Nepal Headed for more Turmoil?

[the-red-under-the-bed]

from the Lal Salam Blog:
http://maobadiwatch.blogspot.com/2009/02/is-nepal-headed-for-more-turmoil.html

Is Nepal headed for more turmoil??

Questions, comments and critisisms all welcome and encouraged.

[Rawthentic]

Well I think this is important because it underscores how Nepal, like all revolutions, undergo periods of deep crisis and contradictions.

These things happen in the midst of line struggles within the communist party (also inevitable) over what road and direction to take.

[the-red-under-the-bed]

couldnt nagree more,

to any Nepal deniers, be prepared to eat your words in the comming months, in my honest opinion

[rednordman]

couldnt nagree more,

to any Nepal deniers, be prepared to eat your words in the comming months, in my honest opinion Sorry if I miss understand you but you almost sound as if you want the communist lead government in Nepal to fail. If their government does indeed get toppled, its not a good thing. Im sorry, but i just dont see what that so called 'democratic alliance' which is supposed to include the Nepalese army could do that is any better than the Maoists. Plus i do not think that there is any side other than the maoist/communist parties that have any serious interest in taking a revolutionary road in Nepal.
I heard somewhere that the maoists have banned people in Nepal from protesting at work. If this is the case, who says that this 'alliance' is going to be any fairer? I guess one could say that it is indeed interesting and tbh, rather worrying times for the Republic of Nepal. Would these problems encourage a re-start of the revolutionary war? After all they did seem to have alot of public support (the election results), would they take well to having an obviously pro-western capitalist party/coa-lation taking over? Either way, whether maoists or alliance (and by the article this is what it looks like it will be between) i can sense a millitary dictatorship ahead. Thanks for the article.

[the-red-under-the-bed]

Sorry if I miss understand you but you almost sound as if you want the communist lead government in Nepal to fail. If their government does indeed get toppled, its not a good thing. Im sorry, but i just dont see what that so called 'democratic alliance' which is supposed to include the Nepalese army could do that is any better than the Maoists. Plus i do not think that there is any side other than the maoist/communist parties that have any serious interest in taking a revolutionary road in Nepal.
I heard somewhere that the maoists have banned people in Nepal from protesting at work. If this is the case, who says that this 'alliance' is going to be any fairer? I guess one could say that it is indeed interesting and tbh, rather worrying times for the Republic of Nepal. Would these problems encourage a re-start of the revolutionary war? After all they did seem to have alot of public support (the election results), would they take well to having an obviously pro-western capitalist party/coa-lation taking over? Either way, whether maoists or alliance (and by the article this is what it looks like it will be between) i can sense a millitary dictatorship ahead. Thanks for the article.


You did misunderstand me. the "democratic alliance" is anything but, and if the Maoist government was to be toppled then it would be tragic.

I dont think the revolutionary war would be re-started. its a phase of the struggle that isnt relevant in the current context, in my opinion. It is much more likely for another peoples movement to start. Which would sweep all before it.

In regard to the strikes, for one, its not policy yet. For two if focusses on two areas, strikes within the civil service, which are tools of the opposition and stop the implementation of the radical budget/ and secondly, unpolitical strikes on the major highways. For example there have recently been stupid unpolitical strikes called by communities which then block major roads. For example a family declared a strike over a marriage dispute, which then blocked the major highway and then held up developement projects in poor areas further along. This isnt right.

[redguard2009]

Two things are happening.

First and foremost, right-wing opponents of socialist renewal and revolution in Nepal are trouncing on the oppurtunity "brought" to them by the world "economic crisis" to lay blame to the gimp Maoist government for Nepal's economic hardships. They have spent the past year throwing every roadblock available to them in the Maoists' paths, with pro-royalist parties allying with supposed left-wing and even communist parties, and now lay the blame of inaction squarely on the Maoists.

Secondly, Prachanda has, I believe, deeply weakened the strong support base of the CPN(M) by the recent decision to embrace bourgeois development in Nepal and turn it into a federal republic rather than head down the path of real socialist development.

These two factors -- assault from the outside, turmoil on the inside -- will combine to be the undoing of the CPN(M), I fear.

[the-red-under-the-bed]

I dont agree that the upport for th maoists has slipped because the party has embraced "bourgeois development". Support is starting to wane, but this is because the Maoists led government has been unable to bring about any real change this far. Their budget for the most part has not been implemented, which means that the land reform, literacy programs, and also development prjects havent been carried out.

And whats wrong with the Federal republic?