Shift In Maoists’ Political Line
Yuba Nath Lamsal
Barely six months after the much-vaunted Palungtar Plenum, the UCPN-Maoist has once again taken a U-turn in the party’s political line, and also changing the equation within the party. The new debate started after Chairman Prachanda temporarily suspended the party’s political line of popular revolt and proposed a plan of action to focus on peace and the constitution.
Peace and constitution
While Vice-chairman Baburam Bhattarai, despite reservations on certain issues, has hailed Prachanda’s new proposal as a positive and more pragmatic one in view of the present domestic political situation and international scenario, senior Vice-chairperson Mohan Vaidya is critical of the new proposal and has dubbed it as national capitulation and deviation from the revolutionary spirit.
Vaidya and his team have maintained that the central committee cannot override the decision of the plenum and have demanded either another plenum or national congress of the party to decide this issue. However, Prachanda and his supporters within the party have defended his line, citing it as a temporary plan until the new constitution is written and promulgated.
In fact, the Palungtar plenum had kicked off a massive debate on the party’s political line in the party’s greatest gathering of more than 5,000 delegates. In the plenum, three different political lines were proposed by three senior-most leaders of the party, including Chairman Prachanda, Vice-chairperson duo Mohan Vaidya and Baburam Bhattarai.
Prachanda and Vaidya’s views were identical on most of the issues except on the issue concerning the analysis of history. Both of them had advocated popular insurrection to overthrow the regime and capture state power. However, they had not completely rejected peace and the constitution. Their conclusion was that the domestic and external reactionaries would not allow the constitution to be promulgated or conclude the peace process, and thus a mass revolt was necessary in order to foil the reactionary conspiracy against the people and the party.
On the issue concerning the party’s principal enemy, Vaidya and Prachanda had stood together, concluding that India was the principal enemy as, according to them, New Delhi was colluding with the domestic reactionaries against the Nepalese people and the Maoists.
Baburam Bhattarai’s position was different. Although he also did not reject the need of a mass revolt, he advocated that the time was not ripe for it. According to him, this was the time to concentrate on peace and the constitution and that a revolt would be necessary only when the efforts for peace and the constitution fail. On the issue of the principal enemy, he pointed at the domestic reactionaries and compradors who are the fundamental stumbling blocks in the country’s political and economic transformation,
There was fierce debate on these three proposals, but no decision was taken at the plenum, and the central committee was entrusted with the task to take a proper decision in accordance with the spirit of the Palungtar plenum.
In the central committee meeting held soon after the Palungtar plenum, Vaidya and Prachanda stood together, and their political line of mass insurrection was adopted, while some of the Baburam supporters registered their note of dissent.
Even though the political line of a mass revolt was adopted, it was never put to test or implementation. In the last five months, everything has been done on an ad hoc basis. But with the deadline for the promulgation of the constitution fast approaching, Chairman Prachanda all of a sudden brought a new proposal in the politburo meeting, temporarily suspending the political line of mass insurrection. Prachanda’s new proposal focussing on peace and the constitution is akin to what Baburam had been advocating.
The politburo was unable to take any decision on this issue, and was, therefore, sent to the central committee for a decision. The new political line has changed the earlier equation in the party. Earlier, Prachanda was closer with Vaidya. But the new development has brought Prachanda closer to Baburam, alienating Vaidya and his group.
Equations have often changed in the Maoist party based on the political line being adopted by the party. Once in the past, the party had taken action against Baburam Bhattarai and some of his supporters for advocating peaceful partnership with the parliamentary parties against the monarchy. However, the situation took a new turn soon after Gyanendra Shah took over absolute power, marginalising the parliamentary parties.
Analysing the new situation, the famous Chunbang meeting not only withdrew the action against Baburam Bhattarai but also brought Prachanda together with Baburam. The Chunbang meeting adopted a new tactical line which remained at work until the Constituent Assembly election. The equation again changed at the Kharipati conclave that brought Prachanda and Vaidya closer until recently.
Prachanda’s new proposal has come taking into consideration the people’s aspiration and wish of the international community. If the Maoists go for a mass revolt immediately, it may send a negative message to the people as well as the international community that the Maoists are not serious about peace and the constitution. The other political parties, mainly the Nepali Congress, the CPN-UML and Madhesi parties, are constantly accusing the Maoists of not being serious about peace and the constitution.
Even if the party decides to go for an insurrection, can the revolt be successful? What will happen if the revolt fails like the indefinite general strike called by the party that had to be withdrawn after six days under mounting pressure from the people and the international community?
People have the right to revolt if the regime and parties do not act in conformity with the will and aspiration of the people. But the parties and leaders must feel the pulse of the people. But is this the time for a revolt? The country is in a mess due to political instability and uncertainty. The political instability and uncertainty have given rise to insecurity, poor law and order, high inflation and low productivity, massive unemployment, poverty, discrimination, economic disparity, scarcity, communal feelings, regionalism, among many others. These evils have to be fought and controlled in time for which political stability and peace are necessary.
Political instability can be ensured only when the ongoing peace process is concluded at the earliest by promulgating the new constitution and resolving all other outstanding issues. The people and the international community are watching cautiously and curiously the activities and role of the political parties at this crucial moment.
Any efforts to derail and delay the constitution-writing and peace process will be taken by the people as a move to sabotage the achievements of Jana Andolan II. Thus, the parties must show the people and the international community that they are serious and sincere about peace and the constitution. Prachanda’s new proposal may have come under these circumstances and compulsion.
In fact, the present political process that began four years ago is the agenda of the Maoists. The Constituent Assembly election, republican set up, federalism and inclusive democracy were initially the agenda of the Maoists which were later accepted by the other parties. If the constitution is not written and the peace process not concluded, these agenda would fail. In such an eventuality, the entire political process and exercises of the last four years would be defeated. Moreover, Prachanda may have understood the mood of the people and the situation both at home and abroad.
Debate and discussion make a political party more democratic and vibrant. So the current debate in the Maoist party is natural. The party is, thus, expected to come up with more commitment and seriousness to complete the ongoing political and peace process.
Onus
The UCPN-M is not only the largest party but a key constituent of the present coalition government. The people have placed high hopes on this party, which was demonstrated in the Constituent Assembly election. Being the largest political force of the country, the onus lies more on the Maoists to complete the present political process.
The author can be reached at: yubanath@wlink.com.np
Barely six months after the much-vaunted Palungtar Plenum, the UCPN-Maoist has once again taken a U-turn in the party’s political line, and also changing the equation within the party. The new debate started after Chairman Prachanda temporarily suspended the party’s political line of popular revolt and proposed a plan of action to focus on peace and the constitution.
Peace and constitution
While Vice-chairman Baburam Bhattarai, despite reservations on certain issues, has hailed Prachanda’s new proposal as a positive and more pragmatic one in view of the present domestic political situation and international scenario, senior Vice-chairperson Mohan Vaidya is critical of the new proposal and has dubbed it as national capitulation and deviation from the revolutionary spirit.
Vaidya and his team have maintained that the central committee cannot override the decision of the plenum and have demanded either another plenum or national congress of the party to decide this issue. However, Prachanda and his supporters within the party have defended his line, citing it as a temporary plan until the new constitution is written and promulgated.
In fact, the Palungtar plenum had kicked off a massive debate on the party’s political line in the party’s greatest gathering of more than 5,000 delegates. In the plenum, three different political lines were proposed by three senior-most leaders of the party, including Chairman Prachanda, Vice-chairperson duo Mohan Vaidya and Baburam Bhattarai.
Prachanda and Vaidya’s views were identical on most of the issues except on the issue concerning the analysis of history. Both of them had advocated popular insurrection to overthrow the regime and capture state power. However, they had not completely rejected peace and the constitution. Their conclusion was that the domestic and external reactionaries would not allow the constitution to be promulgated or conclude the peace process, and thus a mass revolt was necessary in order to foil the reactionary conspiracy against the people and the party.
On the issue concerning the party’s principal enemy, Vaidya and Prachanda had stood together, concluding that India was the principal enemy as, according to them, New Delhi was colluding with the domestic reactionaries against the Nepalese people and the Maoists.
Baburam Bhattarai’s position was different. Although he also did not reject the need of a mass revolt, he advocated that the time was not ripe for it. According to him, this was the time to concentrate on peace and the constitution and that a revolt would be necessary only when the efforts for peace and the constitution fail. On the issue of the principal enemy, he pointed at the domestic reactionaries and compradors who are the fundamental stumbling blocks in the country’s political and economic transformation,
There was fierce debate on these three proposals, but no decision was taken at the plenum, and the central committee was entrusted with the task to take a proper decision in accordance with the spirit of the Palungtar plenum.
In the central committee meeting held soon after the Palungtar plenum, Vaidya and Prachanda stood together, and their political line of mass insurrection was adopted, while some of the Baburam supporters registered their note of dissent.
Even though the political line of a mass revolt was adopted, it was never put to test or implementation. In the last five months, everything has been done on an ad hoc basis. But with the deadline for the promulgation of the constitution fast approaching, Chairman Prachanda all of a sudden brought a new proposal in the politburo meeting, temporarily suspending the political line of mass insurrection. Prachanda’s new proposal focussing on peace and the constitution is akin to what Baburam had been advocating.
The politburo was unable to take any decision on this issue, and was, therefore, sent to the central committee for a decision. The new political line has changed the earlier equation in the party. Earlier, Prachanda was closer with Vaidya. But the new development has brought Prachanda closer to Baburam, alienating Vaidya and his group.
Equations have often changed in the Maoist party based on the political line being adopted by the party. Once in the past, the party had taken action against Baburam Bhattarai and some of his supporters for advocating peaceful partnership with the parliamentary parties against the monarchy. However, the situation took a new turn soon after Gyanendra Shah took over absolute power, marginalising the parliamentary parties.
Analysing the new situation, the famous Chunbang meeting not only withdrew the action against Baburam Bhattarai but also brought Prachanda together with Baburam. The Chunbang meeting adopted a new tactical line which remained at work until the Constituent Assembly election. The equation again changed at the Kharipati conclave that brought Prachanda and Vaidya closer until recently.
Prachanda’s new proposal has come taking into consideration the people’s aspiration and wish of the international community. If the Maoists go for a mass revolt immediately, it may send a negative message to the people as well as the international community that the Maoists are not serious about peace and the constitution. The other political parties, mainly the Nepali Congress, the CPN-UML and Madhesi parties, are constantly accusing the Maoists of not being serious about peace and the constitution.
Even if the party decides to go for an insurrection, can the revolt be successful? What will happen if the revolt fails like the indefinite general strike called by the party that had to be withdrawn after six days under mounting pressure from the people and the international community?
People have the right to revolt if the regime and parties do not act in conformity with the will and aspiration of the people. But the parties and leaders must feel the pulse of the people. But is this the time for a revolt? The country is in a mess due to political instability and uncertainty. The political instability and uncertainty have given rise to insecurity, poor law and order, high inflation and low productivity, massive unemployment, poverty, discrimination, economic disparity, scarcity, communal feelings, regionalism, among many others. These evils have to be fought and controlled in time for which political stability and peace are necessary.
Political instability can be ensured only when the ongoing peace process is concluded at the earliest by promulgating the new constitution and resolving all other outstanding issues. The people and the international community are watching cautiously and curiously the activities and role of the political parties at this crucial moment.
Any efforts to derail and delay the constitution-writing and peace process will be taken by the people as a move to sabotage the achievements of Jana Andolan II. Thus, the parties must show the people and the international community that they are serious and sincere about peace and the constitution. Prachanda’s new proposal may have come under these circumstances and compulsion.
In fact, the present political process that began four years ago is the agenda of the Maoists. The Constituent Assembly election, republican set up, federalism and inclusive democracy were initially the agenda of the Maoists which were later accepted by the other parties. If the constitution is not written and the peace process not concluded, these agenda would fail. In such an eventuality, the entire political process and exercises of the last four years would be defeated. Moreover, Prachanda may have understood the mood of the people and the situation both at home and abroad.
Debate and discussion make a political party more democratic and vibrant. So the current debate in the Maoist party is natural. The party is, thus, expected to come up with more commitment and seriousness to complete the ongoing political and peace process.
Onus
The UCPN-M is not only the largest party but a key constituent of the present coalition government. The people have placed high hopes on this party, which was demonstrated in the Constituent Assembly election. Being the largest political force of the country, the onus lies more on the Maoists to complete the present political process.
The author can be reached at: yubanath@wlink.com.np
Comments
Post a Comment