining currency in the major three parties, it is very important to know that leaders are possible through hard work, confidence, determination, ideas and identification with the issues. Leaders are created by movement, long democratic practices and immediate events triggered by people’s frustration and anger. However, instant leaders are short-lived and fade-away after they fail to imbibe perseverance, commitment and the qualities of being patient. Such leaders are soon subdued by powers and privileges as their role is made for the time being. Good leadership is necessary in politics. In plain words, leadership matters in politics. He must be committed to democratic values and practices. A wrong leader or a wrong person in office destroys the institution as is evident in the Nepali context. If a leader is farsighted, strong and widespread having all the traits of a democratic culture, he is destined to be successful. Henry A. Kissinger had said that without far-sighted and committed leaders, the institution would grow to irrelevance and ultimately disaster. This saying should be the mantra of our senior leaders in the process of leadership transition. It is worth mentioning here that young leaders are in the making and given the opportunity, they can turn the challenges into opportunities. They would definitely be good at governing the nation. Yet new leaders need to be a good educator, communicators and responsible. Mere procedural leaders have little or no sense in the dynamics context of politics. No saner mind would disagree with the fact that old parties are under immense pressure. The poor performance of the party has created an appetite for its reform- be it in party leadership or structure.  Further, the rise of a new party has forced the old party to reform and adapt to the changes. We have seen politicians but not leaders. Exceptionally, no so-called leaders have respected democratic values and practices. They want to remain in power infinitely by decree or by force. Their only desire is to rule the party making it a hostage. This is not how it works in democracy. Leadership transition is the only way to bail the country out of crises- political, social and economic