A Rapidly Changing Nepal-Winter Has Its End

[RedMarxist]

link: http://kasamaproject.org/2011/09/03/important-and-urgent-funds-needed-now-for-winter-has-its-end/#more-33779




1. We are continuing to report on the rapid changes that are coming here in Nepal, including the resistance to the disarming of the revolution and the coming resurrection of the base areas in Nepal through the form of People’s Councils. We will be covering the details as revolutionaries here continue to shift and move on a new basis.
2. We are investigating the views among the people, and how different sections of society view the questions of revolution and peace. What is the social basis for consolidating capitalism, and who in this society wants a fundamental rupture with both imperialism and feudalism moving towards socialism?
3. We will be bringing reports from our investigations in Rolpa on both the history of the revolution (how it happened, what lessons to draw from it for our own uncharted road to communist revolution in the U.S.), and the state of the base areas in this current transition period.
4. We are planning a national speaking tour when we return. We need funds for continuing travel.
5. We are planning further reporting in more locations for the near future. We want to make the leap from being just a summer reporting project to a more permanent project that reports on revolution all over the world. Keep tuned.




Interesting development in Nepal(in red). Just thought I'd post this.

[RED DAVE]

link: http://kasamaproject.org/2011/09/03/important-and-urgent-funds-needed-now-for-winter-has-its-end/#more-33779

Interesting development in Nepal(in red). Just thought I'd post this.Some problems :

(1) Who is going to provide revolutionary leadership and what is the strategy? Is there going to be a return so people's war, now against the Maoist leaders of the former people's war? How are these new leaders going to distinguish themselves from the old ones?

(2) Is there going to be a turn towards the working class. The link refers to rural areas.

Remember that the people's war strategy failed. 5 years ago, because they could not defeat the army, the Maoists gave up armed struggle. Is a new round of Maoists going to try a new round of the same strategy, against the people, Prachanda, Bhattarai, etc., who developed it for Nepal?

Until the failure of the previously Maoist-led revolution and the inadequacy of Maoism as a political theory is examined, the best that can happen is a repeat of what already has happened.

RED DAVE

[RedMarxist]

that's a rather cynical outlook on things, eh?

It hasn't happened yet. They are still building up the base areas and a new army and as you can see without the UCPN the people have been forced to use 'People's Councils' as a replacement.(one wonders what exactly are these councils made up of)

I'm not sure how long it takes to rebuild an army or the base areas(months, years?), but in the coming time expect to see news stories and more WHIE and Kasama reports.

[Tommy4ever]

Are these like splinters from the UCPN? As far as I can see both of the main factions in the Maoist party want to integrate with the regular army (eventually). So to go against this people would probably have to leave that party.

[RedMarxist]

I think they are independent of the UCPN. People's Councils sound new to me-Sounds similar to the Greek assemblies or the Russian Soviets.

Basically the people seem to be taking their own initiative and launching a revolution independent of the UCPN

Now all that remains to be seen is whether or not the army and police forces of Nepal crush the revolution or not.

[Who?]

Are these like splinters from the UCPN? As far as I can see both of the main factions in the Maoist party want to integrate with the regular army (eventually). So to go against this people would probably have to leave that party.

I believe they sympathize with the Baidya faction within the UCPN. The leadership is leaning towards reformism but strong revolutionary Maoist leadership still exists. Contrary to what you and RED DAVE may think.

[RED DAVE]

that's a rather cynical outlook on things, eh?No, it's realistic based on the behavior of the leadership of the UCPN(M).


It hasn't happened yet.Unfortunately it has. The Peoples Army has been disarmed and in camps for, I believe, 6 years.


They are still building up the base areas and a new armyPlease provide evidence of this. I see nothing but rhetoric in this regard.


and as you can see without the UCPN the people have been forced to use 'People's Councils' as a replacement.(one wonders what exactly are these councils made up of)One wonders how real these People's Councils are. How many are there? Where are they organized? And what political line are they taking?


I'm not sure how long it takes to rebuild an army or the base areas(months, years?), but in the coming time expect to see news stories and more WHIE and Kasama reports.Please remember that now this army is going to be built in the presence of a government which itself is lead by Maoists. Contemplate that: Maoists trying to build a Maoist army, a tactic that has already failed, against a Maoist government with its own army.


Are these like splinters from the UCPN? As far as I can see both of the main factions in the Maoist party want to integrate with the regular army (eventually). So to go against this people would probably have to leave that party.Correct. Rhetoric aside, Kiran is not opposed to the liquidation of the PLA into the regular army. The argument is a matter of time frame. And, correct me if I'm wrong, the new opposition is not opposed to integration either. It wants to wait for the conclusion of the so-called peace process and the completion of the constitution. Please note that the constitution will be a bourgeois constitution for a bourgeois state. The so-called New Democracy is exposed for exactly what it is: Capitalist Democracy.


I think they are independent of the UCPN.Please document this. As far as I know, the People's Councils are under the control of the UCN(M).


People's Councils sound new to me-Sounds similar to the Greek assemblies or the Russian Soviets.They have little or nothing to do with the Soviets. The Soviets were revolutionary organs of working class power.


Basically the people seem to be taking their own initiative and launching a revolution independent of the UCPNThere is no indication that this is happening. One torchlight demonstration, led by a faction of the Maoist party, is a long way from a new initiative or an independent revolution. Think about the general strike of 15 months ago or so. It was hailed as the beginning of a Maoist-led New Democracy!


Now all that remains to be seen is whether or not the army and police forces of Nepal crush the revolution or not.First of all, there is no revolution. The Maoist-led revolution of the past decade is over. As to the new revolution, it is barely begun, and it is also under Maoist leadership, which means they are committed to the same politics that produced the current sell-out: the block of four classes. And, as I mentioned above, they will now have to deal with an army and police force controlled by a Maoist government which, itself, has run just such a revolution.


I believe they sympathize with the Baidya faction within the UCPN.This needs to be documented, and the meaning of the word sympathize" needs to be expanded on concretely.


The leadership is leaning towards reformismThat's like saying that someone who has already fallen on the tracks and has been hit by a train is leaning too far over. They are far beyond leaning. They have fallen.

Now, Maoists, one more time, how did that happen?


but strong revolutionary Maoist leadership still exists.That can't be asserted; it has to be demonstrated.


Contrary to what you and RED DAVE may think.The proof lies with you. Let's see it.

RED DAVE

[Tommy4ever]

I believe they sympathize with the Baidya faction within the UCPN. The leadership is leaning towards reformism but strong revolutionary Maoist leadership still exists. Contrary to what you and RED DAVE may think.

Who are they?

I am no expert on Nepal, but all I have heard of the leadership so far points to everyone agreeing to the general idea of integration.

[Labor Shall Rule]

Red Dave,

You have a very superficial understanding of the situation there. The people's war nearly succeeded in toppling Gyanendra. He stepped down because he knew the Royal National Army was low on munitions and had not made heavy preparations for a PLA excursion into Kathmandu, as a recent State Department leak (http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-09-06/news/30119019_1_nepal-king-gyanendra-wikileaks-news-royal-coup) revealed. But seeing that there was a demand for a constituent assembly and the drafting of a new constitution they chose to not force a people's democratic republic at the end of a gun.

If they had chosen to take the capital city, they would have faced a very unfavorable international situation. After the King said he would call for elections and hear recommendations for a new Prime Minister, Washington was shitting their pants. James Moriarty, the then US ambassador, had said they "cannot be allowed to win." He was also behind backing a deal Bush struck with India to increase their financial and military ties, not just to counteract Chinese influence but to threaten national liberation movements in Nepal and internally. U.S. Assistant Secretary of Central and South Asian Affairs, Richard Boucher, also said that they must "...be able to expunge the Maoists." It's no wonder that Condoleezza Rice's first reaction was to say she was working "very closely with the Indian government to resolve the crisis," as if they had a crucial role to play in Nepal's future. In all likelihood, Indian interference was likely if Prachanda and the Central Committee decided on such a move.

And no, the People's Liberation Army is not yet disbanded, and their arms and munitions are under supervision in their own camps. The conditions of the Peace Treaty are this way so that they can access them immediately if there was to be an Indonesia-like putsch by generals in the RNA.

[RedMarxist]

what do you think is going on in Nepal? Why is there little to no information on these brand new revolutionary people's councils/new base areas? what of the Baidya faction arming youth for "security?"

do you(everyone) think that a second conflict is cooking up in Nepal right now?

[RED DAVE]

Red Dave,

You have a very superficial understanding of the situation there.Let's see who's superficial.


The people's war nearly succeeded in toppling Gyanendra. He stepped down because he knew the Royal National Army was low on munitions and had not made heavy preparations for a PLA excursion into Kathmandu, as a recent State Department leak (http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-09-06/news/30119019_1_nepal-king-gyanendra-wikileaks-news-royal-coup) revealed.Okay.


But seeing that there was a demand for a constituent assembly and the drafting of a new constitution they chose to not force a people's democratic republic at the end of a gun.Translation: instead of instituting a revolutionary republic by overthrowing the existing government, they instituted a bourgeois republic by parliamentary means. There is a name for this. It's called Menshevism.


If they had chosen to take the capital city, they would have faced a very unfavorable international situation.No shit, Sherlock.


After the King said he would call for elections and hear recommendations for a new Prime Minister, Washington was shitting their pants. James Moriarty, the then US ambassador, had said they "cannot be allowed to win." He was also behind backing a deal Bush struck with India to increase their financial and military ties, not just to counteract Chinese influence but to threaten national liberation movements in Nepal and internally. U.S. Assistant Secretary of Central and South Asian Affairs, Richard Boucher, also said that they must "...be able to expunge the Maoists." It's no wonder that Condoleezza Rice's first reaction was to say she was working "very closely with the Indian government to resolve the crisis," as if they had a crucial role to play in Nepal's future. In all likelihood, Indian interference was likely if Prachanda and the Central Committee decided on such a move.So what you're saying, in essence, is instead of depending on revolution and international solidarity to defend Nepal, they Maoists chose a bourgeois republic and to wheel and deal with bourgeois powers.


And no, the People's Liberation Army is not yet disbandedThey've just been sitting in camps for six years, disarmed and doing nothing, while their leaders got in bed with the bourgeoisie to prepare for full-scale capitalism.


and their arms and munitions are under supervision in their own camps.Yes, Comrade, but under whose supervision: the UN! And, as we post, those great revolutionaries Prachanda and Bhattari, are turning that "supervision," which is actually control, over to the Nepali Army.


The conditions of the Peace Treaty are this way so that they can access them immediately if there was to be an Indonesia-like putsch by generals in the RNA.The conditions of the Peace Treaty were like that so that the Peoples Liberation Army would be disarmed, permanently.

RED DAVE