Thursday, May 28, 2009

Interview: Chandra Prakash Gajurel

I’ve been in Kathmandu for six weeks meeting many Maobadi comrades. As a result I have reached the office of Chandra Prakash Gajurel to interview this important Maoist leader and head of the International Department, Central Committee, Unified CPN (Maoist). In recent weeks I found many friends among the ranks of the unions and the intellectual wing affiliated with the International Department. Through these comrades came the opportunity to report on this meeting and interview.

C.P. Gajurel (Click to Enlarge Photos)

In August 2003, when attempting to travel to London, using forged travel documents, Comrade Gajurel was arrested in Chennai, India. Nepali and foreign supporters, including several international communist parties launched a campaign to have him released. In April 2005 a team of European human rights activists was allowed to meet Gajurel in prison. His supporters feared that he would be extradited to Nepal and tortured by Nepali authorities. After the CPN (M) and the government of Nepal signed a Comprehensive Peace Agreement, India dropped charges against Gajurel, of "conspiracy against India". He was released in November 2006 and returned to Nepal. [1]


SDM: Thank very much for meeting with me. It’s an honor. Just to begin, a very general question in the direction I would like to explore. The supposition is that the central question is how to seize state power now the Maobadi have left government, the tactics now in these new conditions. [2]

CPG: Yes. This is always the central question. It’s not just the central question for the Maoists. All the parties are looking to seize state power, not just the Maoist party. But the Maoists are bringing about a new transformation in Nepal. It is more important that since the elections, where the Maoists emerged as the single largest party in the Constituent Assembly, we are leading the creation of the new constitution. Because of the election, the Maoist party has been recognized internationally as the legitimate leadership in Nepal. Now, this is our most important work, to use the CA for transformation of Nepal. [3]

SDM: What about the perception by some communists in the international community that the recent years of participating in multi-party politics show these tactics are actually blocking advance of the revolutionary process?

CPG: If you only look at it the traditional way, from the way of traditional communist thought, it looks like this line will not help. In fact it has. Still, we have to see that in reality, seeing what happened recently, in the struggle during the last few weeks, the participation in the government did not completely work actually. We have had to make a new turn in withdrawing from the government, but we are still participating in the democratic process. Criticizing this as blocking the revolutionary process is incorrect. This shows a lack of knowledge of our real practice and the concrete situation in Nepal….

SDM: But the critics point out such retreats as disbanding the Revolutionary Peoples Councils in the countryside and other concessions and ask what evidence is there that the leadership is preparing the mass base should a new uprising be necessary.

CPG: When we entered into negotiations we had to lose something. Without, at that point, giving up actual state power, what we had attained in replacing the previous government in the countryside with the Revolutionary Councils, we would not have been able to gain the more important opportunity to develop peoples’ power in the rest of the country, to have the opportunity to win the elections in the Constituent Assembly or run the government. We gave up power but actually spread the mass base in a new way. For example, we were able to increase our numbers through membership drives, there has been extensive growth of the revolutionary process in our affiliation with many workers’ unions and through the increases in the student and youth organizations, especially the YCL. Also during this period, within the party we continued the two-line debate and we formed the Unified party [4], continued to build our mass base. We will complete the revolutionary process in creating a New Nepal.

SDM: There are indications also that rebellious forces are organizing outside UCPN (M) authority, particularly around land reform issues in the Tarai for example Matrika Yadav …

CPG: Some who were with us from the beginning abandoned the party. We listened to their criticisms and with Matrika Yadav we tried, we asked him not to split with us. Since then his new party has opposed us with their own candidate in the recent elections the result was their candidate received only 135 votes. The real irony is one of our former leaders actually joined the UML [United Marxist Leninist party, despite the name, well known as reactionary]. Others are trying to develop a so-called “Left Wing” in parties and youth groups outside affiliation with the Maoists; but we consider these things as essentially insignificant. These groups have in fact been supportive of the Maoists in the move to sack Katawal and in appreciating the PM’s resignation.

SDM: So is was true that from the time of negotiations through Prachanda’s recent resignation there was initially a drawing back from an aggressive revolutionary process as before and a new and different way of building the mass base. Would you say those tactics are over now? What are the new tactics, will we see a renewed aggressive revolutionary movement?

The Prime Minister’s resignation was not a big thing for us. Our movement has been working on three fronts and the participation in government was the least important. The experience of being in government was not a failure; it contributed to our revolutionary process in many ways. The issue we raised of civilian supremacy over the army has demonstrated to the people the truth of the situation, the other parties are against supremacy of the people. More important is the Constituent Assembly front where more focus can be on creation of the New Nepal constitution. Our tactics remain the same as to the remaining two fronts, the CA and the streets. We boycotted the selection of the new PM and abandoned the government front for better political benefits from action in the more important and effective fronts. We will use our greater numbers in the CA to create a constitution that will transform Nepal, creating a socialist economy meeting the needs of all the oppressed populations.

SDM: If indeed the goal is to have an anti-feudal and anti-imperialist constitution, especially in regard to land reform, is that really going to be enforceable without a new revolutionary upsurge?

GPG: In our use of the CA the question of anti-feudal and anti-imperialist resistance is the main contradiction. Without at least 2/3 of the vote we cannot write even one clause of the new constitution. We have approximately 40% of the vote and this is not enough. At the same time we are going to be blamed if the writing of the constitution is indefinitely delayed. This is why the most important front is the street. We will do everything possible to convince CA members from the other parties of the necessity and benefits of an anti-imperial and anti-feudal constitution for a New Nepal with a socialist economic orientation. It is likely this will require an “extra-CA” effort to influence the vote within the CA. It will mean the action of our people in the streets.

SDM: You mean the continued direct pressure from the YCL on the cadre of the other parties and the street activism we have seen by the many unions and their collective organization under the All Nepal Federation of Unions – not any activation of the PLA.

GPG: Yes….

SDM: But there still remains the possibility that reactionary forces in Nepal and international interference could cause us to fall short of that 2/3 vote for the constitution with the necessary character. Should this become likely, how does that fit with movement towards integration and rehabilitation of the PLA?

GPG: First it is important to understand this question is integrated with .. its not isolated from, it’s a part of constitution making process. If we have an anti-feudal and anti-imperialist constitution, if we can institute a real peoples’ republic, the integration will be the creation of a national army under civilian supremacy and in the service of the socialist orientated economic structure, the transformation to a New Nepal. It’s not an isolated issue.

I take this means it’s a matter of timing of the integration [CPG nodding at this point]. I wish to venture a personal opinion. Without garnering that 2/3 vote in the CA, the integration would lead to a situation where the PLA would no longer be able to function as a revolutionary force. Mao said that without a PLA the people have nothing. [I didn’t actually get a direct response to this opinion].

GPG: The real situation in Nepal is that many forces are leading the nationalistic struggle. It is a struggle for liberation from feudalism and imperialism. It has been led by communists. No one believed that the Peoples’ Revolution would be so successful. It was our decision to enter the democratic process of multi-party participation. No one believed that we could win the largest number of CA seats. We did take the lead in a third way, extending our revolutionary struggle to include a government front. It’s not that important for our revolution that we took decision to leave government. If the government is not led by the communists it can be led by others, we are not concerned because we are supported in the streets and have the largest number of seats in the CA. We believe over time and in the future the people are seeing what is in their best interests.

SDM: My final question goes to this issue of communist leadership, to the possibilities for the communist vanguard. I have concluded from my time in Nepal that the bulk of Maobadi support is simply based on the desires of those people to overcome their oppression. There is not a depth of understanding of the communist hypothesis. So what are the real prospects of a communist society in Nepal?

GPG: There is the distinction between theory and practice. In every revolution there are very few who have a real understanding of Marxism, what Lenin and Mao have said. The masses are motivated by attaining something for their basic well-being not by an understanding of theory. But they learn by practice. The real intentions of the reactionaries are revealed to the masses as they are led through the revolutionary process. Of course, even among the masses supporting the revolutionary struggle are the opportunists. We believe that, over time, the people, without theoretical understanding, will in practice understand the necessity of removing the reactionaries and will recognize the opportunists for what they are. In time, in this way, a transformation will happen; there will be a New Nepal.

SDM: So we must put our faith in the people and the truth of the communist hypothesis and its egalitarian maxim. Thank you for giving so much of your time. I am very encouraged to continue to establish an affiliation with the International Relations Department, an organization based here in Kathmandu that may be a benefit to the many communists who support the Maobadi throughout the world [5].

CPG: I am very happy to see someone from the heart of the imperialist world here to work in Nepal and to work towards a greater understanding in the international community about the real intentions of the Maoist revolution. [at this time he gave me a copy of the renewed publication of “The Worker”]. I suggest you read and share the articles here for the most correct understanding our movement.

Notice: “The Worker” is being published now under C. P. Gajurel ‘s leadership of the International Department, Central Committee, Unified CPN (Maoist). The website:


[1] Excerpts from
[2] For an excellent recent background article on international interest in the Maoist revolution see
[3] I refer the reader to my extensive bookmark collection of chronological news items during recent years. A review of the last few weeks’ developments may be necessary for some readers to understand the context of this interview. See

[4] I wrote a series on this debate in November 2008 beginning at
C. P. Gajurel’s part in that debate is covered in Part 3 of that series. A most interesting news item at the time on his views is found at

[5] An immediate objective is to establish a facility in Kathmandu that would provide international communist activists basic infrastructure for staying and working in Kathmandu for periods of time. This infrastructure could be developed in affiliation with the UCPN (M) International Department. In short this may be a clearinghouse for information exchange and project development. Such has been the subject of my discussions with some Maoist affiliated Union activists and one part of the intellectual wing of the International Department – the comrades who provided me this entree to an interview with Comrade Gajurel. There are as yet no specific agreements for this plan, but it is certainly an important goal for the coming weeks and months.

Blog Guide:
A discussion of blog features and primary topic content may be found at the initial entry. The first few entries give a good idea of how best to use the blog, especially for the tagging and social bookmarking at my external Delicious site, and for instructions regarding the Stefandav TV widget.

Subscribe to Stefandav: Atom 1.0 RSS 2.0
Read more!

Friday, May 22, 2009

“Revolution and State Power in Nepal” (Kasama)

Last month, Kasama posted an analysis from the MLM Revolutionary Study Group called “Revolution and State Power in Nepal.” Since then, in the wake of rapidly moving events, the MLMRSG has written the following reassessment of their views, published on May 16, 2009.

By the MLM Revolutionary Study Groupyoung worker in kathmandu

In keeping with the importance of supporting the people’s revolution in Nepal, we have been following the rapidly changing developments after the attempted sacking of General Katawal, Chief of Staff of the reactionary Nepalese Army, by the Maoist-led government. We have also been looking more closely at the statements by party leaders following the National Conference of the Unified CPN (Maoist) held in November 2008. Finally we have developed our views on the particular circumstances posed by the revolution in Nepal. We have decided to make some further comments that clarify, correct and elaborate upon our paper of April 4, 2009. (See

First, we have reassessed the results of the National Conference. Prior to it, Chairman Prachanda’s views were coming under public criticism from a number of senior party leaders, including Kiran (Mohan Baidya), Guarav (CP Gajurel) and Biplap (Netra Bikram Chand). The main issue of political strategy that was brought to the conference was whether the party should go for a People’s Republic, completing the new democratic revolution through the seizure of state power, or the revisionist position that the party should consolidate the present bourgeois republic and limit itself to a process of state restructuring. (See Bastola’s “Historic National Convention: Milestone of Revolution,” in the December 1-15, 2008 Red Star, and CP Gajurel’s “The Role of Major Tactical Line in Developing a New Constitution” in the January 16-31, 2009 Red Star. For Red Star archives.)

The Conference united around a compromise that merged the two positions. This resolution delivered a partial blow that has restrained the revisionist strategy that had been dominant, and has given more freedom of action to the revolutionary forces in the party. Since the leadership of neither side was defeated, the line struggle has not ended but has moved out of public view in recent months.

The new formulation of waging struggle from the government, the parliament and the streets points to such a shift to the Left. (The revolutionary forces in the party have been stressing the struggle from the streets.) The efforts of the Maoist-led government to sack the army chief of staff, which has brought the Maoist mass base out into the streets in a way not seen since the April 2006 uprising against the monarchy, also points in this direction. Just the fact that Basanta could publicly state that “the Nepalese oppressed class has now arrived at a very glorious but more challenging juncture of seizing central power through a process of people’s rebellion of the Nepalese specifically under the leadership of our party the Unified CPN (Maoist)” is another sign of this shift. (Red Star, March 16-31, 2009).

Thus, our statement that “the current strategy of the Prachanda leadership … is guided by a revisionist line and strategy that is in opposition to a revolutionary line and strategy of preparing the masses and the party to wage a struggle to seize political power” is an unclear description of the current situation within the Unified CPN (Maoist). Both inside the party as well as publicly, Prachanda has been promoting the revisionist strategy of consolidating the bourgeois republic and restructuring the state by constitutional means. However, the party leadership as a whole is not following a revisionist line, as it has clearly not resolved the two line struggle.

This assessment is opposed to the position of the RCP, USA, which asserts that the UCPN (Maoist) has become a revisionist party i.e., that revisionist consolidation is complete and that no revolutionary line struggle remains within the party, and that the revolution has basically been defeated.

In sharp contrast, the Kasama Project in the U.S. has performed a valuable service in popularizing the revolution in Nepal and developing support for it. However, in our view the materials of the Kasama Project do not pay the necessary attention to the two line struggle in the UCPN (Maoist). Without saying so explicitly, these materials promote the view that a revolutionary line has been in command of the party and has been implemented since the Comprehensive Peace Agreement was signed in 2006, in the face of substantial evidence to the contrary.

We believe we were correct to emphasize the decisive nature of the two-line struggle in the party for the future of the revolution:

“The current transitional stage cannot last for long. There are two alternative paths of development: Either the bulk of the Maoist forces will get further submerged in administering a bourgeois/feudal state and trying to push it to the left–which will represent a serious setback to the revolutionary process–or a new wave of Maoist-led revolutionary struggle will lead to the seizure of power and the victory of the new democratic revolution as a transition to socialism in Nepal.”

A second point in our article must be revisited. We wrote that:

“there is no evidence that the party leadership is preparing its mass base and the party for an actual seizure of power.”

It must be said that lack of public discussion of making plans for insurrection by the party doesn’t mean that such plans and preparations aren’t being made–which by necessity must be kept secret. We would expect the People’s Liberation Army, the Young Communist League and other organizations led by the party to have contingency plans in the event of a decisive showdown with the reactionaries, such as a coup by the army. However, these are plans for defensive armed struggle. An “offensive insurrection,” on the other hand, is a strategic undertaking, and plans for this can move forward only if a revolutionary line and strategy wins out in the struggle within the UCPN (Maoist).

It is important to understand that a revolutionary situation is an objective process, the conditions for which must mature before the time to strike comes. Going over to the insurrectionary offensive requires a qualitative change in the mood of the masses, where they have become convinced that a peaceful solution is no longer possible by the actual conditions they face and by the work of the revolutionaries. The masses of people do not arrive at such a position at the same time. The advanced forces must win over the intermediate among the basic masses, as well as vacillating allies, to the revolutionary seizure of power, and in the process disorganize and demoralize the backward forces. One important factor that can accelerate this process and bring it to a head is when the onus for the breakdown of a political stalemate—such as exists in Nepal today—can be laid at the feet of the reactionaries. This was successfully done by Lenin and the Bolshevik Party in the months before the October 1917 insurrection, and by Mao and the Chinese Communist Party during 1945 and 1946 before the outbreak of civil war with the Guomindang.

In his writings on the Kasama website, Mike Ely has emphasized that before an insurrection can be launched in Nepal, there must be “dress rehearsals” in the streets, where the party can assess the strength of their core revolutionary forces, determine how effective they are in bringing over broader sections of the people, and measuring the response of the reactionaries. The current confrontation over General Katawal, which has brought tens of thousands of Maoist cadre and supporters out into the streets, could prove to be such a political dress rehearsal if a revolutionary line drives the struggle forward and brings the masses into play in a way that is not limited to asserting civilian control over the army. Future political confrontations may arise when Maoist efforts to write a new revolutionary constitution, and to integrate the two armies in a way that keeps the People’s Liberation Army politically intact, run into a wall of reactionary resistance. New popular initiatives in the struggle for land reform–which have been placed on the back burner since the Comprehensive Peace Agreement was signed in 2006–can also reshape the political landscape in preparation for the revolutionary seizure of power.

Third, we have held a view that the political and military strategy of protracted people’s war—which includes a tactical use of negotiations and, in some conditions, electoral work that exposes the system–is the only viable strategy in semi-colonial and semi-feudal countries such as Nepal, India, the Philippines and Indonesia. In Nepal, the question is posed whether, after the mass armed struggle in the countryside has been ended short of victory, is it possible to wage political struggle, including participating in elections and coalition governments, with the orientation of generating new forms of revolutionary struggle and organization among the masses in the cities and countryside–thereby gaining the political independence and revolutionary initiative that can enable and lead to a renewal of armed struggle and the conquest of nationwide political power. It remains to be seen whether such a path to the revolutionary seizure of power can be successfully pursued in Nepal, much less in other countries, but this possibility cannot be simply ruled out.

As a result of the people’s war that liberated most of the countryside, and the ending of that war to wage political struggle as the main form of struggle, there is now a temporary and unstable dual power in Nepal. The Maoists share state power with the bourgeois/feudal forces in the government. Their armed forces are still separate entities—though the PLA is in an extremely vulnerable position. How does the Marxist-Leninist understanding of the class nature of the state comprehend this situation? Does the state everywhere and always have to be either bourgeois or proletarian? Or can there be particular historical situations where there is fierce struggle between these two antagonistic classes within the state apparatus for a limited period of time before the issue is settled?

In order to answer these questions, there are dangers in both dogmatic application of historical precedents, drawn from other times, places and circumstances, as well as from overdrawn “exceptionalism” and “particularism.” The latter tendency acts as if nothing has been learned about the underlying laws of society, political economy, the modern state as an instrument of class rule, class struggle, and the necessity for the armed seizure of power and the replacement of the bourgeois state by a new revolutionary state. Both errors are denial of a scientific method and remove essential tools of analysis from the revolutionary toolbox of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.

In the period ahead the political situation in Nepal will be in a high degree of flux as the two lines contend in the party, and as new flash points develop between the Maoist-led masses and the forces of reaction. With the triumph of a revolutionary line in the party, the revolutionary consciousness and power of the masses can be unleashed to the fullest extent, and the conquest of nationwide political power can become an actual possibility when the objective conditions ripen. These points–which differ from the wishful view that the UCPN (Maoist) is united in leading the revolutionary struggle forward against the forces of reaction, as well as the dogmatic and sectarian claim that the revolution has been betrayed by the party–are essential to include in materials aimed at popularizing and building support for the revolution in Nepal.

The people’s revolution in Nepal is a just one. Its every step forward requires support by communists, revolutionaries and progressive people around the world.

The MLM Revolutionary Study Group website is Contact:

Blog Guide: A discussion of blog features and primary topic content may be found at the initial entry. The first few entries give a good idea of how best to use the blog, especially for the tagging and social bookmarking at my external Delicious site, and for instructions regarding the Stefandav TV widget.

Subscribe to Stefandav: Atom 1.0 RSS 2.0
Read more!

Thursday, May 21, 2009

May Maobadi Bookmarks


1. The single article introductions below are the latest postings of this month's bookmarks for news items or opinion pieces on the Maoist revolution in Nepal. To see all this months bookmarks to date, use the "Read More" link following the currently displayed articles.

2. The introductions to articles are excerpts from the original publication. The original publication is accessed from the link at the end of each introduction "... go to original article".

3. To obtain last month's Nepal Maoism bookmarks only, go here or when available next month's Nepal Maoism book marks will be available here.

4. To obtain a display of blog postings including all monthly bookmarks as well as all other blog postings including the tag "nepal maoism" please go here.

Prachanda: Maoist capture state power Thru Peace Process & Army Integration

May 27 – Chairman of UCPN (Maoist) Pushpa Kamal Dahal on Sunday said Maoists would capture state power only through the peace process, new constitution and after Army integration.

“We will not capture state power through arms as widely speculated,” said Dahal at a programme at the general assembly of Nepal National Industries’ and Commerce Association. “We will not be provoked, but the fight for civilian supremacy will continue through the streets and parliament.”

Feeling betrayed by CPN-UML and its leader Madhav Kumar Nepal, Dahal said, “I thought I worked hard to nurture the elixir of life, but I think I had planted poison.” ... go to complete original article Interview Baburam Bhattarai

May 26
How do you justify your party’s advocacy for civilian supremacy when there are arguments that the government’s move to sack Katawal was not in line with constitutional norms?

Dr Baburam Bhattarai: First of all, we have to see the government’s move in the backdrop of years of struggle for democracy in Nepal. So far as Constituent Assembly (CA), republic and civilian supremacy are concerned, these issues should have been raised by capitalist parties. But unfortunately, Maoists had to do this. The slogan for republic was first raised by the Maoists. In the beginning, all the parliamentary parties were opposed to it, though they finally supported us. Now, when we are raising the issue of civilian supremacy, the same political parties backed by other reactionary forces are protesting it. But we strongly believe that they will ultimately come to our position. It is the reality of Nepali society. ... go to complete original article

Prachanda: New Nepal as a Puppet State?

Outgoing Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal said Friday that it is quite possible the new coalition government will be a puppet of reactionaries and different power centres.

Addressing the parliament, Dahal alleged the partners of the new UML-led coalition of engaging in a dirty game as they try to install a new government. Describing the exercise to form the new government as part of a ‘counter-revolution’, the Maoist chief said those “rejected by the people” are now being placed at the helm.

The caretaker Prime Minister in his speech repeatedly questioned the morality of other political parties alleging them of not being able to stand for sovereignty, integrity and unity of the nation.

Dahal, who spent most of his time criticising other parties, said former allies betrayed him in the army chief episode. The parties, according to him, had agreed to take action against the army chief, but later they did a complete about face.

Describing the President’s decision to reinstate the army chief as being regressive and unconstitutional, he said the Maoist party would continue peaceful protests to restore civilian supremacy.
... go to complete original article

Madhav Kumar Nepal is the Prime Minister

“I announce that Madha Kumar Nepal has been elected unopposed in the position of Prime Minister as per the Constituent Assembly (CA)’s Legislature-Parliament Business Advisory Regulations 2065,” CA chairman Subash Chandra Nemwang said before the Legislature-Parliamentary session on Saturday.

Nepal had previously served as a former deputy prime minister in a nine-month government led by UML in 1994-95. He led the party for 15 years from 1993 to 2008.

Nemwang congratulated Nepal on behalf of the parliament and himself for being elected the new Prime Minister.

Only Nepal, 56, of the CPN-UML filed nomination for the scheduled election for the Prime minister on Saturday. He filed his nomination at the Parliamentary Secretariat at around 10.30 this morning.

He has the support of around 360 lawmakers from 22 political parties, excluding 238 lawmakers from Maoists and two from CPN (Unified).
... go to complete original article

To get a display of all this months Nepal Maoism bookmarks

Sikkimization Begins: by Mohan Baidya Pokharel alias Kiran
CC Member Nepal Communist Party-Maoist (United)

May 19 - ..We were playing the role of a forward-looking force, yet the local and foreign reactionary forces could not tolerate our moves to liberate the people. Now in our fresh bid to restore peoples’ supremacy, they want, on the other, the Military supremacy. We have the inner feelings that similar to the past political skirmishes that came to a conclusion through various forms of protests, this time around as well a new form of protest will bring the current political deadlock to an end.. s far as, the integration of Militia into Nepal Army is concerned, we will also achieve the target at any cost. We did our best to achieve our goals while we were in the government. But, the reactionaries continued creating hurdles to attain those objectives. Now, our party president has already resigned from the post of the Prime Minister.. could not resist those reactionary moves.. President further stopped us from taking those needed steps. A totalitarian step was thus imposed upon the peoples’ supremacy.. ... go to complete original article

Next Nepal Govt will face great difficulties: UML President Jhala NathKhanal

May 18 - ..Khanal had supported the Maoists stand in the entire nine month long cooperation in the Maoists’ led government, finally opposed the Maoists move to sack the Chief of the Army Staff and facilitated the premature fall of the Maoists’ government. Mr. Khanal said that the next majority government will face great difficulties in tackling the political problems confronting the nation. “To respect the peoples’ mandate, a government with the Maoists participation is a mandatory one”, opined Mr. Khanal. “Our prime duty is to restore peace, institutionalize federal democratic order and to draft the new constitution, yet we will have to face great obstacles in the process”, said Khanal. Mr. Khanal urging the Maoist party to stop terrorizing the cadres of other political parties said they must stop thrashing others and accept the democratic order as it is and establish smooth relations with other communist parties.. ... go to complete original article

Nepal Maoist Threaten Revolt, State Capture

May 17 - ..“As per the dictates of their foreign masters, the dejected and rejected UML and NC leaders are forming the next government”, said Dahal.. Chandra Prakash Gajurel said that his party will now take on the path to conclude the incomplete decade long rebellion led by his party. “Out from the government is an opportunity for us to complete the revolution, President Ram Baran Yadav has given the Maoists the golden opportunity to bring the revolution to an end through Peoples’ Uprising III” “Now we will capture the State, which is the prime objective of the Maoist party,” Narayan Kaji Shrestha Prakash- Maoists party leader, alleged that Madhav Nepal-a senior UML leader, was an Indian agent. “Mr. Nepal is being lifted to the seat of the PM.. Lila Mani Pokharel.. leader in Dhangadi “If the reactionary move continues, we may have to finally grab our weapons”, said Pokharel “The Maoists were very simple when they were in the government, out of the government we have become dangerous”.. ... go to complete original article

UML Will Have to Repent and Later Apologize: Nepal Minister Gautam

May 14 - Bam Dev Gautam, a UML leader primarily, but, who is considered to be the real mastermind of the Thankot Police Post Attack during fag end of the rebellion and of the King’s rule in coordination with the Maoist Party, has all of a sudden begun criticizing his own party boss, Mr. Jhala Nath Khanal.“The history is the witness of this UML blunder, UML will have no option in the future than to repent for this Himalayan blunder and apologize to the people,” “Our party president Mr. Jhala Nath Khanal by retracting form his earlier decision to sack the Army Chief, is solely responsible for this political blunder”, Gautam added. Mr. Gautam, the deputy prime minister of the country mostly criticized his own party high-command in the course of his speech. “Without the Maoist support, no government will last more than six months period”, he predicted. “The UML is only destroying its future toeing the Nepali Congress line”, Gautam also said. ... go to complete original article

People’s Republic Only Can Guarantee Nepal's National Pride: Narayan Kaji Shrestha United Maoists Leader

May 13 - The.. main target of the People’s War and the last Revolution was not only the Monarchy but also the traditional parliamentary system. What the people need today is the forward looking People’s Republic which is in essence the People’s Democratic Republic where people remain sovereign and their supremacy prevails. People’s Republic can only guarantee national pride which obliterates the entire feudal and imperial symptoms prevailing in the society.. the best system that suits to the needs of the common workers, peasants and the exploited ones of this country. Those who will prefer to object to proceed in this regard will be automatically sidelined by the people. We can thus hope that we will be able to frame a people’s constitution of our preference.. a new government in place that honors the people’s supremacy but not that of the Army’s.. the interim constitution has been derailed. The formation of a new government with the constitution derailed will not get sanction of our party. ... go to complete original article

Sack Nepal Army Chief First and Form Govt. Next: Maoist

May 12 - “Peaceful protests must continue, advised the politburo members, to restore peoples’ supremacy, bring the peace process to its logical conclusion, draft the constitution on time, integrate the Militias into the Nepal Army and finally, to institutionalize the Federal Republican Setup”, a Maoists’ leader is quoted as saying by the media. “The meeting also made a decision in favor of holding mass-meet in Kathmandu, Biratnagar, Dhangadi and Nepalgunj, May 17, 2009, to pressurize the President so that he reverses his earlier decision ”, said Mr. Dinanath Sharma, the Maoists’ party spokesperson talking to the media. “In the Katawal issue, with the President not withdrawing from his decision, it is not possible to constitute the next government”, said Sharma adding that any steps to form the government by ignoring the Constituent Assembly body may invite trouble in the country of the highest order. ... go to complete original article

Unified CPN (Maoist) Politburo: Party Should Organise More Protest Programmes

May 8 - Most of the politburo members who spoke during the meeting held at the Agriculture Development Bank's building at Bhaktapur were unanimous that the party should intensify protests from the parliament and struggle from the streets until civilian supremacy is upheld by sacking the Army chief. Maoist spokesperson Dina Nath Sharma said the meeting discussed the protest strategy the party should adopt against the President's move including formation of new government. Apart from that, the meeting also delved in important issues like army integration, constitution writing and proper conclusion of the peace process, it is learnt. The Maoist parliamentary party has already decided to protests in the parliament and struggle in the streets against the President's move, and as per it have obstructed the legislature-parliament sessions for the continued two days. ... go to complete original article

UCPN (Maoist) Not to Allow Business of House

Police have arrested dozens of civil society activists Tuesday morning from a sit-in programme in front of the presidential palace.. Terming the president’s move to reject the decision of the PM, the executive-power holder of the government, as unconstitutional, the civil society activists had called for demonstrations. Krishna Pahadi, Arjun Parajuli, Dr Devendra Raj Pandey, Dr Renu Raj Bhandari, Khaendra Sangraula, Hem Bahadur Bista and Shyam Shrestha are among 50 demonstrators arrested by the police. Talking to Nepal FM, Dr Pandey said police misbehaved with them though the sit-in was peaceful. He said authorities have no right to declare any area as prohibited zones. On Monday, Kathmandu district administration had announced areas at the proximity of presidential palace and army headquarters as prohibited zones for any rallies and demonstrations. Dr Pandey further said they would continue to fight for rule of law, asking the president to stick by his constitutional powers. ... go to complete original article

Nepal: Crisis Over Control of Military

The breaking News is that late last night the President (of the Nepali Congress Party) went way outside his role as stipulated in the interim Constitution and contacted the ex-General Katawal and requested that he continue at his post. The implications of this are unclear- whether the legitimate CoAS Khadka has stepped aside or, the much more probable scenario, there are now two people claiming to be the legitimate head of the Armed Forces. It seems that there is now a dual power, with the Prime Minister being challenged (unconstitutionally) by the president. This will just further disrupt the situation and lead to further instability. The major political parties of the UML and the MJF are still divided, and are likely to remain. However the UML has definitely left the government, although with real reservations from certain key leaders. Yesterday there were clashes between Maoists and Congress cadres, and occasionally the Congress and the police.. likely that the same will occur.. ... go to complete original article

Blog Guide: A discussion of blog features and primary topic content may be found at the initial entry. The first few entries give a good idea of how best to use the blog, especially for the tagging and social bookmarking at my external Delicious site, and for instructions regarding the Stefandav TV widget.

Subscribe to Stefandav: Atom 1.0 RSS 2.0

Read more!

Friday, May 15, 2009

Nepal’s Gajurel: State Power is Our Goal (Kasama)

“Now, we’ll spearhead the ‘third Janaandolan’ against the president’s unconstitutional move to reinstate the Army chief and also complete our unfinished revolution.”

* * * * * *

The following are two statements by Gajurel. The first is recent from Kantipur Report. The second is a longer interview from October 2008.

C.P. Gajurel, 59, is a politburo member and chief of the foreign affairs bureau of the CPN (Maoist) party. In August 2003, while he was attempting to go to London from Chennai airport with forged travel documents, he was arrested and spent three years in jail in Chennai.

Following the second People’s Movement of 2006, and the entry of the Maoists into mainstream politics, he was released from jail in December 2007. Since his release, he has traveled internationally, raising awareness about and seeking support for his party. Thanks to Ka Frank for the first article.

NEPALGUNJ, May 17 – A senior Maoist leader said on Sunday that his party has not yet given up the goal of capturing the state.

“Capturing the state was not on our mind when we were leading the government. But Nepali Congress and CPN-UML were so scared of us — they sought help from India and the U.S.,” C.P. Gajurel said at his party’s mass meeting here.

The Unified CPN (Maoist) central secretariat member added,

“Now, we’ll spearhead the ‘third Janaandolan’ against the president’s unconstitutional move to reinstate the Army chief and also complete our unfinished revolution.”

Gajurel chastised India and the U.S., saying

“the two countries are standing against us as they came to know that we will not abort our goal — the establishment of a people’s republic — even after coming to power through ballot.”

“By supporting the UML candidate for the premiership, the two countries have shown they want to upset the leftist unity out of fear that the communists might establish people’s republic.”

* * * * * * *
Interview 2008(Excerpts)

Thanks to Nickglais at Democracy and Class Struggle

Gajurel spoke with Aditya Adhikari and Kosh Raj Koirala of The Kathmandu Post on Oct. 23, 2008 about the new government, the ideological tussle in his party, and its relations with other parties and neighboring countries.


Q: How do you assess the performance of the Maoist-led government so far?

C.P. Gajurel: We feel that the performance of the government has not lived up to the party’s hopes. Because it is a coalition government, it hasn’t been able to work according to the policies of our party. We entered government with the understanding that we have to undertake visible change two weeks after entering government. Even if we couldn’t immediately undertake major changes, we felt we could do smaller things, like controlling traffic and providing adequate supply of oil. But unfortunately we haven’t even been able to do that.

Q: Your party has said that it doesn’t believe in parliamentary democracy, but it believes in multi-party competition and doesn’t want to impose a traditional communist system. Could you explain what the state structure would look like under your model?

Gajurel: There is a mistaken belief that multi-party means parliament, the parliamentary system means democracy, and that no other form of democracy exists in the world. But there are many political systems in the world that are not parliamentary but have multiparty competition
Q: So what is the alternative that you propose?

Gajurel: In our multi-party system, there will be competition between parties that are nationalist, that have fought for the country and republicanism, who want to make a new Nepal . It could be that many parties could come together to form government. It’s not necessary that, like in parliament, there has to be an opposition party and a ruling party. In the interim period we didn’t have an opposition but the system was democratic. In fact, there is no provision for an opposition in the interim constitution. Only after the Nepali Congress decided to stay in opposition did we decide to allow for it.

Q: Who will select which parties are nationalist and will be allowed to compete? What are the parameters for selection?

Gajurel: The parameter is the party’s history among the people. The contribution it has made. The commitment it has towards the constitution we will draft. The commitment it has towards the country and its people.

Q: We hear that the Maoists say the state should be responsible for selecting parties that will be allowed to compete. That what the Maoists mean by multi-party democracy is one where they control the state and select which parties can compete and which cannot.

Gajurel: No. The system will have courts that will have final authority. There will be an Election Commission. These bodies will make decisions. The state can’t just stop some parties from competing just because it wants to.

Q: The policies of your party in government are very different from what your party used to state a few years ago. Don’t you feel that the party has deviated from its core ideology?

Gajurel: We haven’t deviated from our core ideology. We didn’t come to where we are through falling into some kind of misconception or illusion. We have our own strategy and our own tactics, and we’ve come here implementing them. The Constituent Assembly (CA) was a demand we put forth five or six years ago. We participated in the CA according to our own policies. Our central committee took a decision to enter government. But it is true that this is a new exercise. Such an exercise hadn’t occurred in the world communist movement.

Q: Recently there has been much talk in the media about the differences between the “hard-line” faction of your party, and the “moderates”. That one faction wants to go back to war to continue the revolution, while the other wants to continue the current peace process.

Gajurel: Various opinions and differences arise within the party, and it is important that they do. As communists, we define our party as one of unity in opposites. It is not monolithic. The different opinions in the party struggle against one another, and the party gains direction through this struggle.

But no-one in the party thinks that we should go back to armed struggle. Even the so-called hardliners don’t think this. Through armed struggle we have reached a phase where we can pursue our agenda through other means. Why should we then go back to it?

Q: We have heard a lot about the term ‘Federal Democratic Republic’ over the past two years. But what is this ‘People’s Republic’ that we’ve been hearing about more recently?

Gajurel: The national convention of our party, which is going to begin on November 9 or 10, will deal with this issue of the kind of republic we need. The ‘Federal Democratic Republic’ line was definitely useful in bringing an end to the monarchy and establishing a republic. But do we now move forward or consolidate this form of republic? To move forward we now need a ‘People’s Republic’. The maximum form the Federal Democratic Republic can take exists in India . But has the Indian republic been able to solve its problems? We don’t have to go further than Bihar to see how it functions. We have to do better than that.

Now it is said that a ‘People’s Republic’ is a communist republic. But it is not communist. Neither is it socialist. It is basically a bourgeois republic, but it has many elements of socialism. For example, there will be progressive land reform. There will be decentralization of many rights. There will be local self-governance for many castes and ethnicities. We want to move forward so that we don’t return to a feudal-type, capitalist-type of republic.

Blog Guide: A discussion of blog features and primary topic content may be found at the initial entry. The first few entries give a good idea of how best to use the blog, especially for the tagging and social bookmarking at my external Delicious site, and for instructions regarding the Stefandav TV widget.

Subscribe to Stefandav: Atom 1.0 RSS 2.0
Read more!

Wednesday, May 6, 2009

Nepal: General State of Uncertainty (The Economist)

THE immediate cause of the fall of Nepal’s government, led by former Maoist rebels, was a bid to remove the conservative army chief. When the cabinet fired General Rookmangud Katawal, alleging that he had defied civilian control and breached the terms of a 2006 peace deal, the Maoists were deserted by their coalition allies. Their defeat was complete when the president reinstated the general, prompting the prime minister, Pushpa Kamal Dahal (also known as “Prachanda”), to resign on Monday May 4th.

Trouble has been brewing since the Maoists surprised everyone by winning elections a year ago after fighting a ten-year insurgency which ended with a peace agreement in 2006. That accord called for the integration of some former Maoist fighters, who are currently sitting in UN-supervised camps, into the national army. It also contained provisions for a new constitution to be written by the assembly elected last year. Both those aspirations now look remote, and with them any prospect for a final resolution to the conflict.

The army used to demonstrate its conservative nationalism with loyalty to the monarchy but the institution was abolished after last year’s elections. With the king gone it still stands as a bulwark against political radicalism. General Katawal was sacked for blocking Maoist integration into his forces, on the grounds that the indoctrinated former guerrillas would politicise the institution and turn Nepal into a communist dictatorship.

In recent months Nepal’s generals have been engaging in politics nakedly, briefing foreign diplomats on alleged Maoist intentions and producing constitutional and policy proposals on issues far beyond security and military matters. The army’s political activism is backed by India, which supported the peace process but now wants a limit on Maoist power.

The anti-Maoist forces also include Nepal’s other political parties, which are still licking their wounds from their electoral drubbing. The peace process was supposed to be based on consensus, with all parties co-operating in writing a new constitution. But after coming a poor second place in the elections the Nepali Congress party refused to join the government and has been staunchly opposing any policy for which the Maoists might claim credit.

The centrist, but deceptively named, Unified Marxist-Leninist party joined the government but always seemed in a hurry to leave—it may now lead the new administration. Ethnic parties from the south are likely to heed India’s wishes while extracting concessions in return for their support.

The rest of the parties, supported by wealthy Nepalese and the media, have accused the Maoists of high-handedness and latent authoritarianism. Their anger is party justified by the thuggish antics of the Maoist’s youth wing, the Young Communist League, and the power it exerts through allied trade unions.

But hostility to the Maoists, sometimes bordering on hysteria, also looks exaggerated. The opposition and urban elites benefit from the social and economic hierarchy the Maoists say they want to change. Meanwhile, economic policies such as loans for the poor, enacted during the Maoists’ brief administration, have proved widely popular.

With their own parties weak and unpopular, and the Maoists formidably well organised nationally, the various “anti-Maoists” were all too happy for the army to step in on their side. They were also able to prevail on the president, who was appointed to the supposedly ceremonial role by parliament, to countermand the cabinet’s order to sack General Katawal.

Luckily, no one seems to want a return to open conflict. But the anti-Maoists are fractious and diverse. They also lack ideas or a strategy to govern. Forming a coalition, much less leading the country, will be difficult. General Katawal and the army are now likely to play a significant role behind the scenes, which bodes ill for democracy in Nepal.

The Maoists for their part are likely to use their powerful national organisation, trade unions and gangs of heavies, to give the new government a rough ride. They also have 38% of the seats in parliament, twice as many as the nearest rival. Writing a new constitution requires a two-thirds majority but the consensus the peace process required has been abandoned, and with it any chance of stability.

Blog Guide: A discussion of blog features and primary topic content may be found at the initial entry. The first few entries give a good idea of how best to use the blog, especially for the tagging and social bookmarking at my external Delicious site, and for instructions regarding the Stefandav TV widget.

Subscribe to Stefandav: Atom 1.0 RSS 2.0
Read more!

Saturday, May 2, 2009

Nepal May Day Photos

I started the May Day Maobadi mass demonstration at the district office of the All Nepal Hotel and Restaurant Workers Union where the flag partly pictured above is kept in the Union safe.

These are security guards, chambermaids and other hotel workerssigning in at the district office. The same is happening at districts all over the city.

The area meeting place where a few district groups met and ready the flag

Area groups like this one are emerging from dirt road alleys to begin converging towards the middle of the city Ratna Park

Another convergence. There have been many activist groups having rallys in the streets in recent days, but nothing like this. Essentially this is the workers of about 30 Maoist affiliated unions.

Her feet and hands have withered away, perhaps leprosy. There are numbers of people who drag themselves through the dirt to sit at busy intersections begging for small coins. Somehow taking a closer shot seemed obscene.

Large crowds from East and West meet to turn South into Ratna Park. The main speaker will be Baburam Bhattarai and the topic no doubt will be the insistence by the Maobadi that the National Army stand down in their defiance of civilian supremacy

The combined demonstrators from one half of the city prepare to enter the park. A similar large contingency will be entering from the opposite end. Locked hands accross the width of the column provides a kind of crowd control.

The whole thing had to enter the park through this really narrow gate, about 6 meters wide. It was no place to stumble.

Inside there was music from the loudspeakers and groups began to dance.. shades of the Gratetful Dead concerts came to mind, but here not even beer.. after China it was strange to see a crowd in which there were relatively few who even smoked cigarettes

Center stage. The crowd was about 200 meters deep in s semi-circle. The function was sponsored by the All Nepal Federation of Unions and was presided over by General Secratart Ganesh Regmi who was featured in one of my recent interviews.

Taken from the side of the stage, In the far back you can see the vendor area in the trees.

Among the food and drink vendors were book sellers as well. I don't know if there was anything to Ghandi opposite from Prachanda, but you could also get stuff about and by Hitler.

And a young Australian named Ben who obviously is not a Nazi.. he must have found that flag someplace in Kathmandu, a likely cover

Young Ben Peterson gets tips from political comedian.. an interview being filmed by David, another Aussie commie who has showed up in town

I left the mass rally. I saw this guy on the way in. He and his flies had a hard time standing up for this picture.. most of his hair gone and clearly diseased. He had lain there placidly as the marching revolution skirted his magic circle

Blog Guide: A discussion of blog features and primary topic content may be found at the initial entry. The first few entries give a good idea of how best to use the blog, especially for the tagging and social bookmarking at my external Delicious site, and for instructions regarding the Stefandav TV widget.

Subscribe to Stefandav: Atom 1.0 RSS 2.0
Read more!

Friday, May 1, 2009

Revolution Reports from Nepal - 4

Revolution Reports from Nepal 4

I continue to point to a gap in the number of interpretations of the theory and practice of the Maobadi in present conditions in Nepal. I think these interpretations run the gamut between two camps of belief. One pre-supposition is that the Maobadi are fostering what will be a liberal federal republican constitution endorsed by referendum; that there is to be a multiplicity of previously disadvantaged groups who will have the unencumbered power to form the New Nepal - a newly formed government not dictated to by the Maobadi but protected by them from imperialist and feudal exploitation. The opposite pole of the continuum pre-supposes the Maobadi are intent on capturing state power and imposing totalitarian order, imposing on the multiplicity of groups not what that democratic government might do but what the Maobadi and their international friends want that government to do. I support a viewpoint that bridges a gap between these two general systems of belief, a viewpoint that re-affirms the intentions of the Maobadi to enable a New Nepal strictly under the power of its people.

I am going to follow a certain strategy in arguing a line that goes counter to both the prevailing poles of thought. The various parties and factions, and individuals within those parties and factions, are describing the same basic facts. How they describe them reveals the nature and extent each adheres to one of the general beliefs about the Maobadi. I will suggest another way of looking at current events that indicates the Maobadi tactics adhere to a strategy of fostering the power of the people. At the same time however, there is still a big question in my mind about the revolutionary intent of the people other than the PLA or party activists. Is there enough revolutionary intent in enough revolutionary subjects to be sufficient to actualize the communist hypothesis?

Complications in the Maobadi Camp

The pro- Maobadi support Prachanda. He is in a difficult position between maintaining support from a multiplicity of factions, while cultivating international support and at the same time satisfying the more aggressive agenda of some of the other leaders of the UCPN(M). As one of the local writers, Maila Baje in the Peoples Review put it, Prachanda "sits atop a creepy coalition". The UML uses every struggle between the Maoist Party and any other party or group to negotiate an increase in their own power. The Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (MJF) exerts pressure for decisions that favor their regional agenda. Prachanda's pressures in-house have been from Defense Minister Ram Bahadur Thapa aggressively pushing for the army integration with tactics like firing Katawal, from Babaram Bhattarai's unbridled tirades against the reactionaries; and from within the Party hierarchy but outside government, the influence of C.P. Gajurel and Mohan Baidya supporting closer ties with China and a more aggressive line for taking state power. The maverick Matrika Yadav and his re-formed CPN (M) meanwhile claims Prachanda is more interested in his international relations than in the needs of the Nepali people.

Indian and Chinese Influence on the Maobadi

Ties with China and with India complicate any rapid progress in writing the constitution. Matrika Yadav visited China before his formal break with UCPN (M). MJF leader Upendra Yadav, also Foreign Minister was hosted by the Chinese who pledged support for the MJF. UML Chairman Jhal Nath Kanal is in Beijing as we speak. Prachanda is set for a forthcoming visit during which it is beginning to be touted he will sign a Peace and Friendship Treaty with the Chinese. At the same time, ties with the Indians are rooted in the support they gave to forming the Seven-Party Coalition and paving the way to the current Maoist leadership of the government. If the Indians withdraw endorsement of the 12-Point Agreement this undermines the peace process significantly and even the Royalists get back in the picture.

The relationship with the Indians deeply involves the relationship of the National Congress with the Indians. It was through the efforts of NC President Girija Prasad Koirala that negotiations between the parties in New Delhi were made possible. Now that the Maoists are beginning to stall in the process of integrating the Army and have been unable to effectively govern as yet or move the agenda for writing the constitution (for all the reasons above), the NC and the UML united as a political class have begun plotting an alternative government while understanding prospects for regaining control of the government may be impossible given the Maoists own the republican agenda. Meanwhile, the Indian influence on and relationship with the NC employs the NC in pushing for a revised and updated treaty with India before Prachanda goes to China.

The Maobadi as Evil

The belief that the Maoist intention is to smash the state and take over state power results in the Maoists being painted evil in every instance by those who believe this would be a catastrophe. Whether it is believed evil or tactical the fact is the Maoists have a long history of means being justified by ends. They had a cooperative relationship with the Crown by which in part they ended the monarchy. The insurgency from the beginning was fueled by the Maoists parlaying anti-Indian sentiment into support and yet it was to the Indians they turned to broker the 12-Point Agreement. The Maoists have previously pointedly criticized Chinese "communism" and now Prachanda holds the Chinese card in his hand to see what renegotiation of the 1950 agreement with India might be placed on the table.

Some put forth the argument, and it makes sense, that the NC even with the partnership of the UML would have an even far more difficult time trying to govern. Among the Maoists is the assertion that even if the UML left the government to join NC opposition then Maoist government would simply continue as a minority government. Or worse as far as the NC is concerned, the Maoists leave the government. There is some irony in that the NC assertions the Maoists want to smash the state and take unilateral state power results in their not putting anymore pressure on the Maoists than necessary. They believe pushing them too much into a corner could result in what they want to avoid most - better to keep the Maoists failing in place till the time is ripe to appeal to the voters. Insurrection is only one side of the Maobadi sword; the other would be abandonment and insurrection.

I have pointed out the several conditions that severely curtail the Maoist led government from functioning (they haven't even been able to organize spending of available funds on relieving the problems of the people let alone make sufficient progress with the CA). What they have accomplished has been gained through assertive moves that are interpreted by the opposition as unilateral exercise of authority. They insist they essentially have veto power on the new constitution based on the numbers. They are installing only Maoist supporters throughout the state organization. They are working very hard to promote an understanding and allegiance to the revolution. Perhaps most threatening to those who disbelieve in the revolution is that the Maobadi are always ready to exchange peaceful development towards their goal for war if necessary. Not just the PLA but also the YCL and the members of the many unions stand ready to launch an urban revolt along with a remobilization of bases in the hills.

The Maobadi make a clear claim, from the beginning to end, that the ultimate goal is to exercise a dictatorship of the proletariat and eventually have a communist society with no class division controlling the state, which is to be an administrative entity for carrying out of peoples will (and so not a state in the proper sense). This objective is proclaimed to be a totalitarian intention by the reactionaries who point to unbridled violence among the cadre and corruption in the Maobadi led government as evidence of what will be. The business community says they are still giving "donations" to the Maoists. The press reports intimidation by the Maoists. Detractors insist the Maobadi claim to ensure civilian supremacy over the army is just an excuse to take the NA out of play in obtaining full state power, not for the people but for the Maobadi. Widespread criticism of Home Minister Gautum has emerged inasmuch as the clampdown on criminal activity is seen to be focused on soft targets, from where monetary gains are available - best examples the casino and other "entertainment" businesses.

So what is the Truth?

Gautam's response points to something important. He says the government alone cannot improve the security situation, that people should adopt "self-security measures". The important thing suggested here, I assert, is that the government alone can't do anything. Those who support the Maobadi accept that the poor performance of the government and the loss of security is a result of reactionary intervention, that multiparty cooperation will be required to establish "New Nepal". The support of the Maobadi is based on a collective dream where each element of the multiplicity envisions a New Nepal possessed of characteristics that remove the particular oppression of that element; that party, person, ethnic group, regional group, economic group, labor group and so on. So support for the Maobadi is support for a new country of course, but it's support for a new government defined by a new constitution to meet disparate grievances through the operation of a new state in which the balance of power is shared by the participating elements, including all interests of civil society. Belief in the Maobadi is that they will foster this development.

The reactionaries expect the security situation could be quelled by martial law and if the people would give them the mandate government performance could be restored and improved with political democratic power sharing and even civilian supremacy over the military. This way the NC and the UML can find common consensual agreement in building New Nepal with all democratic elements. The reactionaries are rooted in the belief that the Maobadi seek absolute power and dictatorship by the party. From this belief, they tell the people all they will get is what the Maobadi says they can have. They say civil society and the other parties must avoid the control of the Maobadi or the Constituent Assembly will not have a consensus of agreement in writing the constitution. Instead they will get the Maobadi plan for the questions of federalism, ethnic nature of the state and regulation of authoritarianism and what constitutes exploitation.

But what if the Maobadi are in fact communists? I mean, what if there is a gap in fully understanding the communist hypothesis in the range of political actors involved other than the Maobadi themselves? What if this gap is manifest in the balance of the Maobadi supporting population in that they do not anticipate a withering away of the state in New Nepal? What if the reactionaries are wrong or duplicitous about the Maobadi hunger for autocratic dictatorship - that is they either are hiding they know they are an oppressor class and fighting to avoid their logical exclusion from a communist society, or they reject the egalitarian maxim, reject communism as utopist, believing that as things get a lot better for me they will also get somewhat better for those who chose to work for the salary I will pay.

The Maobadi plan, the practice of their theoretical stance clearly calls, with the blessings of Lenin, for stripping the reactionaries of their standing army. Otherwise the necessary social resurrection is impossible. This is to pave the way for the oppressed masses to establish a new state. The Maoist conception of this new state is quite specific and resurrects for novel application in the Nepalese context what Mao called "democratic centralism". In a state where power is shared by different masses of oppressed it is possible that mutual aid can be established; that is part of the concept. At the same time the multiplicity participating in the democratic body must, in the communist hypothesis, establish a classless society by thoroughly eliminating the reactionaries on the basis of eliminating any and all exploitation. It follows, that with no ruling class the function of the state is no longer a state proper in which a majority party operates its will on the people with the people's "consent". The people are then self-managing in their particular social and economic situation. The Maobadi invoke the model of the Paris Commune and Lenin's Soviets. The administration of the state service functions is to be a matter for public service employment not accompanied by powerful elitist political players.

What Should the Folks Do?

Since I have chosen to put my faith in the version of the Maobadi actually attempting a new 21st century communism by carrying out the unfinished Maoist enactment of dictatorship of the proletariat by a democratic centralist interim government, my main suggestion is there needs to be a massive ideological campaign. The Maobadi, given their objectives as I see them, will need to face the same forces that have curtailed revolution in the past. Within the new government coalition will be compromises on points of application of federalism, land reform and many other questions of distribution of resources. There needs to be engagement of capitalist modes of production while not practicing exploitation, particularly in projects with foreign investment or funding. The accumulation of wealth and structure by deposed class oppressors will remain in the picture along with their international relationships.

If the Maobadi are going to be the vanguard of future communism they need to awaken as many people as possible to the need to strip those representing the oppressor classes of their power. At the same time, internal vigilance will need to be enhanced, the masses have to be awakened to a level of selflessness required to curtail purely self-interest. It needs to be an expansion from the existing individual social situation. If the UCPN (U) is unable to motivate enough of their own to embrace the concept of pure socialism then the class octopus lives. Much of the Maobadi support needs to fully grasp where the party wants to lead them.

What the reactionaries should do is keep doing the same as they are. Whether they remain and flourish in their power depends, as it does for the Maobadi, on the masses of people. Obviously their ideological apparatus is already in full swing. If the people fail to eradicate imperial and feudalistic oppressor classes because they have not bridged the gap in their understanding of communism, then those who say it's a utopian dream and those who simply reject the egalitarian maxim will remain and regain, and regain.

When however, perhaps the time comes when enough of the people are capable of communism, then it will be seen by the reactionaries that it has been the truth and they too will bridge the gap in their understanding. OK, some might.

Blog Guide: A discussion of blog features and primary topic content may be found at the initial entry. The first few entries give a good idea of how best to use the blog, especially for the tagging and social bookmarking at my external Delicious site, and for instructions regarding the Stefandav TV widget.

Subscribe to Stefandav: Atom 1.0 RSS 2.0

Read more!