| Username |
Post |
| ashu |
Posted
on 27-Jul-03 06:52 PM
Red-faced Maobadis
by CK Lal
Another compendium that tries to pare open the layers of the insurgency.
Despite what Comrades Badal and Mahara have been saying at public fora in Kathmandu after coming above ground, the Maobadis seem desperate to rescue the talks. This for no other reason than the impatience of their field cadre. Once the rains are over, the leaders better have something concrete to show for their efforts.
Surya Bahadur Thapa knows this well, so he is prolonging the preparations for talks to suit his own political convenience. The mediators and human rights activists who met the Prachanda-Baburam duo recently in the New Delhi suburb of Noida recently know that Thapa knows, so even they will not be insisting too much on any preconditions for resumption of negotiations.
Once the third round of talks begin, government negotiators are likely to discover that their Maoist counterparts have suddenly developed extraordinary sensitivity for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country. Alas, its already too late to do much about it. If Robert Kaplans piece in the current issue of Atlantic Monthly is true, the Americans are already here.
It appears that the Maoist fears of Pax Americana were not as far fetched as Comrade Prachanda had made them sound in his bombastic press releases. In an interview (http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/interviews/int2003-06-18.htm) Kaplan brackets Nepal with Colombia and the Philippines as examples for the future of US intervention in world affairs.
Apparently, we arent going to be an Afghanistan, if that is any consolation. But then US intervention is no more just a threat, its a hard reality of hyperpower geo-politics. The safe houses of Siliguri will never be the same again. Condy Rice just needs to turn on the burner in Washington, and it will get uncomfortably hot for Maobadi commissars in New Delhi.
Its not for nothing that Mahara & Co are exhausting curses on the Americans while remaining unusually quiet about Indian expansionists. CCOMPOSA may urge the world to look at the Himalaya, as they just did after the RIM meet in Chattisgarh last week, but Maobadis know that after 9/11, South Asia will never be the same again.
For the government, the discomfiture of Maobadi leaders is a unique opportunity to lure the insurgents back into the mainstream. Instead of the usual brinkmanship of royal nominees, Thapa now needs to show vision and statesmanship. If handled properly, we might even see Maoist militia recruits heading for stabilisation duty in Iraq! The necessity of moral ambiguity is an essential component of Kaplans maxim of Supremacy by Stealth.
If we are confused today about Maoist motives, that is much truer of the past seven years. It is still a mystery how a ragtag bunch of frustrated politicians and social misfits succeeded in igniting a wildfire insurgency in such a short time. The importance of understanding the Maoist movement in Nepal will only grow as the world grapples with the ever-present threat of guerrilla warfare everywhere. The best way, perhaps the only way, to fight these guerrilla organisations is not to let them form in the first place.
Kaplan may not readily admit it, but there is more to the root cause theory than mere post-facto justification of violence. Desperados are born when grievancesreal or imaginedare allowed to fester. Once that happens, there is never any dearth of ambitious leaders ready to pounce upon the opportunity of an alluring shortcut to political success.
In editing the compendium Understanding the Maoist Movement of Nepal, Deepak Thapa has opted for variety over authority. A comprehensive introduction and five chapters cover the entire gamut of Maoist phenomenon in Nepal. But such a comprehensive treatment does have its pitfalls. There is an out and out trashy piece about Comrade Prachandas drinking habits (two big glasses of fresh frothy buffalo milk straight from the udder at the crack of dawn) by journalist SNM Abdi alongside a scholarly paper on the anthropology of the Kham Magar country by Anna de Sales.
Though they are grouped under different chapters, as a reader its very difficult to see the connection. Maoists have been adroit media managers, and they get into the press often and usually in their own terms. But that doesnt justify the absence of official views in this book.
Two overt propaganda pieces by Li Onesto take up nearly 60 pages, but the Royal Nepali Army doesnt even get a hearing on Dunai or Holeri. In fact this anomaly is an indication of the trend where objectivity of journalism often translates into ambivalence towards atrocities of the insurgents on the one hand and compulsions of the government to be ruthless on the other.
It is not just the state, even civil society chose to ignore the dire predictions of a brewing insurgency by R Andrew Nickson and Stephen L Miksell. But then, did Maoist insurgency begin as a conspiracy to undermine the legitimacy of democratic regimes? This volume has nothing to offer on Koiralas Grand Design theory.
Even though this book is a collection of previously published material, it succeeds in broadening a readers understanding of the Maoist phenomenon in Nepal. (A brutal insurgency can hardly be called a movement, as the title of the book suggests.) Kaplan must get a copy, if he doesnt have one already.
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 28-Jul-03 01:47 AM
What follosw are two letters to editor for last Friday's NT.
" Isn't it against the semblance of scholarly ethics for a contributor to review the book in which his contribution appears? CK Lal has a chapter in the book Understanding the Maoist Movement in Nepal edited by Deepak Thapa, yet he has reviewed it in your paper. Lal also suggests the book should have included the military's side of the story. You cannot include everything in one volume and, more importantly, what is the official version for some may not be the same for others.
Anil Bhattarai, Sujata Thapa
Kathmandu
*************
I would like to thank CK Lal for his short review of Understanding the Maoist Movement in Nepal edited by me (Red-faced Maobadis #154). While I take his criticisms in the spirit they were intended, and especially so since he is one of the contributors, I would like to draw attention to a major error that has crept into the book. I do this because Lal does recommend the volume to others and the error would do injustice to the writer concerned, R Andrew Nickson. The last paragraph on page xii of the Introduction contains four references to Mashal. All these should read Masal, otherwise the argument therein does not make sense.
Deepak Thapa,
Kathmandu
|
| Shaiva |
Posted
on 30-Jul-03 04:15 AM
ck lal should not review books. His is a good columnist but a lousy reviewer. Book review is a scholarly job and it should be left to scholars. ck lal is no scholar. I strongly advise him to stick to his columns. Some of them are interesting. I think ashu can pass this message to ck lal
|
| ashu |
Posted
on 30-Jul-03 07:45 PM
I'll be meeting CK Dai later this week.
Since he knows me as someone who can directly tell him like it is, I'll bring this up.
But most likely, he'll laugh, shrug and make some jokes about this, and that's the
way he is.
oohi
ashu
ktm,nepal
|
| noname |
Posted
on 30-Jul-03 09:50 PM
In fact Deepak Thapa too have forwarded a 'subtle comment' - though I have yet to figure out what exactly was the 'hidden meaning,' if any, of pointing to that fact - about CK LAL reveiwing the book where he has contributed a chapter.
|
| makar |
Posted
on 31-Jul-03 05:48 AM
I agree, CK Lal can't review books properly. His review of Dr. Adhikary's book is a record of disgrace. However, does a collection of old newspaper and magazine articles deserves a proper review? CK Lal's own article in the collection is the most 'trashy' of all. It shouldn't have been included. We expect more from a journalist of Deepak Thapa's stature. Or is it that he had no say in the selection and Martin Chautary simply handed him articles of its regulars to copy-edit and print? I wonder.
|
