redguard2009
15th June 2009, 22:12
First, before I start out, I can already hear the detractors criticizing my use of the term "revolution" when describing the events of the past decade in Nepal.
I defend my use of this term, for I believe that the goings-on in Nepal are the revolution -- or atleast a stage of it. A small stage, perhaps; maybe an inconsquential one, but an undeniable stage in the larger movement for sure.
That said, I'm perturbed the lack of support and almost complete silence towards the situation in Nepal lately. In that embattled little country Communists are fighting a day-to-day battle to usher in a new stage of transitional revolutionary politics, a struggle which has drawn in all of the major powers of the world.
Recently, the Assistant Secretary of State of the US visited Nepal; India has for many years held vested interest in its small neighbour, and with Nepal's growing economy, trade with China and Europe have increased dramatically and the United Nations keeps a constant presence in internment camps throughout the country.
Most should know the brief history of the Nepali revolutionary struggle which has continued on since the mid-90s; how the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) (Now the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist)) engaged in a brutal, bitter fight to roll back the dictatorial presence of Nepal's ancient monarchy and pro-Western, pro-Indian bourgeois parties. The Communist struggle, or atleast struggle of those claiming to be Communists, has gone on for much longer, however. Several groups, organizations and political parties and affiliations have flown under the hammer & sickle in Nepal, including the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist) which currently holds government today.
But to wrap it up nice and short; sinec the mid-1990s the Maoists of Nepal have struggled in an often-violent confrontation with the interests of the ruling classes in Nepal, whether they be the monarchist kingdom or bourgeois political parties. In 2006 the struggle reached a high-point ideologically; the Maoists successfully managed to turn popular opinion against the monarchy to such a degree that its former enemies, the bourgeois nationalist parties, agreed to a coalition to abolish the monarchy and create a secular, republic state -- quite a feat for a country that, until recently, was viewed as a 3rd world tourist attraction, where religious doctrine dominated politics and social life.
Throughout its struggle the Maoists have afforded a great deal of popular support. At their highest point the Maoists held the influence of the majority of the country's worker's organizations; their calls for general strikes were respected and carried out with zeal, plunging the country into deadlock for days at a time as hundreds of thousands of Nepalis went on strike to support the Maoists. And in a highly controversial move the Maoists decided on a dramatic shift of tactics; for a decade their People's Army had battled Nepali nationalist forces to a near standstill, and although the Maoists held sovereignty over a large part of the country's rural interior their ability to penetrate urban centers and the majority of the Nepali population center was lacking. So, unlike so many insurrectionist movements in the past which continued fighting until complete exhaustion, the Maoists shifted goals; they would lay down their arms and, confident in their ability to deal a final blow to the bourgeois power base, decided to achieve final victory through peaceful means by demanding and then utilizing the democratic political process.
In 2006 the first general elections for Nepal's new government were held. Although the Maoists failed to win full-sweep, they surprised bourgeois analysts and politicians alike by leaving election day as the largest political party in office. Their first and foremost political move was to officially abolish the monarchy, sack the King and expel him from the country, turning his immense palace into a museum and tourist attraction. This was carried out with little opposition. But the final victory which the Maoists had hoped for remained out of reach. After months of bitter disputed between the leading Maoists and their numerous opposers -- including the Unifed Marxist-Leninist party which sided with the bourgeois parties against the Maoists on almost every single issue -- politics in Nepal became deadlocked. The Maoists did not have the political authority to bring about the sweeping changes necessary to ensure the continuation of progressive reformation; even simplistic matters of managing the Nepali Army and Presidency were met with increasing hostility from the other parties. The last straw came when the Maoist Prime Minister attempted to fire one of the Army's top Generals, a move which was rescinded by the (non-Maoist) President. At this move the Maoists quit the government.
At this stage, anything can happen. The Maoists have again begun calling general strikes; this weekend their latest completely shut down the Nepali capital of Kathmandu. Maoist leaders have issued statements hinting that a continuation of armed struggle is on the table.
For all of our minute ideological differences, it's clear for everyone to see that the struggle for revolutionary progress in Nepal is in dire need of our support. Whether or not the label "Maoist" scares or disturbs you, the fact remains that the Unified Communist Party of Nepal is struggling to carry out the progressive aims of that country's fledgling proletarian movement. In their short tenure, under constant attacks from political opponents, the Maoists managed to carry out several very important political tasks; the abolition of the monarchy; secularization of the state; enactment of equal rights for all races and genders; nationalization and development of important social and economic institutions such as schools, universities, farming, land ownership, etc. The proletarian population of Nepal has grown exponentially, whereas in 1996 when hostilities were first beginning the vast, vast majority of Nepalis lived as peasants in the countryside.
Nepal is now at an important stage which one could compare to revolutionary Russia. The Tsars have been defeated; the provisional government is impotent and incompetent, pandering to various political agendas and interests outside of those of the peasants and proletarians. It is important, as revolutionary socialists, communists and activists, for each and every one of us to engage with this movement, to discuss it, support it, criticize it, talk about it, spread awareness about it, and above all else to recognize its importance and not shrug it off as the savage inconsequential byproduct of 3rd world foreigners.
I defend my use of this term, for I believe that the goings-on in Nepal are the revolution -- or atleast a stage of it. A small stage, perhaps; maybe an inconsquential one, but an undeniable stage in the larger movement for sure.
That said, I'm perturbed the lack of support and almost complete silence towards the situation in Nepal lately. In that embattled little country Communists are fighting a day-to-day battle to usher in a new stage of transitional revolutionary politics, a struggle which has drawn in all of the major powers of the world.
Recently, the Assistant Secretary of State of the US visited Nepal; India has for many years held vested interest in its small neighbour, and with Nepal's growing economy, trade with China and Europe have increased dramatically and the United Nations keeps a constant presence in internment camps throughout the country.
Most should know the brief history of the Nepali revolutionary struggle which has continued on since the mid-90s; how the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) (Now the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist)) engaged in a brutal, bitter fight to roll back the dictatorial presence of Nepal's ancient monarchy and pro-Western, pro-Indian bourgeois parties. The Communist struggle, or atleast struggle of those claiming to be Communists, has gone on for much longer, however. Several groups, organizations and political parties and affiliations have flown under the hammer & sickle in Nepal, including the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist) which currently holds government today.
But to wrap it up nice and short; sinec the mid-1990s the Maoists of Nepal have struggled in an often-violent confrontation with the interests of the ruling classes in Nepal, whether they be the monarchist kingdom or bourgeois political parties. In 2006 the struggle reached a high-point ideologically; the Maoists successfully managed to turn popular opinion against the monarchy to such a degree that its former enemies, the bourgeois nationalist parties, agreed to a coalition to abolish the monarchy and create a secular, republic state -- quite a feat for a country that, until recently, was viewed as a 3rd world tourist attraction, where religious doctrine dominated politics and social life.
Throughout its struggle the Maoists have afforded a great deal of popular support. At their highest point the Maoists held the influence of the majority of the country's worker's organizations; their calls for general strikes were respected and carried out with zeal, plunging the country into deadlock for days at a time as hundreds of thousands of Nepalis went on strike to support the Maoists. And in a highly controversial move the Maoists decided on a dramatic shift of tactics; for a decade their People's Army had battled Nepali nationalist forces to a near standstill, and although the Maoists held sovereignty over a large part of the country's rural interior their ability to penetrate urban centers and the majority of the Nepali population center was lacking. So, unlike so many insurrectionist movements in the past which continued fighting until complete exhaustion, the Maoists shifted goals; they would lay down their arms and, confident in their ability to deal a final blow to the bourgeois power base, decided to achieve final victory through peaceful means by demanding and then utilizing the democratic political process.
In 2006 the first general elections for Nepal's new government were held. Although the Maoists failed to win full-sweep, they surprised bourgeois analysts and politicians alike by leaving election day as the largest political party in office. Their first and foremost political move was to officially abolish the monarchy, sack the King and expel him from the country, turning his immense palace into a museum and tourist attraction. This was carried out with little opposition. But the final victory which the Maoists had hoped for remained out of reach. After months of bitter disputed between the leading Maoists and their numerous opposers -- including the Unifed Marxist-Leninist party which sided with the bourgeois parties against the Maoists on almost every single issue -- politics in Nepal became deadlocked. The Maoists did not have the political authority to bring about the sweeping changes necessary to ensure the continuation of progressive reformation; even simplistic matters of managing the Nepali Army and Presidency were met with increasing hostility from the other parties. The last straw came when the Maoist Prime Minister attempted to fire one of the Army's top Generals, a move which was rescinded by the (non-Maoist) President. At this move the Maoists quit the government.
At this stage, anything can happen. The Maoists have again begun calling general strikes; this weekend their latest completely shut down the Nepali capital of Kathmandu. Maoist leaders have issued statements hinting that a continuation of armed struggle is on the table.
For all of our minute ideological differences, it's clear for everyone to see that the struggle for revolutionary progress in Nepal is in dire need of our support. Whether or not the label "Maoist" scares or disturbs you, the fact remains that the Unified Communist Party of Nepal is struggling to carry out the progressive aims of that country's fledgling proletarian movement. In their short tenure, under constant attacks from political opponents, the Maoists managed to carry out several very important political tasks; the abolition of the monarchy; secularization of the state; enactment of equal rights for all races and genders; nationalization and development of important social and economic institutions such as schools, universities, farming, land ownership, etc. The proletarian population of Nepal has grown exponentially, whereas in 1996 when hostilities were first beginning the vast, vast majority of Nepalis lived as peasants in the countryside.
Nepal is now at an important stage which one could compare to revolutionary Russia. The Tsars have been defeated; the provisional government is impotent and incompetent, pandering to various political agendas and interests outside of those of the peasants and proletarians. It is important, as revolutionary socialists, communists and activists, for each and every one of us to engage with this movement, to discuss it, support it, criticize it, talk about it, spread awareness about it, and above all else to recognize its importance and not shrug it off as the savage inconsequential byproduct of 3rd world foreigners.