MAOIST PERSPECTIVE

Ideology Vs Reality

 The Maoist leadership make tentative attempt to convince the western donors about their economic policies

By SANJAYA DHAKAL

Both Prachanda and Dr. Baburam Bhattarai have publicly admitted that they faced tougher negotiations on economic agenda with the liberal democrats during the process of drafting of interim constitution.

Dr. Bhattarai : Hard time convincing

This showed that the comrades will have a tough job to alter the present economic system as they are sure to face fierce opposition from liberal democrats, international community and reformists in the days ahead. Perhaps sensing this difficult task, the Maoists have already said that they are in favour of realist economic agenda and have talked about reaching a common economic program with other parties during the interim government.

In such a background, the two leaders tried to present their perspectives on economy and development policies to a select group of Kathmandu-based western donors on December 22.

At a program hosted by the World Bank Nepal office, the two Maoist ideologues preached about the significance of socialist communist policies for a country like Nepal .

They, however, did not miss the opportunity to tell the donors that they are in favour of foreign assistance as well as foreign investment so far as "they are targeted at benefiting the poor people."

In what is seen as their first official interaction with the representatives of donor community, the Maoist leaders tried to allay the fears of western donors regarding their intentions.

"We are proud we created a new political situation in the country. Now we want to more rationalize our priorities," said Maoist chairman Prachanda said at the program. By "more rationalizing priorities" he probably meant that the doctrinaire and dogmatic communist economic policies seeped in classical Marxism could be facing the axe as far as they are concerned. Already under fire from their ideological fraternal parties from India and elsewhere for "abandoning the revolution midway," their decision to make a departure from classical Marxist economy could draw further criticism.

However, as Dr. Bhattarai so fondly states, "We neither sought others' support when forming the Maoist party or launching the people's war and nor we will seek their acceptance while making our decision based on our needs," the Maoists are making brave efforts to undergo both political as well as economic transformation into a mainstream political party.

But his efforts still appear half-hearted. When he elaborated Maoists' economic agenda before the donors, he did not forget to lay emphasis on the need to transform the country's current 'dependency stage' to capitalist stage. In classical Marxism, a state has to pass through stages of feudalism to capitalism to socialism to communism – the final dictatorship of the proletariat. As he has been stating that Nepal currently is at feudal stage, Dr. Bhattarai did not have any ideological qualms to say that his party wants the country to become 'capitalist for the time being' – something which surely would have pleased the ears of donors.

Dr. Bhattarai also said his party stressed on redistribution of land in order to usher in commercialization of agriculture and industrialization.

And in an apparent effort to win the confidence of donors, particularly the World Bank, Dr. Bhattarai also added that his party had the necessary political will to take action against big wilful defaulters of bank loans.

The program was attended by representatives of embassies of Denmark, Finland, World Bank, Canadian Cooperation and Asian Development Bank.

How well the comrade duos presentation went with the donors remain to be seen. But in an initial reaction to BBC Nepali Service, Ken Ohashi the country director of World Bank in Nepal said there were still many things to be clarified.

He particularly referred to the land redistribution scheme. He hinted that the state might not have enough resources to buy off the excess lands that will be determined through fixation of land ceiling. And any move to just seize the land would be against the individual's right to property.