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

Maoist desperation

Just when the climate is turning favorable for the Nov 22 Constituent Assembly (CA) elections, CPN (Maoist) has thrown a spanner in the works. This is time when the parties are expected to come out with their manifestos so as to intensify debates and discussions on the future of Nepali state through a new constitution. Instead the Maoists have raised some dead and already decided issues as pre-conditions for the CA polls. If the Maoists are hell-bent on further diminishing their prospects of facing the ballot box, they may do so. But the problem is that their constant U-turns are affecting the entire country and the CA poll is at the stake. We should have already been in top gear vis-à-vis elections by now.

The party has threatened to launch protest programs if its pre-conditions are not fulfilled by mid-September. Thereafter it would launch its infamous jana karbahi ('people's action' that was much reviled during insurgency) and 'political' strikes. All this is to ensure that the polls are held in time, it reasons. We strongly disagree. The seven-party alliance and the Maoists have already reached an agreement on all the issues that the Maoists are trying to raise now as unresolved. Be it deciding the fate of monarchy or electoral system for the CA elections, these have already been settled with the consent of the Maoists. Their latest excuse that their earlier agreement was conditional to holding the CA polls in June is specious. Between June 13 and 24 this year, the Maoist lawmakers and ministers have voted and approved the very subjects in question, including deferring the polls. The parties have already signed an agreement to decide monarchy's fate in the first sitting of the constituent assembly by a simple majority. That agreement still holds.

CPN (Maoist) must realize that it would be held solely responsible if it continued to vitiate the atmosphere for the elections as other political parties, the Election Commission and the United Nations, among others, are insisting that CA polls be held on schedule. Their actions would not ensure the holding of the elections. Rather, they will have disastrous and contrary outcome. The Maoists, understandably, are reluctant to face the ballots at a time when their image has taken a nosedive. They are desperate for a respectable presence in the assembly which would draw up a new constitution. Maoists' desperation is understandable; their disruptive behavior unacceptable. Instead of trying to disrupt the polls, the party leadership would do well to improve its sagging image by reining in the rampaging cadres who at times commit crimes. They could then seek the support of the people for their vision of new Nepal, peacefully.

Source: The Kathmandu Post, August 22, 2007

Crisis of nation-building

C D Bhatta

Political movements in Nepal have brought about significant changes but, to our dismay, they have always posed a threat to the nation-building. This is partly because after the temporal settlement of political movements, the spirit of any movement is spoiled by the boundless desire of power within the political leadership. And partly due to external forces (as all political movements since 1950 are guided by the foreign powers) and infighting between regressive, progressive and status quo-ist forces on basic political (national) values. Prevalence of this type of (a) political culture within the political class have degenerated both political will and promises made before-during-and right after the completion of people's movement.
Nepali state has witnessed a series of political movements during the last half century to democratize state and address issues that impede the process of nation-building. However, all the political movements have ended up in some sort of, what Prof Thomas Meyer of Germany has called lazy compromises between the political parties in conflict and regime at the helm of power. The lazy compromises have only brought cosmetic changes and the major political issues are yet to be resolved. We have an established revolutionary political culture but not the revolutionary thinking (approach) in translating achievement(s) of political movement(s) for the commonwealth of people. Inability of translating words into deeds (real action) is certainly driving Nepali state towards political deadlock one after another for the last half century. This, no doubt, leads us to strongly argue that Nepal never had complete political revolutions in a real sense of the term.

Another factor contributing towards the crisis of nation-building is that political movements have provided sufficient opportunities for various groups to emerge and make claim and counter claim to the state to fulfill their various demands. But Nepali state is not in a position to fulfill all demands given the resources (economic) available and political capacity of the state. This, by contrast, is eroding the capacity of state.
As a result, internal sovereignty of Nepali state is in crisis due to the rise of various non-state-actors in different parts of the country. The non-state actors have challenged the conventional power of the state (such as authority to punish etc).
In the same vein, Nepali state has also lost policy sovereignty to the Western donors, multilateral and multinational organizations and their subsidiary NGOs due to the crisis of governance. In a nutshell, erosion in 'sovereignty' is contributing towards 'systemic crisis' in the nation.
We had underpinned high hope on civil society given its significant contribution towards regime change. But with the passage of time, Nepali civil society is failing to institutionalize the process of regime change (read democratization). This is primarily because civil society groups do not have common voice on major political issues. In fact, it is not clear who exactly governs and represents Nepali civil society as leading civil society activists keep on changing their position (often clash with each other) on major issues of national importance.

It is primarily due to the fact that civil society is aligned with political parties and is accountable to them (for power) and to the donors (for funding) as against citizens at large.
The sheer deficit in democratic political culture across political parties is the prime facie cause of political deadlock. For example, whenever political parties move onto power they are habitual to capture both state and system. This practice has developed neo-patrimonial culture in Nepali politics. To some extent, the eight party-phobias are also the product of this culture which has repeatedly undermined other societal and political forces. There are chances that the pillars of mass democratic movement will run out of steam and stamina, and that the project of nation-building will never be accomplished.
Moreover, there is no social representation of political power which is causing perpetual political pandemonium. For example - there is no intergenerational justice that is, the highest number of voters lies between 18-35 years of age group but we don't have leaders to represent this age-group across political parties.

The next important point within the context of nation-building is the scenario of national security and foreign policy. To put it bluntly, both are missing from political agendas. There is a great deal of crisis of confidence lurking between political forces and national security organs of the state.
The security organs and their members have been undermined, discouraged and demoralized in many occasions (in the name of restructuring) which is only adding up further problems to national security. The tendency within the political parties and their cadres is that they try to destabilize 'national security' for their own vested interests.
Similarly, unavailability of national vision on foreign policy is inviting too much interference into internal affairs of the state (particularly on the future political discourse). But we don't have ability to act upon because there is no coherent voice of political parties on the issues of national importance.

Given these contradictions in practice, perhaps, we need to develop a spirit of understanding, tolerance and give-and-take culture (smart culture of compromise) to complement each other (political and social necessity), which will help to put an end to all internal strife and violence amicably and to get rid from the web of systemic crisis.
Having said all these, finally, the larger challenge for Nepali state, perhaps, is to bail out from the 'state of nature (everyone against everyone)'. And this can only be done internally, by bringing all sorts of societal forces (left out and potential political actors) into the institutional life of the state and externally by taking international community into confidence. Nepali political leaders should posit some sort of commitments towards the peace process, which does not seem to be in place at the moment. Equally important is that we need to strike a balance between political freedom and external and internal sovereignty of the state to enhance the process of nation-building and maintain national security.

Source: The Kathmandu Post, August 22, 2007

Free media and drafts of history

Abhi Subedi

Free media discourse did not receive as much attention from parties, governments and civil society as it should have after the political change of April/06. But it has received attention in recent weeks as an issue of freedom. Nepal government's first united response to Constituent Assembly (CA) elections came like a jolt about a month ago. The spokesman of the government indicated that they had agreed in principle that certain codes should be introduced to limit the media reporting about the CA elections in November 2007.
The recent closures of some newspaper distributions by Maoist trade unions and resumptions following a court order and the flexibility shown by the Maoist information minister Krishna Bahadur Mahara and the trade union near the CPN (Maoist) and the commencement of fast-onto-death by a democratic leader Birendra Dahal propelled by the closure of HBC FM brought the free media discourse to a new height. After these developments, two questions rose like cyclones in my mind. First, why focus on press restrictions before anything else? Second, who is wary of free media in Nepal?

Nepali free media was not created by political parties or governments who have their own mouth organs that they play whenever they feel like and invite readers to appreciate their composition and read their solipsistic notations. Little do such organ creators realise that free media's historical effect is immediate and vibrant.
About the historicity of free press, a senior British journalist John Lloyd says, “Journalists give the first draft of history: historians may do a quite different draft, but most people don't read the histories-so for them it's the first and last” (What the media are doing to our politics 37).
The first draft writers of the current, turbulent Nepali history are the media. The old history writers' books are shelved. They do speak very little now. So writing the drafts of history by free media has become the most important activity in the politically vibrant Nepal. Several native and foreign history writers have been using the Nepali free press to formally write the second draft of the history of this country's turbulent times. The free Nepali press --its journalists, columnists and freelancers have mutually written the first drafts.

Free media was created by middle class youths who found it as an important means of creating cultural and intellectual space for themselves. They came into existence with the awareness of their in-between-ness- the sense of being below and above, between global and local and founded the free media to express their world view. Their free press activity shook the class above and taught the people below how to be assertive.
Media entrepreneurs gave them freedom for obvious reasons. Little have the political parties realised that. Free media successfully challenged the ardent autocratic regime of the modern times in Nepal in April/06. The role of free media and the journalists was the most important one. They took many risks, disregarded life threats and moved under the barrage of batons and bullets to bring news to the public.
There are some caveats. The Maoists were among the first to realise the power of free press because they chose the free press to publish their important views. The Nepali Congress government jailed Editor Yubaraj Ghimire and publisher Kailash Shiroia of Kantipur for publishing Maoist leader Baburam Bhattarai's essay in Kantipur in June 2001 and put a temporary ban on free speech. But the free press prevailed. The free press helped the Maoists to come to the open through their constant attention to their politics, their histrionics, commitments and programmes. Some free Nepali weeklies devote not less than 40 percent of their coverage on the Maoists in each issue.

It is ironical, therefore, that the Maoists should look askance at the free press today and suspect that they may have been funded by foreign agents. Examples abound. Kanak Dixit was detained by King Gyanendra's government for defying the restriction to use IT to talk to the foreign press. Other media groups were attacked and their facilities and technologies were looted and vandalised by government agents. Journalists were gagged by militias and governments' armed personnel over the last decade.
Parties' ambivalent attitude towards the free press continues. But the reality is that if the free press leaves a day without reporting the ongoing minuscule U-turns of the parties even today, the political process will move back to square one. The free press has been overtly or covertly alerting the mass and the parties.
What does it mean then to develop hostile attitude towards free press by the government and political parties today? Can a party dream to rule absolutely tomorrow by suppressing free media? Nobody should work with such imaginaries. People are so vigilant that they will not accept any regressive reporting either. So, why instead of sorting out the main political agenda, mutually working for a law and order situation and going to the villages with manifestos as the chief election commissioner has been pleading them to do, are the political parties and government fantasising a muted and muffled press?
The writers of the first drafts of history have great responsibilities as much as the governments to save a free media in Nepal.

Source: The Kathmandu Post, August 22, 2007

Peace please

Prerana Marasini

So you're from Nepal? The country of Maoists," reacted a foreign classmate of mine here in India. "You can't say it's the country of Maoists; I'm not a Maoist," I retaliated. "Don't deny your country is going through turmoil and there hasn't been any settlement even after the revolution," he said, "Believe it or not but the synonym for Nepal has become Maoists today."
Feeling a little dejected at the comment, that too in a different land, I wanted to think for a while that Nepal is still the same-peaceful-but I couldn't agree to myself. I went to the computer lab and logged on to Nepali websites to update myself with the latest political news. I hoped to see some positive news, something that was not related with deaths and damages, bandas and its aftermaths but I had to be disappointed again.

A parliamentarian had been attacked ruthlessly by Maoist cadres. The news said that they wanted to burn him alive, in public. I got goose bumps. I hadn't heard anything like that before and felt ashamed too. If the parliamentarians were attacked that way, I wondered what happens to the ordinary citizens. I felt emotionally hurt too, as the Maoists who joined the government months ago were still carrying out barbaric activities.
Some weeks ago, I had read the news in which they had attacked a DFO. The fact that they were still embracing people-frightening image disgusted me. Their participation in the government should show respect towards law and order. Involvement of their cadres in activities like these indicates either they haven't been able to implement law in their own group or, they want to remain as rebels. No matter what!

I was still pondering over the remark of my foreign friend, whose nationality I don't want to reveal, when I read something that gave me another blow. The news read: "CPN Maoists have formed committees for eight different ethnic-based 'states' under a federal structure for the country." States? I waited a second trying to figure out what they meant by that. 'Seti-Mahakali, Tharuwan, Magarat, Tamuwan, Newa, Madhes..' gave me a complete picture what these followers of Mao Tse-tung were up to. Split the nation!!
When I was a kid, I always thought of various things to introduce my country, in addition to the tallest peak and the Light of Asia, with foreigners. At this moment, however, I could not think of anything else except the green combatants with red bandana, the group that calls itself Young Communist League and carries out atrocities, and the leaders like Prachanda, Baburam, Mahara, and Hisila. I also remembered what Jwala Singh said-"We won't allow constituent assembly election to take place." I also visualized the everyday bandas and burning of tyres, destruction and demolition, hues and cries.
The more I thought, the more pessimist I became. I tried to divert my mind to the natural beauty of the country. But even that didn't help. I wanted to tell my classmate on his face: "Hey, I come from a peaceful country, okay." If only it was true….I sat back and closed my eyes.

Source: The Kathmandu Post, August 22, 2007