Analyzing Current Scenario in Nepal

By Chattra Bahadur

The role of intellectual class, which had played prominent role in providing impetus to the pro-democracy movement, has not been commendable after reinstatement of the Parliament. Rather than urging and allowing the government (and the reinstated Parliament) focus on the immediate task of initiating the stalled peace-process, they are pushing forward agendas which, at the best, may have weak link with the peace-process itself.

Some of the experts, while analyzing the present situation of widespread confusion with frequent noxious bouts of lawlessness in the capital city, asserted such instances being ‘normal’ during transitional phases. They are also quick to cite such instances during transition period in many countries all over the world. On the other hand, various leaders of different political hue, ministers in the government and other distinguished members of the civic society are often heard playing the blame-game or forewarning of some imaginary conspiracy by the disgraced members of the previous regime (without producing any evidence to support their hypotheses) and dire consequences of such actions. They would advise/request all to come forward to safeguard the ‘achievements’ of the Jana-Andolan 2062/63. At the same time, the Maoist leadership has maintained both high decibel and visibility. The Nepalese media, of course, is hyper-active in helping all the Nepalese realize their ‘right to know’ by reporting all these events.

In the midst of all of this, everyone has started to realize that the much-promised and much-awaited glorious path to peace is being increasingly difficult. The Maoists are proving to be insatiable with their ever-increasing set of demands each day. Much to their chagrin, the urban elite and the commoners discovered that their exposure to the level of threat has increased suddenly and substantially. What was largely a rural affair had reached their doorsteps.

Firstly, rampant extortion drive, with cadres of the CPN (Maoists) reaching most households and shops in Kathmandu and other metropolitan cities, forceful edict to the students of the government schools in Kathmandu for their compulsory presence at the Maoists’ rally, and the massive show of strength at the Maoists’ rally (Jestha 19) has unnerved everyone.

Secondly, spate of successive lootings and killings have shattered law-and-order situation within the capital city, whatever little was left.

Thirdly, the Maoist leadership has justified the extortion-drive in many forums stating that

(a) the SPA had accepted their theory of ‘two governments and two armies’ in principle: thus the parallel government is exercising its legitimate right to collect ‘taxes’ from people; and

(b) the party needs funds to maintain its army, militia, and cadres. They have also demanded half of either Nepal’s or the Nepal Army’s budgetary allocation (demand depends upon the individual Maoist leader) to them if the government was serious in ending the extortion-drive.

To make matters worse, the SPA looks increasingly in disarray without being able to present convincing workable ‘road-map’ to move forward though the peace-process and negotiations are said to be the top-most priority. Instead of presenting unified stand, each political leader, within the SPA constituents, puts forward contradictory viewpoints regarding the peace process, and the conditions that both the warring parties must fulfill before the negotiations. And surprisingly, the government has maintained stoic silence on the question of minimum conditions that the Maoists must fulfill before the second round of negotiations start. Within a short period of time, looking at the turn of events, many have become skeptical regarding the whole peace-process on account of the government’s indecisiveness and lack of assertiveness, and the growing aggressiveness of the Maoists with their ever-increasing set of demands.

The role of intellectual class, which had played prominent role in providing impetus to the pro-democracy movement, has not been commendable after reinstatement of the Parliament. Rather than urging and allowing the government (and the reinstated Parliament) focus on the immediate task of initiating the stalled peace-process, they are pushing forward agendas which, at the best, may have weak link with the peace-process itself. And the Parliament is seen issuing controversial decrees such as the Secular state, the Citizenship Bill, etc. Many analyses in the prominent national dailies and the prominent speakers at the national-level seminars have questioned the aptness and appropriateness of these actions.

The expressed contentions are:

(a) since the reinstated Parliament has mandate regarding the initiation of the peace-process and the election of the Constituent Assembly only, and the issuance of decrees [of these natures] are out-of-preview of the present Parliament;

(b) before any decree, there must be broad-based discussion to weigh pros-and-cons and the present decrees are issued without careful analysis or discussion; and

(c) these are the questions that the people should vote to decide rather than be declared by the reinstated Parliament that lacks the requisite mandate to do the same. And the Parliament has not justified how these decrees were inseparable proviso to initiate the peace-process or on what basis these decrees were issued.

There is also growing concern with the excessive emphasis of the SPA on the political freedom without adequate attention to ensure economic prosperity among the Nepalese. Though the international community has renewed its pledge to support development plans, the government or the Parliament has failed to unveil a single development initiative. It has become wishful thinking that the Parliamentarians would show the same vigor and zeal in kick-starting the economic development process as they had shown in curtailing the King’s powers and empowering the Parliament. The responsible leaders show behavior that contradicts their words and the actual action.

The Parliamentarians and the ministers talk about taking development initiatives to the rural areas to develop Nepal or taking the message of change to all parts of the country but do not step outside the Kathmandu valley on one pretext or another. Likewise, the finance minister revealed poor state of the economic situation [as evidenced by the precarious balance-of-payments situation, growing trade imbalance and deficit] but fell short to mention steps that he will initiate to correct these anomalies. At other instances, some Parliamentarians talk about empowering some sections of the society without revealing a master plan or actual programs to do the same.

Moreover, every Nepalese faces harassments in the form of corruption, antiquated and archaic bureaucratic procedures, and growing political orientation and unionism of the government bureaucracy on daily-basis. These are the key issues that the most Nepalese like to be addressed with urgency. Since the common man interacts with the bureaucracy, the impression of the government is formed on the basis of this. And s/he will believe the over-emphasized ‘change’ only when the bureaucracy is more responsive towards his/her needs. Unfortunately, the government bureaucracy has not changed either its outlook or the way of functioning. Sensing the state of flux in the political establishment, the bureaucracy has become more unresponsive and militant (such as issuance of threat to lock-out or strike at a drop of hat) in their approach. However, the mass does possess common-sense to understand that the change does not come just by proclaiming the change has come. To make them believe, the change must be evident in their daily lives, which is sorely missing.

The scenario prevailing in Nepal at present is quite worrisome. On the peace-process front, the sense of direction is lacking with the government preferring silence and the Maoists presenting divergent set of ever-increasing demands. And on the socio-economic front, the SPA has solely emphasized political freedom at the cost of neglecting the vital issue of the economic prosperity when it is amply clear that economic prosperity is necessary to enjoy political freedom.

Published by UWB

Pioneering blog from Nepal...since 2004.

11 thoughts on “Analyzing Current Scenario in Nepal

  1. “Moreover, every Nepalese faces harassments in the form of corruption, antiquated and archaic bureaucratic procedures, and growing political orientation and unionism of the government bureaucracy on daily-basis. These are the key issues that the most Nepalese like to be addressed with urgency. Since the common man interacts with the bureaucracy, the impression of the government is formed on the basis of this. And s/he will believe the over-emphasized ‘change’ only when the bureaucracy is more responsive towards his/her needs. Unfortunately, the government bureaucracy has not changed either its outlook or the way of functioning. Sensing the state of flux in the political establishment, the bureaucracy has become more unresponsive and militant (such as issuance of threat to lock-out or strike at a drop of hat) in their approach. However, the mass does possess common-sense to understand that the change does not come just by proclaiming the change has come. To make them believe, the change must be evident in their daily lives, which is sorely missing.”

    My points exactly!!!

  2. Mr. Bahadur:
    Firstly let me just commened you on a very good analysis. Normally UWB’s articles and analysis are piss poor but your article has definetly gone against the usual crap found here.

    However, I would add a few things. I personally don’t have much faith on the political leaders since we have seen their ways in the past. However, your critisim that they have not delivered on many economic reforms might be somewhat premature. I think the most important task this government faces is finding a solution to the current political impass. Without a stable political enviroment economic reform and development is really not possible. In fact the government to my knowledge has taken some steps to correct some of the fiscal difficulties you mentioned (Balance of payments etc.) Anyway I don’t want to seem as if I like these scoundrals but I really think that the first thing we need to be doing is finding a solution to this Maoist issue.

  3. I commend Mr. Chattraji- I think he has spoken for people like me. That said, what I would like to state is, as the political wrangling is continuing unabated and increasingly turning from understanding to confrontation between the Maoist and the SPA- is there any junction where they can meet amicably? SPA wants to extend its time in assembly whereby Maoist want to go at once to interim – both have valid causes from their respective side. But this does not mean citizen’s welfare and concerns are being answered or looked into.

    Certain SPA’s member and intellectuals defend extension of assembly and even defend anarchy, quite a feat, shameful though it might seem. And, Maoist have no qualms of seeking “forced extortion” as a necessity, and line of divide on call for autonomy by groups like Kirat, Jaypoj, and Madeshi Morcha etc., has the bearing of a nation that is committing hara-kiri- but whose there to look all at this, may be this is the price for the janaandolan.

    I hope time does not come where nation is a nation no more but only in name’s sake.

  4. It is a good analysis of the situation. Actually it was expected from our great and short sited politicians.

    In every occasion we find our politicians fighting and blaming each other. That is the major indication of incompetency. It is the known fact that politician will not even visit bathrooms if they are not paid. After reaching to a position all politicians change over the night and completely forget about their promises to general public.

    After restatement of the house to this date SPA have not come out with any acceptable road map for peace and economic development. It will go forever on same path. It is senn in the past as well. Everything politicians will like to keep top secret. Nothing is transpaprent in Nepal and nothing will be discussed openly. On the day politicalns agree on open discussion that will be the end of their monpoly and malpractices.

    SPA promised at the beginning that they will prosecute defaulters of people movement suppressors. But what happened? they did nothing. In 1990 also it was promised same but at the end they did nothing. But at that time the defaulters of Panchayat regime became new politicians corruption consultants!!!

    By looking at the history of Nepali politics it will take almost half a centuary to straighten everything for Nepal.

    The quickest way to change faster is revolution and all sets of current unqualified politicians must be changed. Current politicians only thinks about them and their family. Nepal needs politicians to think for the country not for theirselves. In other word Nepal needs true peoples representatives not corrupted brokers like we have today.

  5. Patriotic Citizen:
    Please tell us something new. Don’t you think all of us understand and know that the current politicans are far from being perfect. Ideally we should burn them at the stake.
    You obviously have not thought through this but suppose we get rid of all those political leaders you don’t like. Who are you going to put in their place. Please suggest some names ….

  6. Latest uprising in Nepal — Lessons left for fighting people of soil and the world

    For 19 days since April 6 last, the Himalayan country of Nepal witnessed surges of events that shook it wildly. It all started with the countrywide four-day strike from the sixth itself, called by an alliance of seven political parties, to protest against the tyrannical rule of King Gyanendra and demanding restoration of democracy. The Seven Party Alliance, the SPA, included Nepali Congress, Nepali Congress (Democratic), Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist- Leninist) or CPN(UML), Jan Morcha Nepal(JM-N), United Left Front (ULF), Nepal Mazdoor Kisan Party (NMKP) and Nepal Sadbhavana Party-Anandi Devi (NSP-A), representing different classes and sections of the Nepalese society, viz., the aspirant bourgeoisie, the petty bourgeoisie, the workers, the peasants or the forces going by the Marxist-Leninist banner but appearing nothing more than social democrats by their deeds.

    Right from the start of this movement, there was also the party, CPN-Maoists (hitherto referred as CPN-M), actively participating in it, though not from within the alliance. In fact, whatever we could gather about them, after emerging in 1996, the CPN-M has carried on continuous struggle, often and in the main an armed struggle, with the long term objective of people’s democratic revolution and as the immediate short-term goal with demands, among others, of total abolition of the monarchy and establishment of full democracy with republican constitution to be framed by a new Constituent Assembly. By virtue of that it has already established its control and influence over a large part of the country’s rural hinterland. On a few earlier occasions they even foiled the King’s attempt to hold semblance of parliamentary election to obtain a stamp of democracy on his autocratic rule and get forces of his choice into power. On the present occasion too, the CPN-M waged intensive struggle over the country, in course of the movement forged unity with the SPA on the basis of a 12 point agreement and remained all through in it as one of the major forces to play a decisive role.
    In Nepal, there are quite a few forces going by the name of Communist Party of Nepal. The CPN-M is one of them which holds a major organizational strength and influence over people. We are not in a position to judge the respective precise ideological stands of these different forces; there may be revisionist-reformist social democrats among them as also the real revolutionary force. Obviously, only the people of Nepal can be the best judge and have the ultimate say. However, recognizing and hailing the importance and decisive role of the CPN-M in the present movement of Nepal, we must also say, as we have on earlier occasions, that their use of the terms ‘Maoists’ and ‘Maoism’ is not correct. Genuine Marxists-Leninists will all agree that Leninism is “the Marxism of the era of imperialism and proletarian revolution” as Stalin put it. Even during Comrade Mao’s lifetime, the Chinese Communist Party (CPC) in their report to the Tenth Congress, reiterated that it was the era of imperialism and proletarian revolution and thus Marxism-Leninism was still the guiding philosophy. Also, while recognizing their Chairman Mao’s great contribution to the Chinese revolution by way of concretization of Marxist-Leninist theories and understanding, they described it as Mao Zedong’s thoughts. Obviously it does not mean giving birth to anything like Maoism.

    With repression mounting, people stepped up their resistance
    To comprehend the character and importance of the present movement of Nepal, we may recall a brief outline of the political scene of the country for the last decade or so. In 1990, the country was swept by another massive movement for abolition of the monarchy and establishment of full democracy . On that occasion too, the King could not contain the movement, even by resorting to all sorts of repressive measures. Coming down to negotiation, he was, however, successful in retaining the control of the Army, amounting to control over the state, under the cover of ‘constitutional monarchy’, parallel to the ‘multi-party democracy’. As in the present case, that time too, the same parties like the Nepali Congress or the CPN (UML) sat on the other side of the table to share the booty of power and pelf. With them in the lead, the movement which could have attained the cherished goal of total abolition of the monarchy and establishment of full democracy right then and there, and the Nepalese people would have been freed of at least the chains of the monarchy, ended in the leaders’ backstabbing people’s aspiration and dream. The dual rule of the ‘constitutional monarchy’ and ‘ multi-party democracy’, the ‘twin pillars of stability and peace’ as dished out by the ruling class of Nepal, as also the Indian capitalists, carried on the rule of exploitation and oppression in Nepal, with people’s aspiration for real democracy vanishing into thin air. Resentment among the poor, illiterate masses stricken by acute unemployment, lack of industry and all such evils of the dual rule of the feudal monarch and the aspirant bourgeoisie, went on mounting; it only received brute suppression of democratic movements added by infamous cruelty of the Royal Nepal Army. The more there were oppression and suffering, the stronger became people’s urge for democracy and abolition of the monarchy. CPN-M emerged in this ambience in 1996.
    In any case, the recent movement of Nepal, much more strikingly than any movement of the past and right from its start, beamed with militancy and determination and divided the country sharply into two camps : the overwhelming majority of common people, including professionals, educationists and students on one side, and the King and the army under his control, along with a handful of his henchmen and a section of the administration on the other. In fact, it was a movement that once again proved, and this time more convincingly, the courage and fighting zeal of the toiling people of Nepal. It was not just they joined the movements in thousands, they proved at one and all stages of the movement the main driving force battling with strong determination and ebullient aspiration.
    King Gyanendra responded with his usual highhandedness with which he had been ruling since he had usurped the monarchical power in 2001 following the in-house conspiracy and killing spree among the members of the Palace, dissolved the parliament in 2002, dismissed in early 2005 the government of his own choice to take full control of the affairs. In a massive crackdown on the capital and on districts, the King arrested hundreds of opposition leaders, professionals, students and common innocent people. He imposed curfew for days in and out, banned mass meetings, shut off mobile services with a view to muzzling the voice of protest that rose with every day. The King, enraged and unnerved, violated each and every democratic norm denying struggling people the minimum basic civil and democratic rights. Even in an unprecedented violation of the Vienna Convention, his government refused to issue curfew passes to the diplomat community and the UN human rights officials.
    The police and particularly the infamous Royal Nepal Army, notorious for its cruelty and arrogance, perpetrated unthinkable atrocities. They baton-charged and kicked unarmed protesters, tear-gassed demonstrations, opened fire to kill, shooting at head. At the same time, the trigger-happy forces inflicted bullet injuries on hundreds, including women and children bystanders (on a single day in one event they injured at least fifty with bullet injuries on April, 11). They raided medical students’ hostels at the Teaching Hospital in Kathmandu, the capital itself, assaulting students in protest of which doctors had to close outpatient department.
    Notwithstanding the highhandedness of the King and brutal oppression unleashed by his army, police and such other security forces, the movement did not wane. On the contrary, it rose step by step, day by day, albeit fast and firm. Starting from demands of restoring multi-party democracy with constitutional monarchy still in its place, demands for total abolition of monarchy and establishment of a republican constitution gained ground within the short span of virtually a fortnight. All over the country, from the remote districts to the capital, people in thousands defied ban. They marched out on to the streets, greeted and encouraged the demonstrators from the roadside. Students clashed with the police, attacked government vehicles, even the security vehicles of the US embassy, which latter was standing out all through as the ardent well wisher of the monarch, not to speak of the liberal and incessant military and financial aids the US imperialists had provided the royal government with for decades. People stormed the headquarters and other government buildings in districts; they drove out police personnel from there, set fire to government offices, destroyed statue of Prithvi Narayan Singh, the founder of the present dynasty, in the Tribhuvan University campus and elsewhere, attacked offices of the royalist parties, took control of highways, made road blockades with burning tyres, rocks and logs. As the movement gained momentum and was extended indefinitely, the leaders issued calls to stop payment of taxes and other government dues, electricity, water, and telephone bills, to boycott all products and services of the businesses and industries belonging to the royal family and its relatives and urged Nepalese working abroad not to send remittances during the protest period. Strikes called by the seven party alliance paralyzed the capital and other cities completely; transports were entirely dislocated; educational institutions, offices and markets were closed; yet people accepted the hazards ungrudgingly. Rather the masses were emboldened; they gathered more and more strength in number, spread and determination. Thus the movement tended to develop into a mass uprising in demand of total abolition of monarchy and establishment of real democracy and a republic for people.
    Unable to suppress the movement, the King tried tricks. On the eve of the Nepal’s new year on April 14, he lifted curfew and did not reclamp emergency. The King insisted on withdrawing the movement promising to hold election by April 2007. Both the seven party opposition and the CPN-M rejected the King’s offer as moves to legitimize his coup using election as a ploy. Invigorated, the movement continued further.

    Monarchy found friends in hated US imperialism and Indian expansionism
    The hated enemy of the people of Nepal, the monarchy, did earn supports and lifelines. And it was from none other than the dreaded enemy of mankind today, the war-monger US imperialism and its present ally in South Asia, the Indian capitalist rulers with imperialist aspirations and expansionist attitude for which it is apprehended by their neighbours around. Other imperialists of Europe and elsewhere and the reactionary Chinese capitalist rulers masquerading as communists, also did not fall back. Both the US Imperialism and the Indian rulers, since long , have nakedly interfered into Nepal politics. While it was the matter of the Nepalese people to decide about their monarchy or what system they would have instead , the Indian government, behind the rhetoric of ‘the twin pillars of stability and peace for the country’, viz., ‘the constitutional monarchy’ and ‘multiparty democracy’, made clear its inclination towards retaining the monarchy. Both the US and the Indian rulers have branded the CPN-M as ‘terrorists’ and have liberally provided arms and ammunitions to the Royal Nepal Army and training to their personnel, both on the plea of combating ‘terrorism’. India announced a ban against CPN-M in July 2001, two months before even the monarchical Nepal outlawed them. This time too, when the entire country was condemning the monarchy and fighting against it, the Indian rulers paid a lip-service to democracy and peace, sitting tight-lipped at the atrocious oppression of the King and the Army meted out to the peaceful demonstrators. Both the US and the Indian rulers waited in the lurch, rather accusing the King for not being able to handle the situation effectively and tackle the ‘terrorists’ successfully. When the fate of the King was writ large, the Indian rulers, abetted and instigated by the US imperialists, hurriedly sent an envoy, Karan Singh, to persuade the King to make a compromise with the parliamentary politicians, so that the movement does not go out of the hands of the bourgeois or petty bourgeois parties of the SPA and the monarchy be saved. Even amidst countrywide hatred against the king, Karan Singh took pains to meet Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) and Rastriya Janasakti Party (RJP), both supporters of the monarchy and cast-offs by the people. The royalist government greeted Karan Singh with a curfew clamped on Kathmandu to thwart an opposition rally. The opposition called strike, any way, that made the capital stand still.
    Even then, immediately after Karan Singh’s visit, India jumped gleefully upon the King’s pronouncement of his ‘intention’ to transfer executive powers to the 7-party alliance, meaning a ministry under the King himself. But the mood of the people was otherwise; they were firm in their goal of total abolition of the monarchy and the moment of full take over appeared to have drawn by. The SPA leaders did not dare accept the King’s offer, apprehensive, it may cost them control over the movement.
    When people’s wrath went stronger, the King came down further for a compromise. Minutes before midnight on April 24, the King announced his decision to restore the parliament, that he had dissolved in May 2002. The Indian government, too, sensing the popular mood, made a U-turn forthright. The seven-party alliance accepted the King’s offer lest the movement goes out of their hands and came out to form the ministry with GP Koirala, the octogenerian veteran as the Prime Minister assuming the chair for the fourth time in his life. Even the CPN-M which was critical of the move at the outset, ultimately called truce had a peace talk with the government and has come to terms with the latter on maintaining and stopping armed struggle on the basis of a mutually agreed 25-point code of conduct.
    In the whole drama, the Congress-led UPA government of India and the Indian capitalists had much more to play-act, given license from the US imperialists behind the curtain. They went on with the same age-old tactics of parliamentary politics. This time they picked up the CPI(M), an ally of the Indian government in the domestic scene and a political force going by the Marxist signboard, yet serving the capitalists- monopolists of the country and abroad unhesitatingly to earn unstinted certificates from them from within the country as also from all over the world, from Indonesia to even the US imperialists. At the instance of the Indian Union government as also the compromising bourgeois- petty bourgeois-social democratic forces of the SPA of Nepal, a CPI(M) leader was called upon for brokering for peace among the different sections, particularly the SPA and the CPN-M to ensure and preserve the interests of the emerging capitalist class of that country and the imperialists, in general and the US imperialism and the Indian expansionism in particular, as well. Eventually CPI(M) and its leader were was found to be playing a key role in hastening up this treacherous deal for the Nepalese people to retain the monarchy, in the same way as the Indian government itself did play.
    These events from within the country and without, led to the SPA assume the governmental power. The real character of these parties of the alliance, particularly the major ones, was soon exposed, when they fumbled with the question of total abolition of monarchy. However, people instead of complying with the SPA’s compromising attitude towards the monarchy, made it clear that after all their determined struggle for over several weeks, they were not going to accept their leaders betraying them. In face of tremendous pressure, the SPA government was compelled to take certain steps against the monarchy. Thus the King’s constitutional control over the 90000 strong RNA and 4000 strong royal guard was taken away and was handed over to the parliament. Army deployment and recruitment were entrusted with the parliament. In addition, the King’s right to make final decisions on major issues was also nullified; the Raj Parishad, the King’s advisory council with more than 100 of his supporters was scrapped; the National Security Council regulating the security forces was dismantled, a new body was formed with the Prime Minister in the chair; the tradition of senior officials like the Chief Justice and Prime Minister being sworn in by the King was scrapped, with the charge passed over to the House. Nepal was declared a secular state instead of a Hindu kingdom with the King dethroned from his status of the “Vishnu Avatar” or incarnation of the Hindu god Vishnu. Instead, the King was declared amenable to pay taxes; his immunity from prosecution was removed; the National anthem extolling the King was decided to be replaced and the parliament was empowered to decide the royal family’s allowances and privileges.
    All said and done, in spite of these vital steps against the monarchical system and power, the monarchy was left to exist, though as a titular head, much of the type persisting in the United Kingdom or the Japan, two prominent powers of the world imperialist-capitalist system among others. Visibly, it was a compromise with the monarchy and a betrayal to people’s aspiration for total abolition of monarchy and establishment of a people’s republic. It was a compromise in which the power of the monarchy and feudalism is curbed, yet the monarchy is left to survive as an institution. In lieu of that, in the name of multi-party democracy the emerging capitalist class is installed with full power. Thus, it was a compromise in which with the SPA consisting largely of the parties of aspirant bourgeoisie reined in front, the capitalists gain power, a bourgeois democracy of the capitalists is consolidated, obviously at the cost of people’s bloodshed and sufferings, at the cost of people’s aspiration for a real people’s democracy. So not only the monarchy is not yet abolished in Nepal; rather the dictatorship of the capitalist class is being consolidated behind the smokescreen of multi-party parliamentary democracy. US imperialism, Indian expansionism and its designful Union government, the revisionist CPI(M) and aspirant Nepalese bourgeoisie and their servitors all have worked in tandem to strike this shameful deal with the monarchy. Even the CPN-M is now looking ahead for the election of the new Constituent Assembly, without raising their demand for total abolition of the monarchy any further.
    In any case, after successfully carrying through this deal, the SPA government, in their bid to curtail the power of the monarchy has brought the charge of the Royal Nepal Army under the parliament. But they have not disbanded the army, whose loyalty to the monarchy persists. In this situation, there is a question floating in the air, inviting discussions and comments in this or that circle. What will be the consequences, if this army plays a different tune in future and come into confrontation with the parliament at the instruction or instigation of the king, who remains dormant as a persisting institution? Presently, people are in fighting vigilant mood. If, and when, this mood dies down, cannot the army react otherwise and revolt to nullify the steps taken by the government?

    Immensely potential uprising of the Nepalese people ended in tragic compromise
    The fact that stands out after all these stormy days is that had there been a real revolutionary leadership to lead it, this historic movement in Nepal , so massive an uprising bore all the potentialities of not only abolishing the monarchy and setting up a people’s republic, but even of heading towards struggles to end completely with all sorts of exploitation, including the capitalist exploitation. Instead, the exploitative system continues to prevail just as before, making it sure that people can expect no relief from it; rather they may have to face more ruthless exploitation of their capitalism, intimately linked with the utterly moribund world capitalism-imperialism. We are not aware if there is any real revolutionary leadership in that soil. Even if it were there, it has been proved by now that they did not have the sufficient organizational hold over all sections of exploited masses to lead the movement to its desired goal. Rather the political situation in Nepal has revealed that not only the pro-monarchy, pro-feudal forces, even the pro-capitalist forces of the aspirant bourgeoisie of the country, such as the Nepali Congress or the Nepali Congress (Democratic) or the social democratic parties like CPN (UML) exist with considerable hold over the masses.
    Now, under such circumstances, with the struggle of the Nepalese people having been betrayed by the bourgeois-petty bourgeois- social democratic leadership and thus reaching a new phase, once more the situation has brought to the fore the brilliant analysis and invaluable teachings of Comrade Lenin, the great proletarian leader, on questions like overthrow of monarchy and establishment of democracy as also overthrow of feudalism and colonialism. They are so very fundamental that people of each and every country will have to realize their its significance.
    Succinctly summarizing Lenin’s teachings, Comrade Shibdas Ghosh made the following observations:
    “Lenin showed … in the present era of moribund capitalism, when world capitalism has entered the stage of imperialism and turned out and out reactionary, …. the bourgeoisie ceased to have a revolutionary character which they had as a class during the eighteenth or nineteenth centuries.
    So, although the national bourgeoisie will participate in many cases in the anti-imperialist liberation movements, they will make compromises with imperialism-feudalism at the same time out of fear complex of revolution.
    … in order to lead these bourgeois democratic revolutions to their logical culmination in the present era, what is essential is that they must be conducted under the leadership of the working class.” (November Day Speech, 1974, Published in SW, vol-3)
    It was for this reason that Lenin categorically concluded that the movement for democracy overthrowing monarchy and feudalism, or the national liberation struggle from the clutches of imperialism, none of these can reach their goal today under the bourgeois leadership. These can only be attained by the real revolutionary leadership of these days, the Marxist-Leninist leadership. It is under that leadership that the tasks of bourgeois democratic reforms are to be incorporated as the first steps of socialist reconstruction.
    The events of Nepal attests to this truth. The massive uprising of people that could have tended towards the fight to end with all exploitation, has ended with the rule of capitalism consolidating itself under the aegis of the combination of bourgeois- petty bourgeois- social democratic parties of different names and banners. With this the struggling people of Nepal enter into the new phase with their task set at overthrowing of capitalism. And confronting this task they must carefully delineate and realize their responsibilities in this changed context.
    Events of Nepal have, however, attested to how incisive and decisive can people’s power be, even in the question of overthrowing powerful state machinery and reactionary regimes. In the not-very distant past, people of the Philippines, Indonesia or Bangladesh could also overthrow their respective tyrants from power through their militant struggles culminating in mass upheavals. Thus in the Philippines, the tyrannical dictator Marcos and a successor of him were ousted from power through popular mass uprising; Suharto, the dictator, was overthrown in Indonesia; Ershad, the military dictator had to bow down to people in Bangladesh. There may be more cases; but what is notable is that in all the cases the reactionary regimes crumbled down like pack of cards in face of invincible power of fighting people. But again, in all these cases, since the leadership was not in the hands of any real revolutionary party and since the social democratic or other bourgeois-petty bourgeois forces had taken control of the movements, the oppressed struggling people of those countries simply witnessed installation of one oppressive regime in spite of removal of another, belying all their expectations and dreams and vindicating the invaluable teachings of Comrade Lenin, the great proletarian leader.
    All these cases, including that of Nepal, thus prove how irrefutably important the question of the leadership of real revolutionary party is, of what paramount importance is the task of its building up uncontested organizational strength over the toiling masses on the basis of correct revolutionary theory and lofty revolutionary culture and ethics.
    As Lenin taught, there can be no revolution without a revolutionary party and there can be no revolutionary party without a revolutionary theory. Now a revolutionary party of the working class, cannot be formed merely by intention or by adopting any and every means. It must be realized in exaction and concretized correctly in scientific ways. The revolutionary party of the working class, that is, the genuine communist party can only be formed following the Leninist method which is also the scientific method for the purpose. We must add here that Comrade Shibdas Ghosh, one of the eminent Marxist thinkers of the present days, have further enriched and elaborated this concept through his unique contributions. Thus, it must now be understood that the communist party develops on the foundation of an ideological centralism, attained through continuous ideological struggle covering all aspects of life, and characterized by one process of thinking, uniformity of thinking, oneness in approach and singleness of purpose. This ideological centralism lies at the root of the democratic centralism, that serves as the foundation of the collective leadership and gives rise to the concrete conception and personified expression of it through the emergence of the leader of leaders of revolution. These, in reality, distinguish a proletarian revolutionary party from the individual leaderships and groups of bourgeois parties. Besides, through relentless and painstaking struggle, it gives birth to a band of professional revolutionaries, the core of the party.
    It is this revolutionary party that must determine the stage of the revolution and its correct strategy, which means which class is in power and which are the classes the revolutionary working class must align with as allied forces of revolution, that is, which class the working class must overthrow from power, and must reinforce its strength through alliance with which classes.
    Further, on its basis the revolutionary party must concretely evolve the base political line of struggle, of which Comrade Mao Zedong spoke in his language as “The correctness or incorrectness of the ideological and political line decides everything”. The CPC, too, in their Report of the Tenth Congress added in elaboration “If one’s line is incorrect, one’s downfall is inevitable….If one’s line is correct and even if one has not a single soldier at first, there will be soldiers, and even if there is no political power, political power will be gained.”
    The secondmost significant requirement for revolution to become successful, that all great Marxist leaders from Marx to Mao Zedong and Shibdas Ghosh, emphasized is the question of mobilizing the widest public opinion in favour of revolution covering all sections of exploited people of the country. The revolutionary party must carry on sustained ideological struggle on Marxism- Leninism, with a view to, as Lenin put it, ‘Advancing a revolution’ that may ‘come to a standstill’ ‘not because of external obstacles, not because of the violence of the bourgeoisie …, but because of the unreasoning trust of the people’ on the petty-bourgeois social-democratic parties. “Only by overcoming this unreasoning trust … ideologically, by comradely persuasion, by pointing to the lessons of experience ” can the revolutionary party bring the masses into the surge of revolutionary struggles. ( Quotes are from The Tasks of the Proletariat in our Revolution, April 1917).
    Thus side by side with conducting movements on various demands of their life and living, that is the democratic mass movements with the content of class struggle being directed against the ruling capitalist class, the toiling people must see to it that ‘a revolutionary party along with its mass fronts gains enough strength to coordinate and lead all the mass movements single-handedly towards their historical goal’ of accomplishing revolution. Till that stage is reached the united front of the revolutionary party is “a historical and objective necessity to free the mass mind from the ideological and organizational influence that the bourgeois and petty bourgeois parties still have over the people…”; it “acts as an instrument of struggle to organize and mobilize in the united movement that section of the people who suffer from illusion about the petty bourgeois social democratic parties and are still under their spell”. This was how Comrade Shibdas Ghosh, the founder General Secretary of our party put it, in his brilliant concretization of Leninist teaching on ideological struggle, particularly in connection with united front as an instrument of democratic struggle, perfectly in keeping with the warning of Comrade Stalin that we cannot ‘put an end to capitalism without putting an end to social democracy’. Comrade Mao was equally explicit in his views on mobilizing public opinion. Thus he said : “Some people want to increase our political influence only by means of roving guerrilla actions, but are unwilling to increase it by undertaking the arduous tasks of building up of base areas and establishing red political power.” (On correcting mistaken ideas in the party: SW, v.1, p.104) And in regard to the latter, that is the ‘base areas’ and ‘red political power’, he emphatically submitted: “The fundamental condition… the indispensable condition for establishing base area is.. to arouse the masses for struggle…We must organize the workers, peasants, youth, women, children, merchants and professional people according to the degree of their political consciousness and fighting enthusiasm into the various mass organizations necessary for the struggle.” (Problems of Strategy in Guerrilla Warfare; SW, v. II, p.98) . Even when the question is judged in the background of armed struggle, Comrade Mao did not refrain from indicating that “Weapons are an important factor in war, but not the decisive factor; it is people, not things that are decisive. The contest of strength is not only a military and economic power, but also a contest of human power and morale.” (On Protracted War, SW, v., III, p.143)
    A revolutionary party engaged in preparing for the revolution in a country cannot also forget another great teaching of Lenin that ‘cultural revolution precedes technical revolution’. Thus, the intense ideological struggle strengthened by a high ethical-moral-cultural standard of Marxism- Leninism, undertaken by the revolutionary force should be directed also to bring about radical changes in the cultural standard of the fighting exploited people, in their consciousness and proximity to the revolutionary politics and culture. This will be a prerequisite in the preparation for revolution.
    As fundamental requirement for successful accomplishment of the revolution, another Marxist-Leninist teaching is that revolution cannot be carried out to success in a country through carbon-copy of the revolution of another country. Each country has its particularities; each situation has its own characteristics. Those must be studied and analyzed carefully by the revolutionary party while drawing out the revolutionary strategy and tactics of its country. In fact, how correctly the revolutionary preparation is being made, a deciding factor of that is how successfully the revolutionary party is making the concrete analysis of the concrete situation. In quite a few cases in the international communist movement, this tendency of carbon-copying tended to raise its head. In result, the revolutionary preparation suffered setback and delay in some cases; in some others there were even failures. The tendency may still be noted occasionally; Comrade Mao too did not fail to note it and raise caution against.
    In fact, on this and many other related questions, the vast and in-depth experience of the CPC under the leadership of Comrade Mao Zedong, the architect of the Chinese revolution, may be illumining for revolutionaries of different countries. But one can never afford to accept them mechanically without his own analysis and conclusions. We can hear from none other than Comrade Mao Zedong in this regard from his words to the representatives of some Latin American communist parties : “The experience of the Chinese revolution, that is, building rural base areas, encircling the cities from the countryside and finally seizing the cities, may not be wholly applicable to many of your countries, though it can serve for your reference. I beg to advise you not to transplant Chinese experience mechanically.”( SW, v. 5, p.326)
    In support of his arguments, he categorized the concrete conditions of China with his analysis: “…the characteristics of China are that she is not independent and democratic, but semi-colonial and semi-feudal … we have no parliament to make use of and no legal right to organize the workers to strike. Basically the task of the communist party here is not to go through a long period of legal struggles before launching insurrection and war, and not to seize big cities first and then occupy the countryside, but the reverse ..” (Problems of War and Strategy).
    Guerilla warfare and Mao Zedong appear inseparably linked. Here again, though Comrade Mao considered guerrilla warfare as indispensable and ‘therefore the best form of struggle for the people’s armed forces to employ over a long period in a backward country.’ (Introducing ‘The Communist’, SW, v. II, p.291), he highlighted that there were certain preconditions too. Thus he said: “ It will be impossible to sustain guerrilla warfare behind the enemy lines without base areas. What then are these base areas? They are the strategic bases on which the guerrilla forces rely on performing their strategic tasks and achieving the object of preserving and expanding themselves.” (Problems and Strategy in the Guerrilla Warfare, SW v. II, p.93)
    Roving-rebels or base areas , while many put these two ideas in contest and supported the roving-rebel idea for some reason or other, Mao warned : “In the present age of advanced communications and technology, it will be all the more groundless to imagine that one can win victory by fighting in the manner of roving rebels. However the roving-rebel ideas still exist …. Therefore, ridding the minds of guerrilla commanders of this idea is a pre-requisite for deciding on a policy of establishing base-areas.” (ibid, p.94) We should remember that Mao was writing this in the earlier parts of the last century. By this time, have not the ‘communications and technology’ advanced much further, making Mao’s words even more relevant?
    The question that would come up naturally at this stage is that what then is the fundamental condition of setting up of base areas? We may reiterate Mao’s words “The fundamental condition … the indispensable condition for establishing base area is.. to arouse the masses for struggle…We must organize the workers, peasants, youth, women, children, merchants and professional people according to the degree of their political consciousness and fighting enthusiasm into the various mass organizations necessary for the struggle.” (Problems of Strategy in Guerrilla Warfare; SW, v. II, p.98).
    Obviously, the revolutionary party can carry out these tasks more easily in a democratic ambience, working over ground. The more there are democratic rights prevailing, to whatever extent they be, the faster it becomes for the revolutionary party to work. So it remains the task of such a party to try to maintain the condition which facilitates freest activity of the revolutionary party. It does not help create any situation, unwarranted and unwise, that may help the reactionary ruling class to use it and proscribe revolutionary activities. Under such circumstances, with the masses still under the influence of social democratic and bourgeois parties, it becomes easier for the ruling class to confuse people and thereby isolate the revolutionary forces from the masses. This is a vital consideration that a revolutionary force must make, before resorting to an ultimate method, such as the armed struggle. For, unless the armed struggle is undertaken as the last phase when the influence of compromising social-democratic and other forces on the masses have been totally exhausted and the latter is overwhelmingly in support of the revolutionary politics and methods of the revolutionary force, the rulers taking advantage of the low level of political consciousness of the toiling people and using the state machinery, almost invariably with the support of the world reaction, imperialist-capitalist powers without the country, will find it no problem to crush the struggle and nip it in the bud. The toiling masses for which the revolutionary force may be fighting, will then be left at the mercy of the ruling class on one hand, and of the pernicious influence of all sorts of reactionary politics, including that of social democrats.
    Here we should recall Mao’s own words on armed struggle , where he says : “the so-called theory that ‘weapons decide everything’… constitutes a mechanical approach to the question of war and a subjective and one-sided view. Our view is opposed to this; we see not only weapons, but also people. Weapons are an important factor in war, but not the decisive factor; it is people, not things that are decisive. The contest of strength is not only a military and economic power, but also a contest of human power and morale.” (On Protracted War, SW, v., III, p.143)
    Now that the Nepalese people have entered a new phase of their struggle, when they will have to restart their preparation for the fight to end with all sorts of exploitation, that is preparation for revolution, we would expect them to pay attention to and carefully judge these significant issues confronting revolutionary preparedness and invaluable teaching of the great Marxist authorities in this regard.

    People of Nepal have recorded a win; they must also win the last battle
    Summing up, it must be added that the militant movement, the fighting people of Nepal launched with a view to totally abolishing the reactionary monarchy and thus to ushering in a situation in which they could dream of ending with all kinds of exploitation, has ended in yet retaining the monarchy as an institution, and to that extent, in a compromise. Yet everything is not lost for the exploited people of Nepal. They have repeatedly recorded their rejection of their leaders’ compromising attitude. And the militant uncompromising movement they did put up, stands out glaringly to earn admiration from the struggling toiling masses all over the world. The world today is marked by people’s voice being raised in one corner after another; yet at the same time, the revisionist, social democratic compromising forces of different countries are also at work at the behest of none other than the imperialists-capitalists to calm down people’s unrest, to lead them astray to economism-reformism-parliamentary mock-fights and even to quench the fire of movement totally. In such an ambience, the instance of Nepal is particularly significant, refreshing and inspiring to the world of patriotic, struggling masses of different countries. It will definitely work as a great booster to them.
    As Marxists-Leninists, we firmly believe that struggle generates consciousness, consciousness further educates people in their struggles. The fighting people of Nepal have also shown that through their long struggles they are learning their ways and means and thus setting their goals ahead of them. We are sure the present historic juncture will also leave vital lessons for them to learn.
    As members of the fighting fraternity, the democratic-minded people of the world will always expect that the exploited masses of Nepal will soon rise to meet up the wants and will overcome the gaps in their revolutionary preparations. We are sure, to that end they will see to it that the militant democratic movement demanding fulfillment of the unaccomplished demands of the people, namely total abolition of the monarchy and emergence of people’s republic, eventually leading to conditions for final emancipation from all sorts of exploitation and establishment of socialism, does not wane down. Rather to step up these continuously, they must carry on their intense ideological struggle conducive to fulfilling the main aim of theirs, must launch and continue their democratic mass struggles and class struggles and in course of that develop from within those struggles, people’s committees and volunteer forces extensively throughout the country to conduct and spread the struggle to wider and wider reaches and develop people’s power and instruments of struggle and with the help of them develop and strengthen their revolutionary leadership for the final battle. Ultimate victory is theirs!

  7. Allow me to answer above write up with a song from Beatles:

    Writer, lead vocal: John Lennon

    You say you want a revolution
    Well you know
    We all want to change the world
    You tell me that it’s evolution
    Well you know
    We all want to change the world
    But when you talk about destruction
    Don’t you know you can count me out
    Don’t you know it’s gonna be alright
    Alright Alright

    You say you got a real solution
    Well you know
    We’d all love to see the plan
    You ask me for a contribution
    Well you know
    We’re doing what we can
    But when you want money for people with minds that hate
    All I can tell you is brother you have to wait
    Don’t you know it’s gonna be alright
    Alright Alright

    You say you’ll change the constitution
    Well you know
    We all want to change your head
    You tell me it’s the institution
    Well you know
    You better free your mind instead
    But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
    You ain’t going to make it with anyone anyhow
    Don’t you know know it’s gonna be alright
    Alright Alright

  8. Cdebasish:
    Please be so kind next time to post the link to the article instead of the entire thing.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: