INTERVIEW WITH PRACHANDA

Are the Maoists planning a fresh people’s revolt after their Fifth Plenum? What will be the future of the CA polls? What policy will the Maoists embrace towards India? And how far will the Maoist-SPA alliance go? Maoist Chairman Prachanda spoke on these and various other contemporary issues in an exclusive interview with Nepal magazine recently. Excerpts of the interview:



Q. Your Fifth Plenum (extended meeting) drew much attention. What was so special about it?
Prachanda: The difference between the political circumstances during the earlier four extended meetings and this year’s meeting is the specialty. The earlier extended meetings were held during wartime, for the preparations of the war. This year, the extended meeting took place in a completely new environment of the ongoing peace process and at a time when we, too, are a part of the government.


Secondly, when we entered into the peace process from the process of the People’s War, it was but obvious that several questions would be raised from within and outside the party. The Fifth Plenum has answered all such questions and brought about uniformity in understanding.


Q. What does uniformity in understanding mean?
Prachanda: Transforming a country by addressing the class, caste, regional and gender issues in the transitional phase in a peaceful manner and being a part of the government to hold a Constituent Assembly election are rare experiments in communist movements. Our party has transformed the people’s war into strategic defense, balance, and then strategic retaliation and then ultimately into the peace process, which is a novel experiment in itself. Therefore, this process would obviously have given rise to several questions from within and outside the party. Whether this process will lead us to success or surrender? Such questions had been raised very naturally. We had to answer such questions. And, understanding the fact that the path we have chosen to bring about social and revolutionary changes in a novel way by analyzing all the revolutions and counter-revolutions of the 20th Century is what we call the uniformity in understanding.



Q. We heard that your party rank and file came down heavily on you, that internal differences were spilled over, and that three lines conspicuously surfaced in the fifth plenum. What is the truth?
Prachanda: This is utter nonsense that I was heavily attacked. Had it been so, it would have been impossible to get the 2200 representatives of the plenum united again at the end. Definitely, the honest revolutionists were gravely concerned whether the party would deviate (from its original path). Because of such concerns, several questions were raised. What about security when the central leaders congregate in Kathmandu? Would the follow the path of deviation like the CPN-UML while staying in Kathmandu and enjoying vehicle ride? It’s true that concerns such as these were raised. But it was more than clear that they had a huge confidence in the leadership. As far as the three different lines are concerned, they exist in all parties: Rightist, extremist and the middle-path. We represent a revolutionary line. I did not write Prachanda Path in the document of the plenum. But no one said Prachanda Path was the main line and should not be left out. This also helps to understand the line and debates of the party’s extended meeting.


Q. Your earlier documents used to attack directly; this time around you have said many things vaguely. Why?
Prachanda: The language we used when we were in Rolpa and the one we have to use while in Kathmandu has to be inevitably different. The language used while in one’s own base area and the language that is used while in the White Area cannot be the same.



Q. Do you still consider Kathmandu a ‘White Area’?
Prachanda: Yes, because Kathmandu still does not belong to the people.


Q. You often mention the phrase ‘a new or a novel experiment’. What is this experiment for-- for a revolution or a compromise?
Prachanda: When we talk about a new or a novel experiment, it is for a revolution. Considering the global and national situation and development in science and technology, we have to find a conclusion to push forward the revolution and for that a new and novel experiment is required.


Q. What will that revolution do?
Prachanda: In Nepal’s context it (revolution) will alter the feudal-production relationship or the feudal-property relationship. It will also change the feudal-political relationship and the feudal-cultural relationship. Secondly, it will free Nepal and the Nepali people from the interventions of the foreign imperialists, reactionaries and expansionists.


Q. That means, at a certain point, violence could again take place in the name of revolution?
Prachanda: In one way or the other, each revolution is violent. No matter how peaceful a movement you call it, it always has violence and counter-violence. Secondly, we have felt if we can move forward on the political base formed after our 10 years of people’s war, people can achieve freedom in a peaceful manner as well, and we can constitute a new society. And we are currently engaged in the same experiment. But whether it will always remain peaceful or turn violent again does not depend on us; it depends on our opponents. It depends on the imperialist and feudalist elements which are not yet completely defeated. There is a possibility that they could use violence against the people once again. In that case, the people will have to retaliate against them. At that point, the revolution could again turn violent.



Q. So, there still remains a final confrontation, no?
Prachanda: It can be understood that way. If the process we have embraced after the 12-point understanding and other agreements is obstructed and if the people are not given an amicable atmosphere to express their mandate in a peaceful way and if violence is again used against the people, then a final battle can take place.


Q. There have been allegations that it’s you who have been committing violence and excesses through the Young Communist League (YCL).
Prachanda: Some media houses that believe in reactionary violence are engaged in this propaganda. This is not the truth. If you go to the bottom of each such incident, then you will realize that these incidents have taken place in retaliation to the ruling mindset of the ruling class.


Q. You are in the government. Then aren’t you, too, among the rulers?
Prachanda: If one looks at the outer structure (of the government), one can say so. But, in essence, we joined the government just for the sake of the Constituent Assembly polls. We are not the whole-sole in-charge of the power. Power and government are not the same thing. And again, when we joined the government, we were told that it would be run on consensus, which is not happening. If it continues this way, the relevance of us staying in the government will be over.


Q. So, when are you quitting the government
Prachanda: Our ministers are giving an ultimatum today. Then, it will depend on how the government leadership takes the issue and how it is discussed in the eight-party. It will be sorted out in a few days.


Q. People still have doubts about the CA polls; will the election take place on the said date?
Prachanda: It should. But looking at the preparations made by the government leadership and its modus operandi, we have serious doubts about the polls taking place on November 22. Holding the elections without creating certain essential conditions will not fulfill the people’s aspirations. For example, all the agreements reached so far must be implemented in a proper way. Above all, all the groups, including those in Madhes, which are creating troubles, must be controlled. Since the Gaur carnage, our more than 50 cadres have been killed. But no action has been taken against the guilty. They are walking free. In such a situation, how can one believe that the government can hold the elections in a proper manner? How can we believe? We have already said that India does have a role in one way or the other in creating unrest in Terai, especially the Hindu extremist groups of India are creating troubles in Terai. The government’s failure to control this has given rise to misgivings about the possibility of elections. Besides, feudal royal and other reactionary forces are also trying to thwart the elections. Therefore, we have been saying that an environment for the elections can be created only by declaring the country a republic before the polls.


Q. It is said that you yourself don’t want the elections because your (party’s) popularity has gone down lately.
Prachanda: There is no reason to doubt us as far as the elections are concerned because thousands of our fighters sacrificed their lives for the CA polls. We cannot be against the polls. Yes, we do feel that we might lose; it’s because the feudalists in the country and imperialists-reactionary forces are hatching conspiracies and trying to marginalize us. Despite that, we are not going to deviate from the election front. We have already formed a high-level committee to write an election manifesto. We will soon announce our first list of the candidates in the preliminary level.


Q. There have been allegations that you are complicating the already sorted out issues like a republican set up and proportional electoral system to obstruct the elections.
Prachanda: When it was decided that the CA polls would not take place on June 20, we wrote a note of dissent that the CA polls would not happen unless the country is declared a republic. After we pitched the republican voice high, parliament amended the interim constitution incorporating a provision that it could remove the king with a two-thirds majority. In this circumstance, how can it be said that we are against the polls. This (republican set up) is our old demand. As far as the proportional electoral system is concerned, this is what we have always believed in. We had compromised thinking that the elections would be held within June and also because the Nepali Congress did not accept the demand for a fully proportional system. But, we were unable to clarify ‘the compromise’ before the people. We admitted in our fifth plenum that this was a mistake and we clearly put forth that the proportional electoral system is our belief. But we have not said that we will shy away from the elections if the country does not adopt the proportional electoral system. In this situation, how are we obstructing the elections?


Q. On the question of a republic?
Prachanda: Our party has decided that a republican set up is a must. We have already announced that we will run campaigns for the republican set up. However, we will not shy away from the elections if that does not happen.


Q. Is your relation with Prime Minister Koirala thawing?
Prachanda: I won’t call it thawing… But the truth is there is a contradiction in the way the political developments are taking place and the way the Nepali Congress is working. Girija Prasad Koirala and other leaders who, during the people’s war, told us what we did – attacking the headquarters or targeting the choppers – was alright, now act in a way as if they want us go back when we are in the peace process and in the government. We doubt that Koirala is going to have a huge regressive and bourgeois change.


Q. What will be the status of the Koirala government if, in case, the elections don’t take place?
Prachanda: There won’t be the Koirala government if elections don’t take place. Not only will Koirala’s government go, the country will face a huge disaster.


Q. Civil war?
Prachanda: Yes, a civil war. The series of events have shown that. At that time the scale of international forces’ intervention will be very large. Many people even indicate Nepal’s fate as that of Afghanistan and Iraq. But not Iraq or Afghanistan, Nepal could turn into a Vietnam of the 21st century. This means, there is a possibility that the Nepali people will once again have to revolt against international intervention. What I believe is, if the peace process does not move forward in a proper manner, yet another people’s revolt is a must.



Q. Are you in a position to organize that sort of people’s revolt?
Prachanda: The people of Nepal have to do that. We, on our part, could of course try to lead the revolt.


Q. But, how much possibility is there of deferring the polls to Baisakh (mid-April to mid-May) through an agreement by amending the constitution?
Prachanda: I don’t think so. It does not happen every time. There won’t be any situation where the Nepali people will tolerate the postponement of polls time and again.


Q. That means, if polls don’t happen in November, there is no possibility of polls at all in the near future?
Prachanda: I think it won’t be wrong to draw such a conclusion.


Q. For what the people’s revolt you are talking about?
Prachanda: Firstly, it is for holding of the polls. If that could not happen, it is for transferring all the power to the people.


Q. Power in the people’s hands means power in your hands?
Prachanda: Power in our hands means power in the hands of those who represent the people


Q. When are you launching your people’s revolt?
Prachanda: The process has already begun. Our comrades who are ministers have outlined certain points and given an ultimatum to quit the government if those points are not met. This itself is the beginning of the revolt.


Q. What will be the eight-party equation if the elections do not take place?
Prachanda: I doubt that the coalition will remain intact if the elections do not take place. Either the eight parties will again launch a fresh movement or some of the parties will join hands with the reactionary forces and some will reach out to the people.


Q. What will be the role of the PLA in the revolt?
Prachanda: The PLA cannot be used in course of the people’s movement. But, anything can happen if a situation arises wherein the country heads towards the people’s revolt. The PLA may not remain inside the ‘cantonments’. It will come out.


Q. What will happen to the UN monitoring/ supervision process if the election does not take place on the scheduled date?
Prachanda: The agreement was for nearly one year. If the election does not take place within that period then the UN’s role would come to an end. There will be no need of the UN to stay here.


Q. Let’s change the context. You claim that there is a conspiracy against you in the Terai. Where was that conspiracy hatched?
Prachanda: The problem in Terai is of a serious nature. It is not true that the Hindu extremists alone are behind it as we had been mentioning sometimes. When we sealed an agreement for the Constituent Assembly elections, representatives of the United States went to Madhes to instigate (the people) against us. America has tried to marginalise the Maoists in Madhes. Secondly, the expansionist faction of the Indian ruling class is also conducting planned activities. Thirdly, the feudal-landlord class, which was earlier displaced from Terai, is also involved for revenge. Fourthly, influence of the parliamentary parties was almost non-existent in Terai. They are also taking it as a chance to reduce the Maoist influence there. All these groups have united against the Maoists. And, the dacoits, murderers and criminals, who were chased away by our activists, have also organized themselves. Therefore, the Madhes problem is multidimensional.


Q. Haven’t you talked to the Indian side about the Madhes affairs?
Prachanda: We have been holding discussions. I have been raising the issue with the Indian ambassador—i.e. with the officials working in Delhi. If India had wanted then this kind of mayhem could have been definitely averted. Now they say that such activities are taking place due to the open border. But, there is no ground to easily accept that. It seems to be part of a strategy to sabotage Nepal’s revolutionary movement. Secondly, the general public in Nepal knows that a big ‘design’ of the Indian ruling class to expand its influence in Nepal-- particularly in Madhes-- has been in play. We have been countering this.


Q. What is your India policy now?
Prachanda: We had raised nationalism as the main agenda when we launched the people’s war. In the latter phase, when our responsible friends were getting arrested in India, and the Indian interventions increased, we started our preparations to fight against India. We discussed about a tunnel war with India. I had prepared a document after studying the tunnel warfare of the Vietnam War. It is an open secret that we wanted to hold talks with the royalists before ‘February 1’. Our policy on nationalism and threats from India remains the same if the issues of the tunnel warfare and the talks with Gyanendra are viewed together. However, the February 1 incident badly turned the situation towards an autocracy. It was a newer development than our expectation and analysis. After the advent of the autocracy, we had to go against it. We had to forge a working alliance with the parliamentary parties for that. On top of that, we had to opt for an alliance with the Nepali Congress. And for that, we had to seek Delhi’s support.


Q. Why? What is the relationship between Delhi and the Nepali Congress?
Prachanda: There is a very deep-rooted relationship between Delhi and the Nepali Congress. Is that a secret? Observing the developments since this party was born shows a special relation. For instance, we wanted to strike the 12-point agreement in Rolpa. But, we went to Delhi after Girijababu said he won’t come to Rolpa, and would rather meet us in Delhi. We had a tough time hoodwinking (the Indian authorities) to bring Girijababu to our place. But no matter how much we tried to trick the Indian government, we don’t feel that it was unaware of our meetings. Girijababu had stayed as a guest of the Indian government. That (12-point understanding) took place with the Indian government’s consent. In this way, India did have a role in the signing of the 12-point understanding. In other words, it won’t be otherwise to say that we, too, had some kind of relationship with India through the Nepali Congress.


Q. Now, what does India want from you and what do you want from India?
Prachanda: A relationship of equality. We want the past agreements and treaties (with India) be reviewed appropriately. Also, we want India to help us positively in this transitional period as a neighbour. On the part of India, may be it now wants us to work as per its interest and wish? However, we didn’t work in that way after joining the government. What we feel is India did play a role to marginalize our party’s influence in Terai; it wasn’t good.


Q. What do you feel about Indian Ambassador Shiv Shankar Mukherjee’s recent remarks about the CA elections?
Prachanda: The kind of language he used was very objectionable. That is against the Nepali people and the independence of the Nepali state. It gives a clear hint that India wants to dictate things (in Nepal). It smacks of the tone and language of former US ambassador Moriarty.


Q. Are Nepal’s nationality and sovereignty under threat due to foreigners?
Prachanda: Earlier, when I said the country is heading towards a catastrophe, I also meant to hint at the danger looming on Nepal’s national integrity. The way foreign meddling has been on the rise, if viewed in all contexts, it may pose a danger to Nepal’s independence if all nationalist forces do not stand united. However, I don’t think that danger has already come. The national feeling of the Nepali people is very strong. The Nepali people are always ready to make any kind of sacrifice for the country’s independence. Nevertheless, there are indications that do hint at huge conspiracies being hatched against Nepal’s national integrity and national independence.



Source: The Kathmandu Post, August 22, 2007