Log in

View Full Version : Child soldiers Nepalese Maoists



Colonello Buendia
31st August 2008, 14:08
The new 72-page report (http://hrw.org/reports/2007/nepal0207/), �Children in the Ranks: The Maoists� Use of Child Soldiers in Nepal,� describes how the Maoists have continued using child soldiers, and even recruited more children, despite signing a Comprehensive Peace Agreement with the Nepali government on November 21. The peace agreement commits both sides to stop recruiting child soldiers.

The report, which is based on interviews with former child soldiers and Nepali and international monitors, documents how children as young as 14 served on the front lines, received weapons training, and carried out crucial military and logistical support duties for the Maoists.

�The Maoists should let the children go,� said Sam Zarifi, Asia research director at Human Rights Watch. �The peace agreement explicitly forbids the use of child soldiers, and complying with this will be a key test of the Maoists� good faith to uphold the accord.�
Nepali and international observers believe that up to 4,500 Maoist soldiers were under 18 when they were recruited to fight in a decade-long civil war that has claimed more than 13,000 lives.

The Maoists, however, have consistently denied recruiting or using child soldiers. When questioned directly by Human Rights Watch on November 18, the Maoist leader Prachanda responded by repeating the Maoists� official line: �We have never taken the policy to recruit children into our army. But in our military, they feed some children whose parents were martyred.�

Maoist commanders at the local level have responded identically, or blamed the use of child soldiers in the ranks on lack of discipline among local militias.

�Only when the Maoists, from the top leadership down to cadres on the ground, admit how many children are in their ranks and begin releasing them, can Nepalis be confident that their children will no longer be recruited for combat,� said Zarifi.

Human Rights Watch�s report (http://hrw.org/reports/2007/nepal0207/) documents how the Maoists have used a variety of techniques for recruiting children. Maoists have kidnapped individual children, have abducted large groups of children from school, and have used propaganda campaigns to attract children as �volunteers.� These practices were systematically implemented over several years and throughout areas under Maoist control.

The Maoists� practice of recruiting child soldiers, often forcibly, has caused widespread fear among Nepalis and caused many families to flee their homes.

In areas of the country under their firm control, the Maoists instituted a �one family, one child� policy that forced at least one child from each family to join the Maoists. When boys ran away or were sent away from home, young girls were recruited.

�The Maoists� use of child soldiers violates international law,� said Jo Becker, child rights advocate at Human Rights Watch. �Children under 18 should not be allowed in the ranks, regardless of whether they were recruited by force or through a propaganda campaign.�

Since the ceasefire that came into effect on May 3, no children have been involved in combat. But the Maoists continued recruiting children up to the signing of the peace agreement and, with less frequency, have continued to recruit children even afterwards.

The report also documents the failure of the Nepali government to attend to the needs of child soldiers. Until the recent ceasefire, Nepali security forces treated children accused of cooperating with the Maoists with the same brutality that they used against adults suspected of Maoist ties. The government has not yet created a system to assist child soldiers who leave Maoist forces.

Human Rights Watch called on Nepal�s major international donors � such as the United States, the European Union, India and the United Nations � to provide technical and financial assistance necessary for reintegrating former child soldiers into normal life.

�Release from the Maoists� ranks is only the first step for thousands of children who have missed out on their education or learning how to earn a living,� Becker said. �The Nepali government and international supporters have a responsibility to help these children.�

Since 2002, the Maoists have been named in three consecutive reports by the UN secretary-general to the Security Council as violating international standards prohibiting the use and recruitment of child soldiers. On February 9, a UN Security Council working group on children and armed conflict, is scheduled to consider reported violations against children by all parties to Nepal�s armed conflict. The working group will make recommendations for Security Council action.

�The Security Council should make it clear to the Maoists that they must immediately end their practice of using child soldiers,� Becker said. �This would remove a source of agony for thousands of Nepali families and boost the likelihood of a lasting peace in Nepal.�

Saorsa
31st August 2008, 16:17
LOL EVIL MAOISTS :lol:

I'll post more on this tomorrow...

Abluegreen7
31st August 2008, 18:40
What ages were the Child soldiers any thing over 16 I can understand.

BobKKKindle$
31st August 2008, 19:02
What was the point of posting this article? The Maoists probably have used soldiers who were not legally permitted to participate in a conflict scenario under international law. However, the use of the term "child" is misleading and an inaccurate description of what actually took place, because according to the article the youngest soldiers were aged fourteen ("as young as fourteen") which is clearly not the same as being a child, because many teenagers are capable of making political judgements and so may have chosen to join the movement without any form of external coercion, as partially acknowledged by the article which identifies "propaganda" (which does not involve the use of physical force and could encompass a wide range of different techniques) as one of the factors which has encouraged teenagers to join the struggle. The fact that the article identifies the use of "child soldiers" as an ethical issue suggests that the authors are unable to understand the obstacles faced by the Maoists during the prolonged struggle against the powerful Nepalese state which was able to make use of loyal military forces to retain its strength. This "violation" of international law does not diminish the fact that the victory of the Maoists is a progressive event which should be celebrated by communists throughout the world, because it has allowed for the abolition of a corrupt monarchy which previously exercised a hegemony on political activity, and the recent election success of the CPN(M) shows that the Maoists have the support of the masses, and will also enable further reforms which should improve the conditions of the working masses, who are currently subject to intense poverty and social oppression due to the severe lack of economic development which can be observed in Nepal.

This thread is an example of the idealistic position of so many members on this forum. Instead of trying to search for every possible mistake committed by revolutionary movements struggling against oppression in the developing world, communists should defend these movements and recognise that any attempt to construct socialism will always encounter problems which cannot be avoided despite the best efforts of the revolutionary leadership.

bleedingheart
31st August 2008, 19:25
Good article.:) Goes on to show that Maoists believe that the end justifies the means, very similar to the imperialist mindset, ironically. But then again, using children for labor, war, and such activities isn't uncommon in the TW. Children need love:cool:, not guns.

BobKKKindle$
31st August 2008, 19:38
Goes on to show that Maoists believe that the end justifies the means,This is not an exclusively Maoist position, anyone with a basic understanding of what it means to struggle against the power of the bourgeois state, and construct socialism should recognize that it is sometimes necessary to ignore absolute moral principles (such as the idea that there is a "right" to life so it is never acceptable to kill someone) in favor of a utilitarian system of ethics which evaluates actions based on whether they are useful in pursuit of a final objective, which, in the case of the Maoist struggle, was the overthrow of the Nepalese monarchy. Lenin's decision to order the execution of the entire Tsarist family is a comparable example which demonstrates the importance of maintaining a pragmatic outlook in a revolutionary situation, because if the reactionary forces had been allowed to capture even one member of the royal family, the different competing factions which were all opposed to the revolution may have united around a symbolic leader. A failure to recognize this necessity will lead to the elimination of any revolutionary movement, because, despite the prominence of "rights" in bourgeois political discourse, when the power of the bourgeoisie is threatened by the armed proletariat, the bourgeoisie will resort to any means to preserve its social position, as shown by the victory of fascism in Germany.


Children need love, not guns. How does this immature slogan (which sounds like something you'd read on the side of a coffee cup) add anything to the thread? Guns are necessary to overthrow the bourgeois social order and establish the dictatorship of the working masses, and simply sitting back and talking about how we need to show "love" won't overcome the crushing system of dependency which has obstructed national economic development.

Winter
31st August 2008, 19:39
This thread is an example of the idealistic position of so many members on this forum. Instead of trying to search for every possible mistake committed by revolutionary movements struggling against oppression the developing world, communists should defend these movements and recognise that any attempt to construct socialism will always encounter problems which cannot be avoided despite the best efforts of the revolutionary leadership.

Great post Bobkindles.

I have noticed for quite some time that there is a huge onslaught on anything Maoist around here. The fact of the matter is that these "child" soldiers were being used by the monarchy as well. We need to take into consideration that this society is very different from where we live. This is a society where teen-agers and even children are considered mature at ages we in the west would consider too young.

Nitpicking at successful revolutionary movements is the most counter-productive thing we can be doing. Progress is coming about in Nepal and we should support it.

#FF0000
31st August 2008, 23:30
The child soldiers bit doesn't bother me. At 14-15, I think a teenager can make a decision on whether or not they want to get shot at. Hell, I wanted to go out and learn Spanish so I could volunteer with the EZLN when I was 15. I'm curious, though, about why people are ignoring the whole "Kidnapping" bit.

spartan
1st September 2008, 00:56
If the children in question are teenagers then I don't see a problem with that (though I do have a problem if they have been forced against their will to fight).

If the children are any younger then 13 then I think that this is wrong and should be criticised.

It's funny though with some of the responses to this article, we all argue against child labour but when it comes to children being used as soldiers by a bunch of so-called maoists (who have stated that they aren't going to overthrow capitalism) we all start slandering this article and defending this practice.

Why?

Dros
1st September 2008, 01:59
I have no problem with children voluntarily participating in a leftist army or resistance.

This article is bullshit anti-communism.

Rawthentic
1st September 2008, 02:33
Bob Kindles:

I also appreciate your post. It is clear that you do have a clearer, materialist understanding of what is happening in nepal, despite doctrinal differences. This is the sort of thing I wish others who call themselves communists would take up. I dont mean to uncritically cheerlead the maoists, but to understand, as bob does, what is actually happening and why.

Thanks.

ontheleftneil
1st September 2008, 04:45
Good article.:) Goes on to show that Maoists believe that the end justifies the means, very similar to the imperialist mindset, ironically. But then again, using children for labor, war, and such activities isn't uncommon in the TW. Children need love:cool:, not guns.

Couldn't agree more. Let kids be kids.

#FF0000
1st September 2008, 05:35
Sorry, but the imperialist bourgeois don't, they use kids in countries as cheap labor to gather superprofits. I applaud any teenager who is willing to take up arms against the armies of the Exploiter.

I agree with this. If a teenager wants to get involved in an armed struggle, then by all means.

I'm still waiting for people to address the whole part about how so many of them have been abducted to fight, though.

spartan
1st September 2008, 05:50
I agree with this. If a teenager wants to get involved in an armed struggle, then by all means.

I'm still waiting for people to address the whole part about how so many of them have been abducted to fight, though.
And I am just waiting for someone to come in and call that part of the story "bourgeois propaganda" as per usual.:lol:

Edit: Thats a joke people.

RedHal
1st September 2008, 06:31
If the children in question are teenagers then I don't see a problem with that (though I do have a problem if they have been forced against their will to fight).

If the children are any younger then 13 then I think that this is wrong and should be criticised.

It's funny though with some of the responses to this article, we all argue against child labour but when it comes to children being used as soldiers by a bunch of so-called maoists (who have stated that they aren't going to overthrow capitalism) we all start slandering this article and defending this practice.

Why?

Because child labor is slavery, unless you're going to argue, like cappies, that they have free choice as to either work or have him/herself and his family starve to death.

If these kids chose to join the maoist army for a revolutionary cause, I don't see any problem with that.

No one here is going to agree that kidnapping and forcing them to fight is right, if these reports are actually true.

RedHal
1st September 2008, 06:32
Couldn't agree more. Let kids be kids.

you and bleedingheartliberal go watch a disney film.

OI OI OI
1st September 2008, 15:33
I hate when posters here get shocked with this capitalist bullshit .
C'mon guys most of you are less than 18 or you were leftists since 16 or wtv.
If there was a conflict in your country wouldn't you fight on the side of the communists? So stop whining about the evil Maoists who make children fight.
FFS!

Yes we can act as shocked petit bourgeois kiddos but we can understand the sacrifice of teenagers for their cause and see how lucky/unlucky they are that they are fighting against the system while we are on the computer arguing about trivialities and going to meetings with our sects.

bleedingheart
1st September 2008, 18:22
you and bleedingheartliberal go watch a disney film.

Any recommendations?:p