November
16, 2009
"I Want to Dance With the
Real Hero of My
Country"
The Andolan in Kathmandu and
the Revolution to Follow
By GARY LEUPP
"So far,”
notes Peter Lee of the Asia Times,
“Western media have reported remotely and somewhat uncomprehendingly on
the
massive demonstrations in Kathmandu
led by the
Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), with a marked lack of interest. This
perhaps
reflects the shared desire of the Indian, Chinese and Western
governments not
to inflame the situation with excessive attention and rhetoric.” He
refers to
the two-day action in the Nepali capital Thursday and Friday.
But those
demonstrations should be of enormous interest. According
toAsiaNews, “The
second phase
of the so-called ‘people’s movement-III’ saw more than 150,000
participants,
including former Maoist guerrillas and United Communist Party of
Nepal-Maoist
(UCPM-M) members of parliament and militants, gathered around the
Singha
Durbar, Nepal’s official seat of government.”
The
Maoists virtually paralyzed the government
in a stunning display of power. All the top Maoist leaders marched
through the
city, some meeting the police at the barricades and breaking through
to
assume positions around Singha Durbar where they addressed the huge
crowd.
It was
overwhelming a peaceful, even festive andolan or mass demonstration,
although
there were some clashes with police. A senior Maoist leader, Krishna
Bahadur
Mahara, was among those wounded. He told Agence France-Presse, “We are
now
giving the government and other parties an opportunity to look into our
demands. The ball is in the government’s court.” The most powerful
Maoist
figure, former prime minister Prachanda, issued a sharper warning to
the regime,
giving it a seven-day ultimatum (to November 20) to restore “civilian
supremacy” or face a general strike and other strong protests.
When you watch video of Baburam Bhattarai, the brilliant academic who
became
the number two figure in the Maoist movement and served as finance
minister
under the administration of Pushpa Kamal Dahal (Pranchanda), leading the marchers
confronting the helmeted police, successfully pressing through, you
get a
sense of genuine historical momentum gathering here.
Rekha Thapa, one of Nepal’s
most popular young actresses, arrived as one of many who sang and
danced for
the huge crowd. She told those assembled, “I’ve always danced with film
heroes.
Now I want to dance with the real hero of my country.” A rather
embarrassed
looking Prachanda briefly accommodated her, the images captured on national
television and on
newspaper
covers.
It was
brilliant political theater.
According
to S.D. Muni, a professor at the Institute
of South Asian Studies in Singapore
and authority on the Nepali Maoist movement, “The numbers they were
able to
mobilise and the fact they were able to keep control and maintain the
peace
indicate the protest was a success. It also showed the government is
incapable
of dealing with this kind of challenge.”
I’ve
followed the Maoist movement in Nepal
since the inception of the People’s War in 1996. I’m always struck by
the
creativity of the Nepali Maoists’ strategy and tactics. From 1996 to
2006 the
Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) (now the United Communist Party of
Nepal-Maoist)---originally a parliamentary party, the leadership of
which had
determined that armed struggle was the only way towards
liberation---waged a
guerrilla war against the monarchy. Its success was breathtaking. It
controlled
80% of the country by 2005 when the very unpopular King Gyandendra
seized
absolute power sidelining the seven main political parties.
It then,
having surrounded Kathmandu
Valley
with its People’s Liberation Army, agreed to the 2006 Comprehensive
Agreement
with the political parties whereby they would all jointly work to bring
down
the king, restoring parliamentary democracy, while the Maoists would
lay down
their arms under UN supervision, ending the war. A key provision of the
Agreement was that the soldiers of the People’s Liberation Army be
integrated
into the Nepali Army (formerly the Royal Nepali Army).
The
Maoists also demanded the convening of a
Constituent Assembly to write a new constitution, and the proclamation
of a
republic. They won these demands, and in the April 2008 elections for
the
assembly, won 38% of the vote, twice the number of the next party. In
August
Prachanda became Prime Minister. So much for the “End of History”
thesis. A
Maoist having established his credentials by the barrel of a gun was
having
them further validated by the ballet box. Jimmy Carter was there to
confirm
that yes, indeed, it was a fair election.
But this
was not yet revolution. This was not
state power. This was communists who had control of the countryside,
who did
not want to bludgeon their way into Kathmandu Valley (or were not sure
that
they could do it, not necessarily confident that they had enough urban
support), savvily working out a strategy to gain a presence in this
zone where
over a million of Nepal’s 28 million people live so that they could
develop
their political base here prior to a real seizure
of power. The strategy seems to have worked out very well.
First the
Maoists, playing by the
parliamentary rules, swept the polls. Then they exposed the shamof the
system
to which they were being asked to conform. So many had praised them,
for laying
down their arms, for agreeing to participate in normal electoral
politics! But
they for their part had pointed out that their army needed to be merged
with
the Nepali Army as part of the Comprehensive Agreement.
And the
Nepali Army, still ridden with
pro-Royalist sentiment, had refused to implement the provisions in the
agreement pertaining to PLA integration and instead sought to recruit
new
troops.
This was
really the crux of the problem.
I’m quite sure at least some of the Maoists had anticipated this
scenario all
along. That is, they had foreseen that the old state power reliant
ultimately
on armed force would not submit to the terms of the agreement or to the
will of
the people as expressed in elections.
The real
issue is of course state power, and
you can’t obtain state power when you don’t control the army. In May
Prime
Minister Prachanda asked the head of the Army, Gen. Rukmangad Katwal,
to step
down and appointed a new army chief. The President, Ram Baran Yadav, a
member
of the Nepal Congress Party, countermanded the order keeping Katwal at
his
post. It is widely thought that he enjoyed India’s
support in this action. At
that point Prachanda did something quite unexpected: in a televised
address he
denounced the president’s move as “illegal and unconstitutional” and
resigned.
The
Maoists not only quit the government, but
pronounced the selection of a new one by the parliament as an
unconstitutional
process. They boycotted the election of Prachanda’s successor, party
leader
Narayan Kaji Shrestha declaring, “Without restoring civilian supremacy
and
correcting the president’s move, the new government will be
unconstitutional.
This government has wrong political ground as it is being formed as a
ploy to
sabotage the peace and constitution-making process and restore military
supremacy. I want to give you a benefit of doubt, if you are
nationalist, you
will come back to the path drawn by the people’s movement.”
In the
six months since the Maoists have made
it impossible for the 22-party coalition government to function,
accusing it of
being unwilling to enforce the Comprehensive Agreement integrating the
two
armies. They have focused on this issue of “civilian supremacy,” which
is
really a matter of focusing upon the fact that there remain two
headquarters of
real power in the country.
There’s
the status quo in the Singha Durbar
complex, where the Maoists have tried to negotiate their way as
parliamentary
politicians but where power is ultimately guaranteed by the old state’s
army
backed up by India
and U.S.,
the army that the Maoists confronted and humiliated big-time. And
there’s the
new order being built elsewhere.
Last
week, Maoists in the state of Kirat
declared the autonomy of that state. This was in accordance with the
“first
phase” plans for the People’s Movement III prior to the mass show of
strength
in the capital. But the announcement of ethnic-based states in a
federal system
had been postponed after some discussion and it’s not clear whether
local party
leader and politburo member, coordinator of Kirat State Uprising
Committee,
Gopal Kirati actually had Central Committee permission. The plan to
shut down
the international airport was cancelled after ambassadors’ protests but
the
plan to cut off all roads to Kathmandu
was
executed efficiently after November 1. Ambulances and other essential
vehicles
were allowed egress and ingress; the Maoists having acquired much
valley
support are not looking to lose it.
But they
are making the point to their
political colleagues, with whom they’ve worked through the
Comprehensive
Agreement but who they see as for the most part only temporary allies
at best,
that just because they’ve put down their arms doesn’t mean they can’t
use their
mass organizational skills to scare the hell out of them. The next step
is a
general strike.
In the
meantime, the plan is for a
no-confidence vote in the parliament. Meanwhile, the Maoists control
access to
the valley and it’s quite likely that activists are pouring in for the
next
round of andolan. The “Prachanda Path” as
articulated since 2001 has involved a fusion of the Chinese People’s
War model
and the October Revolution. Which of course means: urban insurrection.
Meanwhile
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon,
noting the obvious---that the PLA demobilization under UN
certification, which
was supposed to result in the integration of the two armies under the
terms of
the Comprehensive Agreement, wasn’t happening---in late October
criticized the
current Nepali government for proceeding “with a fresh round of
recruitment
into the Nepal Army” and resuming “the import of lethal military
equipment.”
In the
assessment of UNMIN [United Nations
Mission in Nepal],
either step would violate the terms of the Comprehensive Peace
Agreement and
the Agreement on Monitoring the Management of Arms and Armies. UNMIN
has
continued to consistently convey this position to the Government and
the
public. The Minister of Defence, Bidhya Bhandari, has called for the
Comprehensive Peace Agreement to be revised, claiming that restrictions
it
places on recruitment, arms purchases and training had been detrimental
to the
effective functioning of the Nepal Army. UCPN-M has strongly protested
her statement.
Prachanda
cited this report at the andolan last week. And I believe
he
cited this passage in Ban’s report:
“In my
meeting with the Prime Minister, Madhav
Kumar Nepal,
at Sharm el-Sheikh in July, I conveyed the strong concern of the
international
community at the lack of progress in the peace process and stressed the
need
for a time-bound effort to resolve the impediments hampering the
process. My
Representative in Nepal
and other senior officials have consistently encouraged consensus and
dialogue
between the parties, recommending the establishment of a more formal
dialogue
mechanism to streamline negotiations and find creative solutions to
overcome
the current impasse. At the same time, my Representative has also
underlined
the need to avoid provocative statements or actions in order to
maintain a
positive climate for dialogue.”
That is
to say, Ban’s urging the reintegration
of the Maoists into government, realizing they’re organizing outside
government
from a position of strength. And the Maoists naturally use this report
to
strengthen their case at this time.
The South
Korean diplomat has absolutely no
personal interest in facilitating the consummation of the twenty-first
century’s
first revolution led by a self-pronounced Maoist party. But he
apparently
thinks it’s best to recognize the reality of Maoist political strength
and to
stick to the 2006 agreement.
Given
this statement, the Maoists who now
boast they have all Kathmandu behind them can say much of the world as represented by the UN
secretary general agrees with their goal of “civilian supremacy,” and
that the
22-party coalition with the UML and Congress at its head, linked to the
Army,
India and ultimately U.S. imperialism is the isolated, marginalized
force.
There are
so many logical and moral arguments
to assemble as Nepal’s
October approaches. It’s the mix of models, and ever-shifting tactics,
and
adaptability and revolutionary competence of these communists that
never ceases
to impress me. I truly think they may pull it off.
Gary Leupp is
Professor of History at Tufts
University,
and Adjunct Professor of Religion. He is the author of Servants,
Shophands and Laborers in in the Cities of Tokugawa Japan; Male
Colors: The Construction of Homosexuality in Tokugawa Japan; and Interracial
Intimacy in Japan: Western Men and Japanese Women, 1543-1900. He is
also a
contributor to CounterPunch's merciless chronicle of the wars on Iraq, Afghanistan
and Yugoslavia, Imperial
Crusades.
He can be
reached at: [email protected]
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You are subscribed. This footer can help you.
Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this message.
You can visit the group WEB SITE at http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, pages, files and membership.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this address (repeat): [email protected] .
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
