Missed opportunity for Maoists

By Dr Shreedhar Gautam

With the incumbent Prime Minister replacing Girija Prasad Koirala as leader of the Congress Parliamentary Party, the cease-fire between the Maoist party and the government came as an important political event in the country. The subject was widely covered by the media and people expressed their views in accordance with their political understanding and interest. Many people hoped that the talks would result in a substantial gain for the country and the nation would take a new turn in its endeavour to accelerate progress and prosperity. They must have felt dismayed with the sudden eruption of armed action form the Maoist side followed by the declaration of emergency to quell the uprising.

Of course, the deadlock in talks between the two contending parties was most unfortunate news for the nation, but the subsequent events leading to the present crisis were not fully unexpected, considering the political nature of the present government and the style of functioning of the Maoist leaders. From the very beginning of the cease-fire and the professed dialogue, it was clear that both parties were entering into dialogue not because of political sincerity but because of their own political compulsions and pressures. Since the declaration of people’s war, there were various contradictions in terms of the policies and working style of the Maoist party. In the name of Maoism the top party leaders acted so arrogantly that on the one hand they alienated intellectuals and friendly parties, and on the other every criticism was taken as inimical, whereas every praise was treated as a friendly gesture without realising that different forces at work in society could be supporting and alerting them for different reasons. They did not see any need to correct their style of functioning and rectify the lapses seen in their ideological framework.

The declared goal of "people’s war" was to establish a socialistic society free from classes as propounded by Marx and Angles, and later advanced by Lenin and Mao. According to their evaluation the ground situation was ripe for protracted armed struggle, and all other measures, including the question of a constituent assembly, were simply revisionist measures meant just to delay the process of social transformation along Marxist lines. Soon after the restoration of the multiparty system, the leaders of the present Maoist party, known then as NCP (Moto Mashal), had vehemently denounced the slogan for a constituent assembly raised by another friendly party, terming the step a reactionary one to divert the people’s attention.

It is an ironical coincidence that the Maoists leaders are pressing for a constituent assembly, the very programme raised by then NCP (Patalo Mashal), and are advocating the need of giving the people sovereign power. In the immediate aftermath of the struggle of 1990 the iron was still hot and the people were enthusiastic about authorising themselves with constitutional powers so far denied to them. If the leaders of the Left Front and Nepali Congress had been foresighted and alert enough, we could have gotten a better constitution with more power to the people in view of the people’s support and desire seen in those days. It is unfortunate for our country that instead of giving maximum power to the people by taking advantage of the changed situation after proclamation of the multiparty system, leaders from the Left Front and Nepali Congress succumbed to the pressure of forces which never wanted the Nepali people to become really sovereign enough to decide their fate and determine the system of governance. Now it has become part of a missed opportunity as in the past when the Nepali people were deprived of the opportunity of electing members of a constituent assembly despite the declared promise of the late King Tribhuvan in this regard after his return from India.

The present Maoist leaders must be aware of Nepal’s history full of betrayal and conspiracies. They must also be aware of the process of social transformation in a society torn apart by clashes between rival classes. They should not have been so politically naive as to expect the fulfilment of demands for a republic, a constituent assembly and interim government from the present government whose recommendation is not necessary for the king if he desires to declare an emergency for a minimum period of three months. The present constitution has given enormous powers to the palace and no fundamental changes can be effected in the constitution without the consent of the king. So, any expectation that the government of Sher Bahadur Deuba would fulfil the demand for a constituent assembly or for that matter a republic was not only unrealistic but also politically childish. Very recently in an interview with the Times of India dated December 5, 2001 Prime Minister Deuba acknowledged that many of the demands put forward by the Maoists were beyond the jurisdiction of his government.

One of the topmost party leaders, in an article published in Kantipur immediately before the declaration of emergency, had argued that the demand for a constituent assembly was to lessen the king’s powers and to make the people sovereign in the real sense of the term. No one denies that the people should be the determining force in their fate and future. But it is unrealistic to expect the king to relinquish his powers in the present context and become a figurehead when constitutionally no authority can question the wisdom of his actions. Moreover, the election of a constituent assembly under the present political dispensation may to necessarily ensure the election of representatives dedicated to the cause of people’s sovereignty. We have the history of leaders who deceived the country in 2015 BS by agreeing to the election of a Parliament rather than a constituent assembly as promised by King Tribhuvan.

The Maoist leaders say that when a particular class is not emerging victorious, there should be certain procedures and measures for compromise. We know that there have been compromises between the contending parties depending upon their respective political strengths and weight. Does this mean that the Maoist party declared the people’s war not with the long term goal of establishing socialism, but to make it a bargaining factor for a constituent assembly? If this is so, the Maoists should give an answer to those innocent people and their own activists who scarified their lives in following the bidding of the party high command in the hope of a better tomorrow and a socialistic system. Can they say that there was a need for sacrificing over 2,000 lives in a people’s war just for raising the issue of a constituent assembly in a bargaining game?

The Maoist leaders should have realised the gravity of the present situation and ought not to have boasted of big achievements without actually giving anything to the people who have suffered a lot in the course of the Maoist movement. They committed a great mistake in the Holeri incident by claiming that the military was defeated in the first encounter with the Maoists. Actually what happened then was not the defeat of the army, but for strategic reasons the army was not given the necessary orders from the concerned authorities to fight the Maoists. Former army chief S JB Rana, in an interview with Nepali Times dated 7-13 December, has revealed that in the past army was not given a mandate to fight the Maoists. Now he claims the Maoists are on the defensive and are running out of arms to fight the military. The country would have been spared the current troubles if the Maoists had taken corrective measures. We know people are dissatisfied with the present ruling elite and political dispensation; and they are in search of real alternatives. But they are tired of dubious and ambiguous political parties and leaders. For the Maoist leaders it is too late as they have missed an opportunity to be a force to be reckoned with.

Waiting for Godot

By Perina Pathak

Nine year old Uma has come to live with us. Though it is against the law to keep a child labour at home, we decided to keep her for her good. If she were left behind to live her own life then she would have adopted a hellish life, which most of such young girls are likely to adopt for the sake of their existence.

About a year ago she used to lead a happy life with her parents, who were wageworkers. But last year her mother eloped with a man, leaving her behind to her fate. Then after two months, her father brought a new mother for her with two readymade brother and sister.

For some days, the life was jolly for her being with new people. But within a week she became extra and unwanted in her own house where she used to live happily. Father started staring at her in her every step. New brother and sister, whom she was reacting as her own, started to chase her and behave inhumanly. This made her very rude toward the society and a very unhappy girl.

Although she was a stepmother, she had some love toward the child and she made a plea to my mother to keep Uma for her well-being. Uma at last had a home to live in and people to care her. Uma lives happily these days and goes to school. She is living a tension-free life.

She is an example out of hundreds of such children whose fate has ordained them to live their remaining life in the streets from their childhood. Frustrated in their life, they search for an easy way out and start doing illegal work.

Though Uma has been rescued from being such a criminal in future, there are many unlucky children unlike her living in streets and fighting for their life. On the other hand, their parents are unaware of the condition of their children. Such parents who are the main culprits for the critical condition of those children are happy with themselves. Because they give birth to one child and move with someone else whom they want but leaving behind their children to their fate. Parents like Uma’s are mainly responsible for the growing number of children on the street.

On the other hand, our government has formulated laws, which don’t allow keeping such child in house. They have named it as child labour. If the general people are not allowed to provide for them then can government’s limited childcare centres keep all those homeless children?

And on the other hand, they enact laws, shout on top of their voice to eliminate child labour and vow to ensure child rights. But these vows are unmatched by their deeds.

As in the previous years, child rights day was also celebrated last week by releasing some jailed children. Every year some activities are undertaken on these days but there is no such provision which will give home to children like Uma. Hundreds of children are still leading a hellish life in streets.
Maybe in future some of them will involve themselves in criminal activities. And as for the girls, there is no other alternative than to become a prostitute.

US just a temporary ally ?

By Shikhar Shrestha

In the cities and towns of war-torn Afghanistan, the lighting collapse of Taliban control has felt to many like liberation. Many have cut off their long beards, women no longer hide beneath the hated all enveloping burqa, and children have flown kites, as the whole country rejoices to the rhythm and rhyme of "once forbidden" musty old film songs. The country would appear to have been reborn overnight, its most urgent and desperate problem solved. Yet for hundreds and thousands of Afghans, still trapped beneath years of famine, drought and war, suffering will not be dispelled so easily.

Afghanistan the country of great mountains, scorching deserts, fertile valleys and rolling plains is one of the world’s least developed countries. The air raids conducted by the US and its allies have impaired Afghanistan’s economy; its once GDP growth rate of 5 percent is now lagging behind at 4 percent as inflation and unemployment seem to soar higher and higher each day. The economy lies in tatters in the so-called hunger belt running across the highlands of seven northern provinces, the survival of up to 3 million people depends on the arrival of food shipments before mid-December; some 700,000 of them are already malnourished and live in mountainous areas that could become inaccessible any day. Camps along the borders of Iran, Tajikistan and Pakistan continue to be flooded with refugees fleeing the fighting. At the same time the chaos and confusion created by the stunning military turnaround have stalled efforts to rush international aid to the affected areas.

The attitudes of many critics have changed dramatically these past few days. Commentators who had been thundering about the invader’s feeble war plans now extol the suppleness of their strategy. The Northern Alliance, once scorned as a ragtag bunch of misfits, is now spoken of with awe and affection. But for now, peace and an improved economy is all that is craved for and many Afghans see no hope without a long-term international commitment to their country. All Afghan children, men and women are expecting this international commitment to come from the country that "started it all": United States of America. This superpower nation’s financial help, aid and political guidance would certainly heighten the improvement of Afghanistan’s social, political, educational and economic status.

Many critics accuse the US of not being a totally reliable and committed ally and many Arabs dislike it for its arrogance and haughtiness. The US is too used to having things done their way and its stubborn nature together with its being a superpower nation makes believe US a monopolistic decider. For example, President Bush after wining a controversial election began his term by catering to oil interests instead of agreeing to the UN’s environmental CO2 reduction treaty. Now, without consulting UN members, he has declared war.

Scenes of the Afghan roads to Kabul pocked by bomb craters and littered with the accumulated debris of two decades of war: burned-out hulks of Soviet tanks and rusting anti-aircraft guns, the Afghans are well aware of the US showing its back after the Afghan-Russian war. The country then was in a state of utmost turmoil, a ‘zero-economy’. The US completely abandoned and ignored Afghanistan. Such acts by the United States also came recently in Yugoslavia. The promise and assurances by the US to help the country come out of a deep economic recession and social disorder once the Milosevic government surrendered now appears to many Yugoslavs as mere folklore. The same story goes for Kosovo and Albania. After disarming by the Albanian rebels, hopes of peace, tranquillity and foreign aid came just as an initial temporary reaction. Many critics judged the United States then, of showing its true colours just like they did in Afghanistan 13 years ago.

In the early ’90s when bin Laden started building his reputation as Islamic outlaw, he had many potential sanctuaries; Afghanistan came on the top of the list. The strongest point why the US will not abandoned Afghanistan this time is the Al Qaeda network. Al Qaeda’s training camps in Afghanistan have been bombed into rubble, but the United States will have to keep working constantly, watch constantly to make sure that they do not pop up gain. The massive crackdown on the Al Qaeda’s the global financial network will hurt but not shutter dependent organisation. US will not give the Afghans the chance to stir up their old rancour towards the west and still try to articulately stop the conditions that produced bin Laden- poverty, decades of humiliations, repressive and corrupt local regimes, and backward looking religious extremists.

United States is currently working under pressure; pressures from international press, from many humanitarian aid agencies and other foreign countries. They all hope that this ‘war against terror’ will continue but without the cost of lives of innocent civilians. India hopes that the war against terror would also be dragged to Kashmir region where the Kashmiri Muslim fundamentalist groups have kept Indian defence personal on their toes, Israel wants US intervention in the Gaza Strip and Nepal too at the recent emergency crisis would certainly appreciate some international commitment towards the Maoists reign of terror. From the very forefront the picture is very clear; the war against terror would come to many as a sign of relief. The United States is certainly working to keep the current action going and according to Secretary of State Collin Powel Afghanistan is their first priority against their fight against terror. This comes to many Afghans and international speculators as an affirmative action and the hopes of a new Afghanistan era would not die so easily and suddenly!