Results 1 to 20 of 102
Prachanda, leader of the Maoists in Nepal, agrees to join an interim government.
I just heard a small blurb about this, I didn't know if anyone had any solid news about it. OR if any one wnated to share their view point of the Rebels.
Well he stuck to his word, Prachanda said when he started the revolution that all they wanted was a end to the monarchy.
If anything this shows that he is a man of his word, and will be admired more by the people of Nepal, I can see Nepal being a true success story.
Yeah, I was just going to start a thread on this.
If you were under the illusion the Communist Party of Nepal(Maoist) represented some kind of revolutionary force, this agreement to join a coalition government with the capitalists would be a total sellout.
In reality, it's a positive step forward towards a negotiated settlement of a bloody civil war. Which helps clear the way for further steps forward by working people in the aftermath of the massive wave of popular protests which swept away the absolute monarchy regime recently.
The overall pattern in recent weeks includes: significant steps forward by the government, under popular pressure. (Control of army transferred from monarch to parliamentary government; Nepal declared a secular state, etc.) Agreement by the government to most of the Maoists' stated demands, like a constituent assembly. Rapid progress of the negotiations. This latest deal on the interim government is a good example.
The Nepalese Army (formerly Royal Nepalese Army) is going along with everything so far, even saying a merger of the two armies would be possible.
Anyway, news:
BBC: Maoists to join Nepal government
Text of the 8-point agreement on setting up the interim government
Kantipur is a good Nepali newspaper, BTW; probably the most pro-democracy of the major papers there.
The bloodshed and intimidation by the official and Maoist armies has tended to drive working people out of politics; the end of the war would do the opposite.
This may be already starting to happen:
Reuters: Fear starts to lift in rural Nepal after peace deal
Ram Kumar Jaisawal says the people of his tiny village on Nepal's baking southern plains would never have had the courage to speak out against Maoist rebels a few days ago.
But after a landmark peace deal between the government and rebels on Friday, the people of Maoist-dominated rural Nepal might gradually be finding their voices again.
Shortly after news of the deal filtered through, dozens of men and women gathered in a grove of mango trees in Betahani to protest against the Maoists and a commander who they say is intimidating them and extorting money.
"There is tremendous fear," said 50-year-old farmer Jaisawal. "But since there is some unity between the government and the Maoists, now we think we can speak to the party and be heard."
.....
"When they hold meetings, they come with a big stick and say you must attend or pay us money," said a farmer from Ramawapur village on the fertile Terai plains, bordering India. "When there is voting, people will vote for them out of fear."
.....
"Until they deposit their weapons, we will be scared of them," said the farmer, sitting on a rope bed outside his home, which had an ornately carved door but no electricity. Reluctant to give his name, he said he would not have spoken out at all before the ceasefire.
It's no suprise. I mean who ever believed that Prachanda was an actual communist? He's just a bourgeois revolutionary who wanted to end the Monarchy(= Feudalism) so a democratic-republic hence capitalism, could be established more properly.
The thing is that the monarchy hasn't even been totally abolished yey since the PM stopped this from happening.
This isn't really surprising at all as Prachanda has always talked about multi-party democracy and never ruled out the Maoists rejoining the system. If the Maoists disarm, then they will be fully reintegrated into the parliamentary system. I don't see how Prachanda hopes to establish his socialist state after multi-party democracy.
You mean, his Nepal Rouge / Shining Path state? He doesn't, but neither is there any realistic prospect of doing so any other way. That's why they made the deal with the 7 parties, and why the negotiations are continuing to advance.
They do hope to become a substantial parliamentary party, I think. The difficulty is, how realistic is that, with the popular resentment of their terrorism? Hard to say: in the vacuum caused by the lack of a revolutionary party, some people may continue to support the CPN(Maoist) as the most radical-seeming alternative.
Because of this uncertainty, elements of the CPN(Maoist) will probably try to drag their feet in negotiations, retain their weapons and ability to intimidate the peasants to vote for them, etc. Since they may doubt that they can remain a significant force otherwise....which implies certain material personal interests for cadres.
I wouldn't say that the Maoists have caved in. More like they're probably low on arms and are taking advantage of the fact that the Nepalese government shits itself in fear of the Maoists.
"We are now becoming a mass party all at once, changing abruptly to an open organisation, and it is inevitable that we shall be joined by many who are inconsistent (from the Marxist standpoint), perhaps we shall be joined even by some Christian elements, and even by some mystics. We have sound stomachs and we are rock-like Marxists. We shall digest those inconsistent elements. Freedom of thought and freedom of criticism within the Party will never make us forget about the freedom of organising people into those voluntary associations known as parties."
--Lenin
Socialist Party (Debs Tendency)
What are the two armies?
The Nepalese Army and..?
If they had faith in me and my motives, they wouldn't need a union
Starbucks Chairman Howard Schultz
Ah. They "shit themselves in fear" over an organisation which is "probably low on arms"? Congrats on contradicting yourself within one sentence.
In reality, the military situation is hopelessly stalemated, due to the essential nature of guerilla warfare and the Nepal Rouge's inability to move on to anything else. This was an essential condition for the opposition-Maoist alliance and everything else that's happened recently.
As far back as February, in this interview with Prachandra, he was not expressing any hope for an outright military victory, but pinning everything on the alliance with the opposition parties.
See also my comments, and quotes from Maoists, in this February thread. Pretty good predictions if I say so myself.
Loyalty in-itself can be nearly as powerful as arms.
I agree. Guerrilla warfare without urban insurrection is a failure.
"We are now becoming a mass party all at once, changing abruptly to an open organisation, and it is inevitable that we shall be joined by many who are inconsistent (from the Marxist standpoint), perhaps we shall be joined even by some Christian elements, and even by some mystics. We have sound stomachs and we are rock-like Marxists. We shall digest those inconsistent elements. Freedom of thought and freedom of criticism within the Party will never make us forget about the freedom of organising people into those voluntary associations known as parties."
--Lenin
Socialist Party (Debs Tendency)
The Maoists' army, of course.
Severian is right. Even Prachanda showed doubts about a military takeover. That's why the 7 party alliance was needed but he didn't really pin everything on the alliance if I remember correctly. More or less, he continued to pin his hopes on the people.
But there has been urban violence and protests.
I'm simply confused on whether Prachanda hopes that a multi-party democracy will evolve into a socialist state or whether he plans to actually take over militarily and establish a socialist state.
Prachanda never "caved in!!!" jesus christ!Originally posted by CCCPneubauten@Jun 19 2006, 03:07 AM
Prachanda, leader of the Maoists in Nepal, agrees to join an interim government.
I just heard a small blurb about this, I didn't know if anyone had any solid news about it. OR if any one wnated to share their view point of the Rebels.
This stage of the revolution is New Democratic!!! It is supposed to abolish fuedalism. Class war comes next.
See Chinese history.
Revolutions in fuedal or semi-fuedal countries must follow the following stages of revolution of revolution:
New Democratic Revolution -> Socialist Revolution -> Cultural Revolution Until Communism.
The Maoist have already won a military victory. The government army can only move freely in 3 regions in Nepal. The government army hasn't won a major battle for a long time. Basically the Maoist have won the military vitory. Now if they are going to win the political victory and secure the future of socialsim in Nepal they need to build Nepal into a strong country, they need the new democratic revolution.
The Maoist have the reactionaries surrounded, they have no where to go and it is only time till the progressive forces gain a political vitory in the cities.
The spiritual atom bomb which the revolutionary people possess is a far more powerful and useful weapon than the physical atom bomb. - Lin Biao
Our code of morals is our revolution. What saves our revolution, what helps our revolution, what protects our revolution is right, is very right and very honourable and very noble and very beautiful, because our revolution means justice
- Dr. George Habash, founder of the PFLP.
Um.. Wow.Code:Prachanda never "caved in!!!" jesus christ! This stage of the revolution is New Democratic!!! It is supposed to abolish fuedalism. Class war comes next. See Chinese history. Revolutions in fuedal or semi-fuedal countries must follow the following stages of revolution of revolution: New Democratic Revolution -> Socialist Revolution -> Cultural Revolution Until Communism.
This is probably the dumbest, most mechanical interpretation of Historical Materialism I have ever heard.
Today the Trotskyites have a right to accuse those who once howled along with the wolves. Let them not forget, however, that they had the enormous advantage over us of having a coherent political system capable of replacing Stalinism. They had something to cling to in the midst of their profound distress at seeing the revolution betrayed. They did not "confess," for they knew that their confession would serve neither the party nor socialism.
- Leopold Trepper (Organizer of Soviet spy ring, Red Orchestra)
Why don't you explain.
The spiritual atom bomb which the revolutionary people possess is a far more powerful and useful weapon than the physical atom bomb. - Lin Biao
Our code of morals is our revolution. What saves our revolution, what helps our revolution, what protects our revolution is right, is very right and very honourable and very noble and very beautiful, because our revolution means justice
- Dr. George Habash, founder of the PFLP.
That's true, but when did the New Democratic Revolution happen in China?Originally posted by Red Heretic+Jun 20 2006, 06:42 AM--> (Red Heretic @ Jun 20 2006, 06:42 AM)Prachanda never "caved in!!!" jesus christ!@Jun 19 2006, 03:07 AM
Prachanda, leader of the Maoists in Nepal, agrees to join an interim government.
I just heard a small blurb about this, I didn't know if anyone had any solid news about it. OR if any one wnated to share their view point of the Rebels.
This stage of the revolution is New Democratic!!! It is supposed to abolish fuedalism. Class war comes next.
See Chinese history.
Revolutions in fuedal or semi-fuedal countries must follow the following stages of revolution of revolution:
New Democratic Revolution -> Socialist Revolution -> Cultural Revolution Until Communism. [/b]
I am pretty ignorant of the history of the area, care to suggest any books?
The rampant armchair quarterbacking here really makes me chortle. I know ya'll don't believe in "Statism" but let's look at the situation realistically for a moment.
(First thing, stop trying to predict the future. Last I checked, clairovoyance was yet to be proven.)
Joining the provisional government gives the CPNM huge influence over the drawing of the next constitution, which is sole purpose of the provisional government. The purpose of the constitiution is to create a framework for a republican government and embark on democratic bourgie revolution - which has yet to happen in Nepal. (Trots: think of 'Transitional Program', sorta.)
It's a massive win the US and other imperialists fought tooth and nail to avoid.
Second, I trust journos and political analysis on the ground in Nepal far more than the SWP's decripiit "analysis" compiled from that oh-so-heady mix of Internet news articles and Barnes' comically sectarian brand of antiquated Trot dogma. Newsflash: Your precious urban insurrection already happened, it's what forced the king to finally relenquish control.
Prachanda hasn't caved into anybody. The CPNM is virtually dragging the SPA every step of the way. Hell the CPNM can barely keep up with the masses at this point.
Finally, just READ this interview:
http://kantipuronline.com/interview.php?&nid=77214INTERVIEW WITH PRACHANDA
Excerpts of a recent interview with Chairman of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), Prachanda alias Pushpa Kamal Dahal:
Q. Which name do you prefer to be addressed by- Chairman, Prachanda or Puspa Kamal Dahal?
Prachanda: I prefer Chairman and Prachanda. The name Puspa Kamal Dahal represents a certain culture while the name Prachanda represents a feeling and ideology that intends to take the whole country forward independently. Therefore, I want that all of my friends and the Nepali people recognise me with the name Prachanda.
Q. Your name has caused a big shake-up in the political sector. You remained underground for 25 years. Now you have abandoned the underground life and entered public life. How do you feel?
Prachanda: I had a different life before I went underground. I used to teach Science in High School. I was involved in politics as well. I was a member of the Party. We boycotted the Panchayat elections of 2038 BS. Then I became totally underground. My situation after the 1990 popular movement was almost like it is today. I was open to the media and was not completely underground. A totally new process began after the start of the People's War (in 1996). Now the situation is somewhat similar to 1990.
Q. You have suddenly landed on the liberal political ground from a violent political base, especially after the 12-point understanding with the seven parties. What were the reasons behind the understanding?
Prachanda: Our political base was not that rigid. Ours is a party which had to wage a People's War for just rights despite entering Parliament. We were the third largest party in Parliament.... We lawfully tried to raise some issues- issues related to nationality, people's daily requirements and democracy- even back then. We are not rigid. What we said even after starting the People's War is that we are not communists of the traditional type. Even after the start of the People's War, we have always been ready to accept the people's verdict. We had told the government during the very first peace talks let's hold constituent assembly elections; that the solution to our problem lay there. We were never into rigid politics. We were very much wide and flexible.
Q. You took up arms for political change. Isn't that rigid?
Prachanda: To take up weapons is just a form of politics. I don't think you become rigid once you take up arms. Taking up weapons is also a form of flexibility.
Q. While talking about dialogue and sustainable peace, you once said, in a different context though, that even the king was acceptable?
Prachanda: I didn't say this in that sense. What I had said is we are ready to accept what the people decide through constituent assembly elections. We are ready to accept if the people's verdict is in favour of the king or monarchy...The situation was different when Birendra was the king. In our understanding, the relevance of king and monarchy ended after the royal palace massacre.
Q. You said the relevance is over. But you twice held talks with the governments of the same irrelevant king. What was the compulsion?
Prachanda: The relevance is over indeed. Right after the royal palace massacre, we said the institutional development of republicanism was necessary in Nepal. We are still firm and clear on this stand. As regards to the issue of talks; a war was on between two forces. The initiatives for talks had been taken to avoid further bloodshed between the two sides. It didn't mean we accepted the relevance of monarchy.... When the UML and Deuba were in power last time, we said we would hold talks with the master not with the servants. Because we thought talks would mean something only if we knew who had the real power. Enough talking was done with the parties. But nothing happened.
Q. Who first saw the need for the 12-point understanding after the king began his direct rule- you or the parties?
Prachanda: On our part, we had seen the historic importance of the unity between our party and the parliamentary parties right after the royal palace massacre. But the seven parties didn't listen to us. We had said also in the Siliguri (India) meeting that a working unity was needed between the parties and us. On their part, the seven parties, too, couldn't do much for the people in the democratic period. The parliamentary parties were so much indulged in their power games that they could not grasp what we were trying to say, or let's say we could not make them understand properly. Their situation was totally different after February 1, 2005. Then the seven parties came and we signed the 12-point understanding.
Q. Had any international power pushed you or the seven parties towards each other?
Prachanda: It's both. If you talk negatively, Gyanendra pushed us towards each other. His negative actions pushed us towards each other. I doubt if this change would have come, hadn't some international powers, mainly India, urged us (Maoists and parties) to "do something" jointly. Had the seven parties somebody who could think independently, the country would have been different right after the royal palace massacre. The country would not have suffered this much, had there been leaders who could think for themselves. This time, India helped the 12-point understanding in a positive way.
Q. To the seven parties?
Prachanda: Let's not say seven parties; mainly the UML and the Nepali Congress.
Q. But no understanding seems to be building between you and the UML?
Prachanda: It is building as per the need. They, too, are in the seven-party alliance, apparently. Let's say it's building. But they might be thinking that they would lose their ground if we enter peaceful politics. In our opinion, it's a narrow-minded thought. Let me tell you one thing, our talks team was in Kathmandu during the first round of talks. We were raising the issue of constituent assembly. There was a wave of encouragement among the people. The then Prime Minister Deuba was not in a position to do anything on the issue of constituent assembly. After we realised that the peace talks were going nowhere, we planned to attack Dang. After the attacks in Dang, the UML leaders became happy. May be they thought that it would be a great loss to the UML if we entered peaceful politics. But this was not on our mind. We were concerned about giving an outlet to the crisis and taking the country forward. They thought "Thank God! You saved us" when we attacked Dang.
Q. A huge shakeup took place after the 12-point understanding. The House of Representatives was restored and it took a lot of decisions. You have come out in public and look very calm and relaxed. It seems as if you are eagerly enjoying the talks. What is the truth?
Prachanda: This is not the truth. Though it looks that way, it's not like that. The 12-point understanding was reached after a lot of hard work. This is something our party had been thinking about for the past four years. Our Indian friends had contacted and talked with us before the king's coup. We were in Rolpa then. But the right environment for it was created only after Gyanendra took over on February 1. There isn't that much brainwork done by the seven parties behind the 12-point understanding. It would have been great had this understanding been built on their (seven parties'own vision. The understanding lacks depth as it was formed amidst the negative moves of Gyanendra and India's advice (to the seven parties and Maoists) to move ahead positively. We had told the seven parties when they put forward the House restoration issue that this will provide the king and monarchy a back door. Even among the seven parties, six were not in favour of House restoration. But the Nepali Congress could not give up this slogan. Girijababu could not abandon it. We knew that a design was hidden in this (House restoration) slogan...We knew this a year before the 12-point understanding was reached. We went ahead with the understanding despite knowing this. We had no other alternative to agitate the Nepali people to a new level of awareness.
Q. Dialogue with India was on while you were still in Rolpa, before the King's coup?
Prachanda: We were in direct contact. Indian friends were there. They said the House should be restored. We said House restoration had no relevance. It is our conclusion that the people have stood up now in this fashion because of the 10-year long People's War and the 12-point understanding. The people stood up under the cover of the 12-point understanding because a direct confrontation through the People's War would lead to much bloodshed. House restoration was not the people's demand. This was not even on their mind. We have taken it (House restoration) as a recurrence of what happened in 1951. Therefore the people still need to be alert.
Q. But the mass movement has stopped?
Prachanda: Rather than saying the movement stopped, let's say it was time to change its form. There was no situation for the movement to go on the way it was going. It was slightly divided as well. There was a change in the political situation.
Q. How can the talks move forward in such an artificial environment?
Prachanda: This thing is very important. We will stick to the dialogue process till the end. It is our objective that a peaceful outlet is found. But the seven-party leaders are creating an artificial environment. They are doing the opposite. Not respecting the people's feelings. We want to keep the pressure on from the ground... If the talks fail, there will definitely be an October Revolution of its own kind in Nepal. We are ready to lead that revolution.
Q. This means you are ready to wait till October?
Prachanda: What I mean, in clear words, is that if the seven parties do not understand by October, then the situation will move towards an October Revolution.
Q. How optimistic are you? Do you doubt Girija Prasad Koirala's honesty?
Prachanda: Rather than Koirala's honesty, how he will run the politics is the major thing. In my first meeting with him three years back, I had told him "You accept a republic, we will accept multiparty. Then the country will become new. Let's make a new Nepal." He had replied immediately, "Congress cannot go for a republic right now." He is still where he was three years back. He mentioned ceremonial king only yesterday. But this ceremonial thing doesn't work in Nepal. This proves how much rigid he is. This concept of a ceremonial king will not work- one, because of the army, and two, because of the king's own character.
Q. Do you personally feel that the talks will be successful?
Prachanda: I don't think the seven-party leaders are in favour of making the talks successful. And I don't think the international power centres, too, are in favour of giving Nepal and Nepalis a forward-looking exit from the current crisis by making the talks successful. To tell you directly, I haven't seen the signs for the talks to be successful. But again, the Nepali people want the talks to be successful and our party, too, wants the same. It depends on how much the people's and our party's initiatives can be taken forward. The talks will be successful if the pressure can be increased.
Q. What kind of republicanism is it that you have been talking about?
Prachanda: There shouldn't be the parliamentary republicanism, which is in practice in other countries, in Nepal. That doesn't solve the problem. There's no question of an autocracy. We need a republicanism of our own kind.
Q. You have envisioned a people's republic, no?
Prachanda: Mao Zedong's People's Republic cannot fulfill the needs of today's world. It cannot address today's political awareness appropriately. Mao said cooperative party theory; we called it competitive party theory. We have said let's move ahead from the conventional People's Republic and develop it as per the specialties of the 21st century.
Q. You do not follow the old concept of communism?
Prachanda: Definitely not. What happened without competition? In the USSR, Stalin gave no place to competition and went ahead in a monolithic way. What was the result?
Q. Let's talk about the economy. The 21st century world is a free-market world. How do you see the open market economic policy?
Prachanda: The economy should not be given a free rein in the name of a free market. We should take the middle way. Words like libralisation and globalisation are being much touted these days. But if you look at it closely, the very supporters of these theories have not implemented it in their own countries. The most powerful countries and America themselves have not implemented it. They have referred it to the poorest countries. Competition has been referred to undeveloped countries. We are against that policy. It's not right.
Q. The country's resources haven't increased. The number of mouths to feed has. In such a situation, do you think the country's development is as easy as you are saying?
Prachanda: I think development is not that difficult a thing. The main thing is what policies and plans the state adopts and what kind of programmes it brings forward for the millions of people. This is the main thing. One hundred years back, we were very much self-dependent. We were not economically weaker than others. If you compare us with many countries of the world, you will know that we are not weak. Others kept progressing and we kept going downhill. We have serious problems in the policies adopted by the state. What I think is if the state has the right programmes and vision, then there are only 200 million mouths but 400 hands. If the 400 million hands are put to work in the right way, imagine where this could take the country in 10 years.
However, we have to cut down certain things to save money. I have been saying that we do not need this 90 thousand-strong army. We can cut it down by 80 thousand. 10 thousand is enough. And then see how much capital we will have. It's not out of any personal grudge that we want to abolish the monarchy. They have amassed hundreds of billions of rupees. Imagine the kind of capital we will have if that is nationalised. Won't miracles happen if we then mobilise the 400 million hands? We can earn millions from our herbs. We have so much Yarchagumba. Let's open processing factories where it is found. Thousands will get jobs and we can earn hundreds of millions of rupees. Money will start growing there.
Q. You just mentioned about decommissioning the army. What will happen to your army?
Prachanda: The same for the Liberation Army. I have also been training them now. There is no use of increasing the number of our army, either. We don't have the status to beat the Indian or the Chinese army even with our 30 thousand and the 90 thousand-strong royal army. We don't have the status to beat anyone. You go through history; the only thing the Nepali Army has done after the Sugauli Treaty is to kill the people. We can ensure security by forming the people into a militia. If all citizens are made to undergo a five-year military training, there will be 250 million soldiers ready. Once that army is ready, even if India or China attacks, we can save the country. But even if we make a 500 thousand-strong army and keep it in barracks, it cannot fight anyone. What's the use of it?
Q. That means the management of arms and armies will not be a stumbling block on the way to a constituent assembly?
Prachanda: In my opinion, it will not and should not. If the seven-party leaders are really serious about the country, peace and development, this problem will not come. It will not come from our side. We are going to put forward this proposal. I have already talked about it. Let's cut down the armies of both sides. Let's train the people into a militia. The militia will maintain law and order. Let's keep the army only to train the people.
Q. Business people, industrialists and entrepreneurs are a little concerned about you. Their fear is if you can give them so many problems as a powerful party, you will squeeze them once in power.
Prachanda: We encourage those who want to develop industries in the country, create jobs, make profits and invest the profits in the country. We are organising a national meet of the capitalists. There, we will invite even those who disagree with us. We want that Nepal's capital does not go outside. We are clear that there will be no development in Nepal unless the capitalists can make some profit. But let that profit not be through exploitation and let it also not go abroad. We are also going to propose to the capitalists to invest where the most profit can be made. We should introduce a strict law to stop those who earn here and deposit the money in America or India.
When I read about farmers being "oppressed" by the Maoists, I think of rich Brahmin fucks crying their eyes out because they have to share with the unwashed masses.
From what I have read, they kidnap peasants so as to force them to indoctrination meetings.
If they had faith in me and my motives, they wouldn't need a union
Starbucks Chairman Howard Schultz
