| Username |
Post |
| ashu |
Posted
on 27-May-03 06:31 PM
One thing that has always amazed me is how well-connected Babu Ram Bhattarai, based in Nepal, is with the card-carrying members of International Left.
I mean, about two years ago, he had an article published in 'Monthly Review' -- the publication which is like "The Economist" of the International Left. Whatever you say
of BRB, you have to give him some credit for having well-known Leftist friends
around the world.
On one level, it's intellectually tempting to dismiss BRB's thoughts as plain rubbish (provided, of course, his cadres don't kill you for saying that!).
But the frightening thing -- to me anyway -- is that, going by anecdotal evidence alone, many people in Nepal seem to genuinely like the guy for his supposed simplicity, his so-called intellectual firepower, his alleged uncorruptibility, his surprsiing willingness to suppress his ego to be a soldier for Prachanda, and on and on.
Ran into Steve Mikesell the other day, who forwarded this interview to me.
I post this here to add a perspective -- with which I happen to disagree -- and to stmulate your thoughts.
Enjoy,
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
*****************
US Gvt. Interfering in Nepal Negotiations--An Interview
Wed May 7 '03
Interview with Dr. Baburam Bhattarai, negotiator and spokesman for the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) discussing the US government interference in the peace negotiations and other aspects of the seven year-old People's War in Nepal.
For the past seven years the country of Nepal has been wracked by an insurgent "People's War." The war was initiated in February 1996 in the communist-dominated Rolpa and Rukum districts in far western Nepal when the dominant landlord forces used police force to thwart the communists from participating in parliamentary and local elections.
Building on the desperate frustration borne of decades of violence against Nepal's mostly rural population in the name of "development," the war has quickly spread throughout Nepal with widespread popular support in the countryside as well as strong sympathies from urban populations frustrated with the corruption, greed, and lack of vision of the urban-based client development-regime. Starting in the "base areas" carved out in the west, the insurgents have extended their control to all the countryside, leaving just major urban areas and district headquarters in military control of the state.
From this position of strength, the insurgents this last month opened up peace negotiations with the state with the aim of bringing about major reforms and true democratization of the state. Even as these negotiations are being initiated, however, the United States government has made statements and taken actions that are undermining the possibility of reconciliation. These and other issues are discussed by Dr. Baburam Bhattarai, a central committee member of the Communist Party (Maoist), spokesman, and chief negotiator for the insurgents in an interview yesterday with an IndyMedia activist in Kathmandu. Also attached is a translation of the proposal put forward by the Maoists in the talks (a better quality translation being prepared has not yet been released).
INDYMEDIA: So how are you doing?
BHATTARAI: Talking politically or personally? [He laughs.]
INDYMEDIA: Both
BHATTARAI: Well, personally I am fine. Feeling okay, doing okay. Politically, things are very uncertain. It is a very uncertain time. Politically things are in flux. You never know what's going to happen tomorrow. So how are you doing? What's your observation?
INDYMEDIA: I see things superficially. I think that one would have to ask specific things, like what's your observations about this & maybe I should start earlier & what led to this peace dialogue?
BHATTARAI: No, you want a formal recording for this?
INDYMEDIA: It doesn't have to be formal. I can edit it down anyway, so it doesn't matter where we start.
BHATTARAI: The peace talks are an objective necessity. After seven years of People's War, we have reached a stage which determines that the old political-military parlance is at a strategic equilibrium. The old state is crumbling at such a pace that it can't survive as it is.
And we are making gradual progress, and the next stage we have to strive for is the seizure of power. For that, if the old state is ready to find a peaceful way out, then we should give peace a chance. So those are our observations. Because of the particular geo-strategic position of Nepal, there is increasing intervention from outside. If we can solve the problem internally, that will be better. In case we can't do it, then there is the next thing. That is how we thought it's time to try for a peaceful solution, because the old state, the old constitution is not functioning, and people are for a political change.
So concerning the talks, it depends how the other side responds. The signs aren't very encouraging. There is confusing interference from the US government. They have been supplying sophisticated weapons to the Royal Army, and the US government has recently listed us as terrorists. So it seems these people aren't very interested in a solution to the problem. They want to avail the problem and find a way of intervening in it.
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 27-May-03 06:32 PM
INDYMEDIA: What do you think their goal is?
BHATTARAI: We don't know what exactly they are up to, but the result of this recent declaration of the US government is disturbance of the peace process. Maybe they want to create a situation in Nepal so that they can intervene on some pretext. After the Afghanistan and Iraq aggression, they are now turning toward South Asia, and Nepal is between India and China. Maybe they want to gain a military stronghold in Nepal so that they can fulfill their strategic objectives.
INDYMEDIA: So this would be an excuse for doing it?
BHATTARAI: Yes, it seems, it seems. So this is quite unfortunate, it seems. So we expect the international community, particularly the civil society and other progressive organizations in the USA to take note of it. Whether the Nepalese people have a right to determine their own future or not. Because what we are fighting for is a completion of the democratic process.
We are not imposing an immediate communist agenda in Nepal, though we are Marx-Leninist-Maoist and we want a radical structure in our society. In the case of Nepal, since it is a semi-colonial, semi-feudal society, first we want to complete the democratic revolution. And the real power is being exercised by the absolute monarchy. And so we are making common fight with other democratic forces to complete the revolution. The US government, which claims itself to be a democratic government, should have no reason to intervene here. So I think this thing should be taken up by the international community.
I think if the US government tries to intervene here & I know that they are doing it. They just signed here one five-year agreement with this old state here on counter-insurgency operations. On that pretext they are bringing in sophisticated communication-military weapons to install here, they are supplying arms, and they are bringing in secret army men to take care of the security of the high ups here. So their ultimate goal seems to be to build up some sort of military base here in Nepal so they can use it against India and China in the future.
INDYMEDIA: Make a forward presence. And so the US government signed a five year agreement?
BHATTARAI: Yes, and they declared us terrorists, you see. When we are in the negotiation table, and the old state has removed that tag against us. If the US government declares us terrorists, that means they are out to disrupt the peace process. They are not in favor of the peace process.
INDYMEDIA: And this last weekend there has been an announcement of a new democracy movement. Has your group signed onto that or not?
BHATTARAI: You mean the parliamentary parties?
INDYMEDIA: Yes.
BHATTARAI: No, you see it is not a question of signing or not signing. You see we are already in the movement. Our movement is to complete a democratic transition. As you know we had reservations since 1990 that the democratic changes introduced in 1990 were not complete.
They were not enough. So we want to enlarge the scope of democracy to take care of the oppressed classes, the oppressed nationalities, oppressed regions, and the women, and the Dalits. Until when you have that democracy, in which we can give power to these oppressed sections of the people, then democracy doesn't mean anything for the real people. So our fight is to complete that democratic process. But these democratic parties didn't realize it. So now the king has taken whatever little power was given in 1990; he has taken it back. So now it is time that these parliamentary parties joined us and led the movement against the monarchy to complete the democratic process.
In the beginning they hesitated, they didn't do anything for the past six months. So now they are coming forward. That is welcome. So it is not a question if we joined their movement. Now they have joined our movement.
INDYMEDIA: Is this a formal thing, did they contact you or are they &
BHATTARAI: We have some understanding. The only thing is that they are not very clear as yet over what they want. They say they are fighting against the takeover by the king. But that won't be enough, you see. Until or unless you make a new constitution and go to the people to elect a constituent assembly which will draft a new democratic constitution, the democratic process cannot be complete. So their demands are not clear.
They just want to restore the status quo. But our position is that only restoring the status quo won't help now. Because under the old constitution real power was exercised by the king, so he instituted that and he has scrapped the old constitution. So now it is high time we started up fresh and drafted a new constitution which will be more democratic and which will be written by the people themselves. And they will say what to do about the king. Only then will king be brought under the constitution and within the constitutional framework. The real strength of the king is the royal army, and the royal army was never under the people's elected representatives.
So one of our basic demands is, as you well know, we want to have a round-table conference of all the major political forces, who will draft an interim constitution and make an interim government, and then we will hold an election for a constitutional assembly. And that constitutional assembly will draft a new democratic constitution. This is our immediate demand. So we want to make a common cause with those major forces who want to fight for democracy in Nepal.
INDYMEDIA: What kind of organization can you create in the population so the constituent assembly won't be co-opted and can become a real force in itself.
BR: Yea, our proposal is those parliamentary constituencies, they weren't very representative, earlier. So we want to create new parliamentary constituencies in which broader masses of the people can be representedoppressed classesand then we want to give autonomy to various nationalities and oppressed regions, so they can have their own representation in the constituent assembly. Then we want to give power to women; they should have provision of special representation in the constituent assembly.
Then the Dalits should also have their representation in the constituent assembly. And this broad representative house can draft a truly democratic constitution. So in the earlier parliamentary elections, these deprived sections and regions -- women and Dalits -- were not properly represented. So that house, parliament, was not truly democratic. So we want to change this framework of elections, so the constitutional assembly becomes very democratic, and it can make a really new democratic constitution. This is our immediate proposal.
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 27-May-03 06:33 PM
INDYMEDIA: And also along this line there have been reports of summary executions. How does that fit into a strategy, or is it people out of control or something &
BHATTARAI: No, in fact these people [the Royal Nepal Army and police] have been massacring people, shooting people under the pretext of fake encounters, which have been exposed by various human rights organizations, amnesty international, and others. In our areas, sometimes we have people's committees, we have people's courts.
Some criminals have been punished in vary rare cases. So when you have some rare cases of punishing the criminals, so they make a hue and cry of summary executions. That is not true. Most of the shooting has been done by them. The Amnesty International report says that more than eighty percent of the killing has been done by the Royal Nepal Army. And most of them were unarmed people, the general masses, not the real combatants.
INDYMEDIA: So there are always these reports that fifty Maoists, a hundred Maoists were killed. Have you had those kinds of casualties, or &
BHATTARAI: That is a fake encounter, if Maoists were killed, they should have seized weapons, but if fifty people are killed they will seize one gun, how can that be? If they had been real combatants they should have seized fifty guns, or at least forty guns. But they seize only one gun and kill fifty people. They are killing unarmed people.
INDYMEDIA: Yes, I know somebody whose cousin was killed by the military and they said this person was a Maoist. And the same with those eight or twenty workers or something &
BHATTARAI: Yea, twenty-seven workers were killed in Kalikot. They were workers engaged in construction at the airport there. They had gone from a village near Kathmandu and they were killed. The army said they were Maoists, that they had killed the Maoists. But later on human rights organizations went there and found the truth. In fact they were unarmed laborers who were killed. There are so many such incidents. So there is violation of human rights.
INDYMEDIA: In your statement you said something about you are working for a radical political solution in your declaration for the peace process. But are the negotiators and the people behind the negotiators, are they going to be able to -- I mean you said a "progressive," not radical political solution -- but even for them wouldn't even a progressive solution which lets more people into the political process, for example, wouldn't that be counter to their interests and their position in the society? The people you are negotiating with and the people behind them like the king and the US government, perhaps. Do you have much optimism for the peace process?
BHATTARAI: No willingly they are not going to relinquish power. Nobody relinquishes power voluntarily. But for that you have to apply pressure from the masses of the people. So I think there is enough pressure from the masses of the people. You see the whole countryside, most of the countryside, is liberated. And even in the urban areas there is a lot of resentment of people who want change.
Because of this pressure, we think that they will relinquish some of the power. The entire power, they won't relinquish it. But since we are negotiating a peaceful solution, we think even though they may not like to relinquish power, they will be forced by the objective conditions of the negotiating path which should lead to some progressive change.
Which is not totally revolutionary, but it should be a step towards revolution. This change would lead to a combination of democratic process and to a revolutionary change in the society. It can make a beginning for revolutionary change. It depends: if the external forces don't intervene, we think that the people's forces will be in a position to assert their power. The balance has been tipped towards the people. So that is why they are asking for foreign intervention. If we are able to prevent this foreign intervention, then there are chances for progressive change. It depends on whether we will be able to prevent that foreign intervention.
INDYMEDIA: Unfortunately I don't have your document written out before me, but just in terms of bringing democracy and bringing people into the political process, it seems pretty democratic. It is strange that the US, which always professes democracy, would be against this sort of thing.
BHATTARAI: Well it shows that these people are not in favor of democracy. When the real oppressed masses of the people are empowered, when women, Dalits, and their operational committees are asking for a democratic change, then why does the US government, which always claims to be democratic, intervene in favor of the old regime, the monarchist regime?
That's why we expect people in America, Europe and elsewhere, to apply pressure against the US government not to intervene in the democratic process in a country like ours. Because we are in no position to harm US interests, economically or otherwise, we cannot harm much after this democratic change. So we don't see much reason for intervention here apart from their strategic goal, the immediate & we don't see why the US government should intervene otherwise.
INDYMEDIA: I had one other question. Are there ways within the party that the lower down people & I mean most of the parties here are very undemocratic internally, and are there ways that within your party their can be accountability and stuff from the top down or from the bottom up?
BHATTARAI: No, as you know we are trying to learn lessons from past experiences: what happened in the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, China and other places. So there is some problem with the Communist Party there. In the course of time the Communist Party developed into a huge bureaucratic apparatus. So there are some problems.
So we are trying to make the progressive change in that structure. Consequently, the cadres, the low-level cadres should enjoy enough democracy to check that process and certainly the masses of the people, even the masses of the people & [here the recording device became full, but he told how the conditions were different here than in previous revolutions and thus the revolutionary strategy must be different. Thus the term for the revolutionary strategy has been given as the Marx-Mao-Prachanda Path. He enunciated that revolution must be a permanent process.]
http://india.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=4798&group=webcast
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 27-May-03 06:33 PM
INDYMEDIA: I think of the US strategy elsewhere, if we jump back to that question. It creates a long-term war which slowly wears down all the forces in the country, because the US has unlimited resources, relatively. I don't know what it is going to do, if it will get over-extended with its wars in Iraq, and Syria and wherever else it is planning to go. But its strategy in the past has always been to wear down any revolutionary force. And so, besides this peace process, how do you see the long-term future?
BHATTARAI: You are right. They want to wear down the revolutionary forces, as they did in the countries of Central America, like El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua and other places. We thought that they would follow that strategy. Bringing the peace process, dragging it on indefinitely, and then wear it down. We thought that, but now the way they are entering this peace process indirectly, I don't think that they are even going to follow that policy here. They just want to scuttle it, sabotage it, and I think they want to directly intervene here militarily. So we don't know their strategy, but at this stage they are following some different strategy here. They want some pretext to directly intervene so that they can station themselves permanently.
INDYMEDIA: Because I know already they have a whole string of military bases stretching all the way from the ex-Soviet Union to &
BHATTARAI: Yes, from Central Asia through Afghanistan all the way to the Philippines and other places. So this there is a definite chain encircling the whole of China and India. So this seems to be the long-term strategy of theirs. We hope the regional powers realize this, and other forces in Europe and America will realize this. It is not a question of Nepal and our revolution, only. They should think about a broader perspective.
INDYMEDIA: Well, the international capitalist is definitely thinking in a broader perspective.
BHATTARAI: Now the good thing after the Iraq war, though they have won militarily, I think morally they have lost. There is a lot of opposition against the US aggression in Iraq. I mean, people in America, Europe, and elsewhere. The way that millions of people came in the street against that war. I think that this is a very encouraging sign. So people are rising up to resist monopoly capital all over the world.
INDYMEDIA: It seems the more they overextend themselves, also the more pressure it will create from home.
BHATTARAI: So I think it is now time to fight this movement world wide.
INDYMEDIA: Okay. In the west [Nepal] you have set up a lot of base areas. In your declaration I was reading that you were saying basically that the Nepal army controls the cities and towns, but in the countryside it doesn't have a functional presence anymore.
BHATTARAI: That's the reality, that's the objective reality. Everybody knows that. All the countryside is under our control, and the Royal Army is confined to the district headquarters and the urban areas. The old state accepts this, acknowledges this.
INDYMEDIA: Since the United States' involvement, how has the situation been changing for you? Or has it yet?
BHATTARAI: It hasn't changed as yet, but if the US pumps in such good weapons and sends military advisers, which they have already done. They have said they have just sent them for training. And then the situation will change afterwards. But in our opinion, since it is a People's War, we are based on the people, the masses of the people. We are fighting a very low-intensity war. Their high technology won't make much impact on us.
I think we can fight them. But we don't want the situation to arise, because it will bring untold suffering to the masses of the people. And our country being sandwiched between India and China, again India will be tempted to intervene, again China will feel threatened, and that will be very dangerous, Nepal being caught in an international conflict which will create an unfortunate situation like Afghanistan, Cambodia or elsewhere. That is why we want a peaceful solution to the problem, without external influences.
INDYMEDIA: It seems now it would be a good strategy to enlist, like you were saying before, a lot of forces around the world in support in one way or another.
BHATTARAI: Yea, I think people should realize the long-term implications.
INDYMEDIA: And then, when you say you control the countryside, what does that mean for people in villages and so forth?
BHATTARAI: The old machinery is smashed there. We have been trying to create people's committees, new people's committees. So they are exercising real power at the local level. So they are carrying out various development activities, like education, health, and other cooperative activities like in agriculture and small industries. These things we are introducing -- the cooperative system -- because most of the people in the countryside are poor peasants with very small holdings. So we are trying to introduce this cooperative system.
INDYMEDIA: And so you have a banking system too?
BHATTARAI: Yes, we have the cooperative banking.
INDYMEDIA: And what kind of government are you setting up? How is it being run.
BHATTARAI: The government is the people's committees. We hold a general gathering of all the people, and that will elect their own committee. So in that committee, there is special representation of the oppressed classes -- the women, the Dalits, and the minority nationalities. So that will be a sort of coalition type government, a multiparty, an all-party government. That type of system, a democratic system, we are introducing.
INDYMEDIA: Have you been having any type of resistance from different groups in society like high caste or things like that?
BHATTARAI: Initially there was some resistance, but now they have been overwhelmed. In the rural areas you don't find much resistance. You see there is no presence of the old state there. And the whole army has retreated to the district headquarters and the urban areas. The countryside is left to the revolutionary forces.
INDYMEDIA: But don't you have the army coming in with its helicopters and things?
BHATTARAI: No, sometimes they go. They conduct military operations. They massacre the people sometimes. After the ceasefire this has largely stopped, but sometimes they go.
INDYMEDIA: Why does the mainstream press talk a lot about Maoist violence as opposed to the &
BHATTARAI: No this is funny, you see. The mainstream press has legitimized state violence. We are resisting. Ours is a counter violence. In fact, from early days, so far they have been enjoying a monopoly on violence. Now the common people have raised arms to resist that violence and defend themselves. So the mainstream press and the world thinking which justifies violence of the old state makes some kind of hue and cry against the counter violence of the people. I think the revolutionary forces & would understand this difference.
|
| paramendra |
Posted
on 27-May-03 07:04 PM
What's wrong with this.....
our proposal is those parliamentary constituencies, they weren't very representative, earlier. So we want to create new parliamentary constituencies in which broader masses of the people can be representedoppressed classesand then we want to give autonomy to various nationalities and oppressed regions, so they can have their own representation in the constituent assembly. Then we want to give power to women; they should have provision of special representation in the constituent assembly. .................Then the Dalits should also have their representation in the constituent assembly. And this broad representative house can draft a truly democratic constitution.
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 27-May-03 08:14 PM
Paramendra,
Nothing wrong with that.
The irony is that in our political landscape, it took, of all people, the Maoists to say
those things publicly and again and again than the mainstream, supposedly representative political parties.
Still, just saying one would do this or that is NO guarantee that one would actually
do it.
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| Sadabichar |
Posted
on 27-May-03 10:31 PM
What's there in the words? It is well known fact that in Nepal the communism oriented people can talk using powerful, hard, strange words.
What really counts is: can you come down to earth and be practical?
|
| Gurl_Interrupted |
Posted
on 27-May-03 10:50 PM
"Yea, twenty-seven workers were killed in Kalikot. They were workers engaged in construction at the airport there. They had gone from a village near Kathmandu and they were killed. The army said they were Maoists, that they had killed the Maoists. But later on human rights organizations went there and found the truth. In fact they were unarmed laborers who were killed. There are so many such incidents. So there is violation of human rights."
"can you come down to earth and be practical? " Yes! sure!, y not...Time will tell.
BrB Jeu has an interesting perspective!
|
| Sadabichar |
Posted
on 27-May-03 11:00 PM
Power?
How could moists intensify their campaign from the villages? Of course, with their wisdom and intellectual thinkings. Which is the POWER. And they applied that power onto the villagers. So they have already exercised "Power" albeit a different kind. And they are power hungry as the current Govt. and the past rulers!!!
|
| Sadabichar |
Posted
on 27-May-03 11:03 PM
This is the Game!!! Hidden games are going on, of which we are not aware. This Girija never revealed the rahashye of "Great Grand Design".. probably he himself got stuck somewhere...
Remember Maoists are the participants of the game aas well... so Time will tell..
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 27-May-03 11:06 PM
You got that right. BRB seems to be quite well connected from NYC to Delhi and knows everyone and everyone knows him.
"After the Afghanistan and Iraq aggression, they are now turning toward South Asia, and Nepal is between India and China. Maybe they want to gain a military stronghold in Nepal so that they can fulfill their strategic objectives."
"So their ultimate goal seems to be to build up some sort of military base here in Nepal so they can use it against India and China in the future. "
I found some points, quite unconvincing and no different than the propoganda of all the communist movement in history. All fear, US intervention and that was quite true and a likely possibility during the Cold war because the US, the USSR and China were all exporting/promoting their systems. However, with the end of teh Cold war and with the US's acceptance and recognition of the Chinese system, its kind of hard to believe that the US would intervene in a country like Nepal, which has no strategic advantage whatsoever in the new world order. America is not going to fight India and China soon, so to say that the US is trying to establish a military base in Nepal is like saying, ye ye ye aakash khasna lagyo.. barbad bhayo! Plus, there's no reason for the US to house 70,000-100,000 of its army-men along with the most sophisticated technologies in a small strategically unimportant country like Nepal. Come on, to say, Nepal's geography allows the US to watch India and China is stretchiung too far. As I said earlier in some other thread, the US has the world's best survelience equipments and spy planes and satelites go over the Indian and Chinese airspace/area almost every week, giving the US the most accurate information of those countries' military build ups. Unless the US wants to resort back to the primitive mode of survelience with telescopes in Fulchowki danda to watch Lhasa and Delhi, the US coming to Nepal to watch China and India remains very unlikely.
"Because we are in no position to harm US interests, economically or otherwise, we cannot harm much after this democratic change. So we don't see much reason for intervention here apart from their strategic goal, the immediate & we don't see why the US government should intervene otherwise. "
A brilliant face saving strategy. The Maoists have now realized that they can't achieve anything without the US blessing, and that the US is not going to bless them unless they change their rhetoric, the Maoists now seem to have come to an agreement with the reality. They are not in a position to change their objectives and the US is not going to listen to them, or give them any importance, so the failure of the People's war looms large, and its the human tendency to blame someone for the "failure".
"Because what we are fighting for is a completion of the democratic process. "
And they will say what to do about the king. Only then will king be brought under the constitution and within the constitutional framework. The real strength of the king is the royal army, and the royal army was never under the people's elected representatives.
Thus the term for the revolutionary strategy has been given as the Marx-Mao-Prachanda Path. He enunciated that revolution must be a permanent process.]
See, this is changing the rhetoric so brilliantly that its hard for an average reader to understand and grasp what he is saying. In the above paragraphs, the statement that" we are fighting for the completion of the democratic process is saying, hey we want to come to the mainstream and we want to work along with or alongside the political parties.
Others laugh when I say that the Maoists seemed to have dropped the demand of a republcian state, but in this interview, BRB somehow in his own revolutuionary vocab has acknowledged that his party is not in a position to say anything regarding the institution of monarchy. This is a clear indication that the Maoists have come to realize that the institution of monarchy still remains a powerhouse in Nepali politics and its not as easy to do away with it as they had thought earlier.
Also, the Marx-Lenin-Mao-Prachandapath is quite confusing. The best thing for the Maoists to do now policy wise is to start a debate on the Prachandapath. What is it anyway, any idea anyone? But, what I could infer from the interview which ashu posted is that Prachandapath is somewhat a translation iof the little red book of the Maoist era China, which were full of Mao quotes and revolutionary slogans, and which called for the total transformation of the Chinese society. The result: 10 eyars of chaos!, also, the theory of "continuing revolution" is quite outdated now. Even the China put an end to the continuing revolution policy in 1984 after the spiritual cleansing campaign because economic/political reforms and continuing revolution don't go along in today's world. Actually, one thing that made the CCP take a formal party line on Mao--that he too made mistakes--was due to his "continuing revolution" policy. Revolution disrupts the progress, in many cases and when the revolution from the above is called, it gets out of control very easily. The mob, instead of fighting for what they have been asked to, create anarchy and instabilty. This is the raeson the CCP stopped with the Maoist policy of Continuing revolutions/campaigns which in the past had disastrous effect on China, for example, The 100 Flowers Campaign, the Great leap Forward, The Cultural Revolution, The Anti-Lin Biao and Anti-Confucious campaign and so on..
Also, the emergence of personality cult in the communist movements worldwide makes it hard for the system to operate smoothly because whoever is at the top, wants things to go according to his will and that just disrupts the smooth functioning of the state.
Also, if i understand correctly, the Maoists are trying to find an equilibrium between the Maoist authoritarianism and liberal democracy! Now, this question of balance, i.e, how to come up with such a system has made all the lelft scholars blank for many many years. Is there any way to say, put a cow's brain into a human skull and still hope that the preson who gets the brain transformation to act as a completely normal human? I don't think so.
|
| GP |
Posted
on 27-May-03 11:35 PM
What do you get from these two sentences:
BHATTARAI: No, you want a formal recording for this?
INDYMEDIA: It doesn't have to be formal. I can edit it down anyway, so it doesn't matter where we start.
---
should a formal and an informal statement mean differently? by a so called public figure. Or, it was a request to hide/edit if something goes wrong, as it happened when Bashir interviewed M. Jackson.
|
| isolated freak |
Posted
on 28-May-03 12:54 AM
Since, I got nothing to do as I am unable to w alk for the fifth day in a row, all i can do is visit this site and read and comment on what's being posted, if they are worthy of comments;-)
here's something about Monthly Review:
As ashu rightly said, Monthly Review is the Economist of the left , and I myself being an avid reader of the Monthly Review,--just to challenge my own thinking on many issues pertaining to todays world,--and having known quite a few people there personally, who happen to love Nepal, I wouldnt find it surprising that BRB has contacts there. One thing, that unites the folks at the MR Foundation on 27th Street, in NYC to BRB in Rolpa is their love for Nepal. No matter what, BRB is a nationalist and he has his vision for Nepal, not that we all agree with it, but we should give the guy credit for having a vision, which many of our mainstream politicians lack. However, I would be more delighted to read BRB in Monthly Review, if he stops harping the party tune all the time. Also, MR has one of the finest sets of the left writers, who are not unnecessarily critical of the Capitalist system. Their biases aside, they write some of the most thought-provoking articles. The thing that makes me read MR is that the editors, Paul Sweezy and Elen Wood and some who wish to remain anoynomous, try to minimize the biases to the maximum extent possible. The American left, especially the New York School is quite liberal and they, instead of being unnecessarily critical of Capitalist system they live in, try to work their way around. Paul Sweezy, Elen Meikins Wood and David Noble (with whom I took a class at the Harvey Mudd College in the Spring of 1998 on the commodification of instruction ) and other internationally recognized scholars such as Noam Chomsky, Immaunel Wallerstien, William Hinton and yes, the one and only late Harry Bravermans association with the Monthly Review has made the Monthly Review, truly the Economist of the American Left.
The web-version of this magazine is free for all to read. The interview of Noam Chomsky on Iraq war is quite interesting. Reading MR challenges your views, which allows you to develop critical thinking on many issues.
|
| bhenda2 |
Posted
on 28-May-03 09:14 AM
BRB lai America sanga sarai dar lagcha jasto chha...ani chainey Terrorist lai Terrorist nabhaney ke bhannu rey? Achhammaai chha...
|
| dumdum |
Posted
on 28-May-03 09:55 AM
while the humane qualities of bhattrai may turn out a zillion times worse than rumsfeld, his uncanny knack to grab the best possible opppertunity at the worst possible scenerio can hardly be disputed. while most of asia remains under close scrutny of the western world and hence makes it nigh impossible for maoists to stick to arms-hardcore militia units like LTTE are on the negotiating table now, and others like MILF may not have many options either than to follow their neapli and sri lankan counterparts-bhattrai and maoists could not have timed the current armistice better( or did they have any option?).
so bhattrai purporting that there is no role of either "imperialist" US or "expansionist" india for the current round-table talks, seemed a little impish for my liking!
yes guies he's shrewd allright...he covers every corner from US to Peru via what links only god know!.....hope he dosen't fall into his own pit( or do i?)
|
| paramendra |
Posted
on 28-May-03 01:13 PM
What exactly is happening with the "peace talks?" Any details?
|
| dumdum |
Posted
on 28-May-03 10:58 PM
nothing exactly is HAPPENING premji, its a perfect stalemate now. no apparent progress is being made and it may only be a matter of time before it breaks down or a new set of talks have to be purposed.
|
| paramendra |
Posted
on 29-May-03 08:47 AM
dumdum ---- At what point might the Maoists go back to their violent ways?
|
| oys_chill |
Posted
on 29-May-03 01:52 PM
They'll resort to violent ways as soon as PEACE IS RESTORED :)
actually not only maoists......every political party since the inception of democracy has been doing it :) so i am sure they don't want to break such tradition :)
param dai, 18 wheelers east teera aaudaina..malai ni amrika ko safari ma jana maun thiyo :P
Oys
|
| dumdum |
Posted
on 30-May-03 10:03 AM
nothing about maoists is certain parmaji...i am not even sure if they really believe they'll get what they have been asking for....constitutional assembly or republic seem a very farfetched notions....and with the resignation of PM today the complexity deepens...who will talk with whom? Will any talks be legitimate when there is no viable government? nothing is sure.
when will Maoists go back to their bloodcurdling roots? it seems very unlikely that they'll do that very soon, they just don't seem to have so much choice provided the international pressures they are under. but with the PM going, what is going inside bhattrai and prachanda's mind only god know?.....after all they are RADICALISTS and cannot always be expected to follow the logical paths
|
