UCPN-Maoist Conclave and revolutionary polarization

Yuba Nath Lamsal

The national convention of the UCPN-Maoist was recently held and concluded in Biratnagar of East Nepal with adopting a new political line and electing a new central leadership. In the conclave participated in by more than 1000 representatives, chairman Puspa Kamal Dahal ‘ Prachanda’ presented a political report concerning party’s new political line  whereas other leaders put forth organizational and other reports which were overwhelmingly adopted by the floor. In fact, there was no dissenting voice on the political report presented by party chairman Prachanda except a few suggestions for its improvement and perfection.

It had been widely believed that the UCPN-Maoist Biratnagar conclave would instill more energy and enthusiasm in the party organization so that it may revive its old glory that the party had lost in the last Constituent Assembly election. However, the national convention concluded amidst controversy and even threat from a section led by its senior leader Dr Baburam Bhattarai not to remain in any position of the party’s leadership hierarchy.  Since there was no difference on the political report and future political line and programs of the party, the last minute disputes among the senior leaders only suggests that the senior leaders are more concerned about the position than the program.

The UCPN-Maoist was definitely got weakened after a sizable section of the party broke its relation with the mother party and formed a new party called CPN-Maoist under the leadership of Mohan Vaidya ‘Kiran’. Its results were clearly seen in the Constituent Assembly election held in November last year in which the UCPN-Maoist was reduced to the status of the poor third party from the earlier largest party. It is now becoming clear that the principal leaders of both the parties are realizing the mistake of party split. Prachanda seems to have realized that he may not be able to make his party a number one political force without the unification with other parties especially the CPN-Maoist whereas Mohan Vaidya ‘ Kiran’ may have thought that his party alone  would not be able to spearhead the revolution. Thus, both the parties have clearly understood value and strength of party unity. This ground reality has compelled both the parties’ top leadership to be positive for party unity. However, there are obstacles in both the parties for the unification. There is a strong faction in the CPN-Maoist that does not want reunification with the UCPN-Maoist but wants to re-launch the armed insurgency in the same fashion the united party had launched 19 years ago. Similarly, certain sections in the UCPN-Maoist are also active not to allow unification with the CPN-Maoist. Some external forces also may be active to keep the two Maoist parties divided so that they remain weak. The UCPN-Maoist is the party that had raised the issue of nationalism so strongly in the past that helped secure popular support among the larger audience. However, the party, after joining the peace and more particularly after going to power, its patriotic stance became subdued probably because the party did not want to antagonize India as Indian influence is heavy in Nepal. This stance and position of the UCPN-Maoist proved fatal to the party as Kiran faction broke relation with the UCPN-Maoist on ideological and patriotic ground.

The political report presented by Prachanda in the Biratnagar national convention has, to a large extent, corrected its stance and position on political line and also on nationalist question. The new political line is basically continuity to that of the Hetauda national congress, which has emphasized mainly on peaceful revolution focusing on economic production. However, the Biratnagar national convention of the UCPN-Maoist has adopted twin approach of both peaceful and production-related campaign as well as preparation for the insurrection which demands use of force for the completion of socialist revolution. The political report has clearly stated that some of the important achievements of capitalist-democratic revolution have already been made and some are yet to be achieved. Those achievements include abolition of monarchy, secularism, federalism and election of Constituent Assembly to write a new constitution. It further says that these achievements need to be safeguarded and institutionalized through writing and promulgating a new constitution at the earliest and working for the preparation of socialist revolution.  For this, Prachanda has underlined the need for spearheading the movement in a Bolshevik spirit so that socialist revolution would be successful.

The political report has realized that the party had made some mistakes on issues concerning patriotic movement. It clearly admits that the party failed to pursue patriotic cause. Prachanda has openly acknowledged that the party gave of patriotic position and ignored the interest of the working class. Now Prachanda has made some improvements in the report saying that the party would not repeat such mistakes in future and remain a vanguard on question of nationalism, class interest and revolution. This has provided a new basis for unity with other revolutionary parties including Mainly the CPN-Maoist.

It has been widely believed and accepted that Nepal’s nationalist movement got weakened due mainly to the division and fragmentation of revolutionary communists. In Nepal, only the communists are nationalist forces. The other parties either pseudo nationalist or lackeys of imperialist and expansionist forces. The imperialist forces and reactionary elements both at home and abroad played role and hatched conspiracies to divide communists and weaken the communist movement. Communists always focus on national liberation movement. Ever since Communist Party of Nepal was born, it has always been focusing on freeing Nepal from external hegemony and oppression. The communist parties until recently have been defining Nepal as a semi-colonial and semi-feudal state and emphasized mainly on liberating the country from the semi-colonial and semi-feudal status. But recently, a new definition has been mooted that Nepal is no longer a semi-colonial and semi-feudal state. According to the CPN-UML, Nepal has been an independent country and not a semi-colonial one. However, the UCPN-Maoist and CPN-Maoist do not subscribe to this view and insist that Nepal still continues to be in the semi-colonial state, which needs to be liberated. The national liberation movement is, thus, its priority. In the past especially after UCPN-Maoist headed the government, it did not raise this issue very prominently and strongly for diplomatic reasons. However, the Biratnagar national convention has clearly spelled out the phrase Indian expansionism as its principal contradiction against which Nepali revolution has to be primarily directed. On the question of principal contradiction, the CPN-Maoist and UCPN-Maoist have arrived at a common point whereas they are moving closer on issue concerning ideology, as well. Now the UCPN-Maoist has taken a little more left turn and revolutionary approach, which has created positive ground for unification with revolutionary communist parties. The UCPN-Maoist document clearly states that the unification process would not be limited only to the CPN-Maoist but it would be a beginning in the process of creating a single communist center in Nepal as both the parties are founded on the fundamental principles of Marxism-Leninism and Maoism. There are quite a many communist parties, big or small, in the country and unity among them is necessary not only to form a broad progressive leftist government but also to bring about radical and progressive reforms and change. Prachanda has clearly proposed that unification with revolutionary communist parties including the revolutionary section of the CPN-UML. If realized, it may help in revolutionary polarization in Nepal. But this may not serve the real purpose if the communist unification proposition remains merely in papers. What Prachanda has proposed should be translated into action for which initiative has to be taken from all sides at the earliest with open mind and open heart putting Nepali revolution and interest of the people on top of all other agenda. Unification of two parties needs a common approach and reciprocity from both sides and one side’s intention alone may not yield results if the other side is not prepared to reciprocate. Now Prachanda has come up publicly for unification with the CPN-Maoist for which he is prepared to do everything possible. The CPN-Maoist leadership, too, need to be flexible and practical so that they would once again be reunified and lead the Nepali revolution to a greater height.