|
|||
|
|
|||
|
COVER STORY |
GOVT.- MAOIST TALKS As the government and Maoist rebels ready themselves for talks, popular expectations are at an all-time high. But will the talks pave the way to a lasting peace? Perhaps it’s too hazardous even to make a prediction. By BHAGIRATH YOGI What would Mao Zedong have done if he were leading a rebellion in Nepal today? Perhaps he, too, would have chosen the path of talks with the establishment against which his ‘people’s war’ was targeted. At the invitation of Chiang Kai Shek, chairman of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Mao Zedong visited Chhungchi, inside China, on August 28, 1945, leading a three-member team that included Zhou Enlai and Wang Ro Phei. The 43-day talks between the Kuomintang government and the CCP concluded in what is known as the "October 10 Agreement", which recognized the Communist Party as the major political force in the country.
Mao returned to Yenan province on October 11 leaving behind his two colleagues in Chhungchi to continue the talks. In a report presented to his party colleagues in Yenan, Mao said: "The Kuomintang has accepted the conditions for peace and unity. It has also been agreed that the civil war should come to an end both parties should cooperate with each other in building a new China. Of course, there are certain issues that have not been resolved yet. The issue of ‘liberated areas’ and ‘armed force’ are yet to be resolved. Things written on paper can’t be accepted unless they are implemented." Fifty-six years down the Himalayan trail, the leaders of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) might be facing a similar situation when they sit across the table with representatives of the Nepali Congress government, probably within a few weeks, to seek a negotiated settlement to the five-and half-year old ‘people’s war.’ Within half an hour of plea for a truce by the newly appointed Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba on July 23, chairman of the Maoist party, Comrade Prachanda, urged his cadres "to withhold all planned offensives against the government forces (read: police)." He said his party was ready for talks if the government created a congenial environment for the purpose. As both sides made efforts build confidence, the cease-fire was followed by release of rebels and policemen. By last week, the Maoists had freed 47 policemen and Nepali Congress workers from their custody, while the government had released 27 Maoist cadres detained under the Public Security Act. In a swift move, Prime Minister Deuba managed to get ‘free hand’ in conducting peace negotiations with the rebels from the all-powerful central working committee of the ruling party. "The party would extend full cooperation to the government to resolve the problem of Maoist insurgency," declared Nepali Congress President Girija Prasad Koirala, who stepped down as prime minister last month amid months of pressure from the opposition and Congress dissidents led by Deuba. Last Friday, Deuba convened a high-profile meeting comprising leaders of political parties represented in the parliament "to evolve a national consensus on the issue of dealing with the insurgency." To his satisfaction, nearly five-hour meeting at Singha Durbar concluded that national consensus could help in resolving the six-year-old Maoist insurgency in the country. A joint statement issued at the end of the meeting said the leaders welcomed the ongoing moves of the government toward achieving a peaceful solution to the problem by holding dialogue with the Maoists.
Both the government and Maoists should come to the negotiating table without any preconditions if they genuinely seek a lasting solution to the problem. "All activities leading to disturbances in educational, social and economic sectors of the country should be immediately stopped to make the atmosphere of talks more favorable and trustworthy," the statement said. The all-party meet also asked the government to exercise maximum restraint and alertness thereby safeguarding fundamental human rights of the people. In between, the Deuba government managed to regularize the Armed Police Force Ordinance and Local Governance (fourth amendment) Ordinance in parliament and pass them from the House of Representatives with the support of the main opposition, Unified Marxist-Leninist party. The government is now planning to convene another meeting of leaders of parties represented in parliament and those outside to discuss the procedures and framework for the Proposed talks before announcing the negotiation team and other details. The Maoist rebels, on their part, have used the period to organize open, mass meetings in different parts of the country, including Kathmandu. Reports say the insurgents are targeting vacant police posts, raising ‘donations’ and engaged in publicity works such as a call for a ban on the sale of alcohol beginning August 17. As expected, both sides are treading extremely carefully not to spoil the environment for talks that is in the making after several years. The Maoist leadership, that used to issue press statements almost every day when the Royal Nepalese Army personnel had been deployed at Nuwagaon, Rolpa last month, haven’t officially reacted to the government’s move of regularizing the Armed Police Force Ordinance yet. Instead, Janadesh weekly, said to be close to the Maoists, reported Tuesday that the underground party has completed all preparations for the proposed talks, reports said. Janadesh, believed to be the mouthpiece of the Maoists, quoted a highly placed Maoist source as saying that the party was ready to send a high-level team to hold talks at a venue proposed by the government or even invite the government team at its ‘own place’. But for this, the government should create an environment of confidence, the source said. The weekly alleged that "domestic and foreign reactionary forces" had succeeded in using the Deuba government against the Maoists by ensuring the smooth passage of the Armed Police Force Bill and Local Governance (fourth amendment) Bill in collusion with the UML. "At a time when there has been widespread popular pressure in favor of talks and ‘total change,’ the government has fallen into the trap of ‘anti-talks elements,’ which has been taken into notice by the Maoist party seriously," the weekly said. Despite all the seminars and discussions taking place in Kathmandu every day highlighting the need to find a peaceful resolution to the Maoist insurgency, nobody is sure whether the proposed talks — if and when they take place — would bear fruits. A little known ultra-left outfit, the CPN (Maoist) launched what it called a ‘people’s war’ in February 1996 when Deuba led a center-right coalition government. The underground party started its war by targeting isolated police posts mainly in western Nepal even before the deadline given by its political front, the United People’s Front, led by architect-turned revolutionary Dr. Baburam Bhattarai, had given to the government to fulfill their 40-point demands. The demands ranged from abrogation of all unequal treaties and agreements, including the 1950 Peace and Friendship Treaty with India, formulation of new constitution by popularly elected representatives to set up a people’s democracy, removal of all the privileges of the King and the royal family members, bringing the army, police and administration under full control of the people, to guaranteeing employment to everybody, giving appropriate price for the produce of farmers and ensuring drinking water, roads and electricity in the villages. As successive unstable, coalition governments undermined the intensity of the `war’ and had no concrete policy to deal with it, the underground party managed to develop ‘base areas’ and raise a ‘people’s army’ and militia in the remote mid-western hills to pursue the war with the declared objective of making Nepal a ‘people’s republic.’ After the rebellion entered the second phase of `strategic stalemate’ from `strategic defense,’ the rebels started targeting ill-equipped police posts and killing policemen mercilessly in the dead of the night. As the government withdrew from their areas of influence, the insurgency spread like wildfire. Within five years, the rebels had managed to show their presence in as many as 55 out of 75 districts in the country.
With 1,800 people killed, hundreds more disappeared or receiving physical injuries, billions of rupees worth property destroyed or looted, the Maoist insurgency has established itself as the major problem in the country. Almost all governments over the last few years have given top priority to deal with the problem of insurgency. Ironically, the same insurgency has put the Maoists as a formidable political force in the country — able to dictate their terms to the government and political parties in Singha Durbar. After Koirala resigned on July 19, apparently after the Royal Nepalese Army `failed’ to fulfill its mission of rescuing nearly 70 policemen with their weapons abducted by the rebels attacking a police post at Holeri in Rolpa district, the rebels were upbeat. Comrade Prachanda, through his faxed statements, demanded that his party would not hold talks with a Nepali Congress leader that followed in the footsteps of Koirala. With Deuba, known for his commitment to work out a peace deal through talks, in the helms, the Maoist leadership, too, was forced to reciprocate. Amid reports of differences within the Maoist party over the issue of engaging the government over the talks — so as to avoid direct confrontation with the army, or continuing their violent offensives — the Maoist leadership now faces a challenge to give a meaningful turn to its armed rebellion. As domestic and international pressure is growing for both sides to engage in peace talks, the Maoist leadership has an obvious choice — to capitalize on the gains acquired in the jungle or move toward a suicidal path by inviting the government to use all its force. Any rational leadership would choose the first alternative. For the government, bringing the rebels to the table of negotiations itself would give a big political mileage. If the Deuba government fails to bring the Maoists in the political mainstream, it would mean that a hardline leadership may emerge within the ruling party backed by Koirala. Or the people might even give a chance to an opposition party to try its hand. Agenda for Talks Though both the government and Maoists have not made their agenda for the talks public, the Maoist leadership has said the proposed discussions should focus on three issues—formation of an interim government, elections to the constituent assembly and formulation of a people’s government. "All these three demands are oriented toward establishing a republican system in Nepal," said Madhav Kumar Nepal, leader of the main opposition UML. The Maoist leaders agree. "After the decimation of the entire clan of King Birendra in a conspiratorial way with the support of the imperialist and expansionist forces, monarchy based on feudal nationalism has ended and republican system has objectively emerged in Nepal," wrote Dr. Bhattarai, in a newspaper article. "At a time when the reactionary regime is passing through fast dissolution and a revolutionary people’s regime is spreading fast all over the country, the talks should be focused toward bringing about a total change in the present regime. In fact, the table of negotiations offers an opportunity to stamp a seal on the real power acquired in the battleground." So, are the much-professed talks between the government and rebels only rhetoric? Critics say the Maoists want to use the truce to equip their cadres with training and supplies so that they could take on the army. The all-party meet last week asked the government to maintain maximum restraint and alertness thereby safeguarding fundamental human rights of the people. Analysts say the government has the dual responsibility of bringing an extra-systemic force within the sphere of the constitution by providing it political space, while at the same time safeguarding interests of the nation and people. For their part, the Maoists are not in a position to prolong their ‘war’ indefinitely by pushing the country on the brink of civil war. Given the geo-political situation of Nepal, such a war could even cost Nepal its sovereignty. Admitted Dr. Bhattarai in his article published in Dishabodh monthly: "One of the most important questions now is to protect nationality from the imperialist (read: US) and expansionist (read: India) forces. So, there is a need to safeguard our nationalism from the assaults of these forces by institutionalizing the republic and maintaining national unity under the leadership of proletariats." Keeping the jargon aside, this would mean the rebels would agree to protect nation’s interests if given some sort of prominent role. This could be made possible by amending the present constitution. But as the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal 1990, has identified constitutional monarchy, multi-party democracy and people’s fundamental rights as unalterable, the present government can travel only a short distance with the rebels. Others, however, see the slogan of a republican state as no more than a tactical move on part of the Maoists. Says D.P. Adhikari, one of the founders of the Communist Party of Nepal, "Communists by ideology are internationalist and republican. But how justified would it be to stick to the same slogan at a time when Nepalese monarchy does not exercise executive powers and has confined its role within the constitution?" But a middle path could be worked out once both the sides agree to sit for talks. "Once you sit across a table for talks, things start rolling. In fact, talks acquire their own momentum," said Yadav Kant Silwal, a former diplomat. WITH THE prospects of the Maoists joining the mainstream, Nepalese communist parties have started searching their ground. The main opposition, UML, has started initiative for what it calls `broader left unity’ by opening doors for even its splinter group, the CPN (ML). It is also seeking a role in the proposed talks. "The problem of Maoist insurgency is a national problem. As a single party or government can’t resolve it, there should be an effort from all sides to resolve it peacefully," said Jhal Nath Khanal, a senior leader of the UML, who led a study team about the Maoist insurgency. "Our nation, people, economy and culture — all are getting weak at present. So, there is a need to carry out massive, nationwide reform programs in all spheres of public life." The opposition is also critical of the government, saying it has not done its homework properly. They blame the government of seeking a consensus with all parties without showing its cards. Human rights activists, too, say the government needs to prepare itself seriously for the proposed talks. "Both sides need to be serious in finding a peaceful solution to the problem. All we can do is facilitate such talks," said Sudip Pathak, president of the Human Rights Organization of Nepal (HURON). The changing international relations scenario also seems to be in favor of the peace initiative. With the United States giving top priority to its relations with China and both China and India becoming sensitive toward their security with the expansion of insurgency along their borders, the Maoist movement needed a `safe landing’ sooner than later. "The insurgency has stretched too far. It should come to an end for its own good," said an analyst. If it happens, it will be a positive development for the country, democracy and hundreds of thousands of Nepalese people — who are compelled to face the brunt of the insurgency that has added to their woes by promising them a dignified life. Will Chairman Mao prevail over his Nepalese disciples? ‘Some Sorts Of Agreement Is Likely Out Of Talks’ — D. P. ADHIKARI One of the founders of the Communist Party of Nepal in 1949, D. P. ADHIKARI returned Nepal after exile in India in the sixties. He later joined the partyless Panchayat system and was one of the architects of the controversial ëBack to Village campaign.' Adhikari is not affiliated to any political parties now but holds strong views regarding protecting national independence and economic development of the country. Follows excerpts of a tete a tete' with the septuagenarian ideologue: How do you see the prospects of talks between the government and Maoists? Dr. Baburam Bhattarai and Prachanda started this movement by giving guns to unemployed educated youth in the name of ëJanabad' (democracy). This group has emerged as one of the powerful class. But the movement can't succeed unless people at large support them. Such a support was not forthcoming over these years. The Maoists are not ready to fight with the military. But if the talks fail, they will come face to face with the military. If military also fails, then foreign invasion is inevitable. As you know, India would not like to see a communist regime in Nepal. So, I am optimistic that some sort of agreement would take place. Do you agree that a section of palace is supporting the Maoist movement? Why should the palace take such risk. Some people are trying to portray the present situation as an outcome of the failure of the multi-party system. But I think it is because of the failure of the multi-party leadership. The multi-party polity can give solution to the present problems but what is lacking is a (strong) leadership. How is it that Maoists are raising the issue of a republican state? Communists by principle are internationalist and republican. There is a strong sentiment in favor of republicanism among the communists. It could also be a camouflage for their other demands. But why should we need a republican state when the King no more enjoys executive powers and has agreed to limit himself within the sphere of the constitution? Recent incidents show that monarchy is still a unifying factor in Nepal. To raise questions on the King's loyalty toward multi-party polity is a lame excuse. How do you see the future of the Maoist movement? We will have some kind of insurgency even in the future. Communism is an international slogan and its appeal will be there as long as we have povrty and unemployment in our society. Do you agree that Nepali nationalism is getting weaker? I don't agree. I would rather say that the ethnic unity and integrating forces are trying to renew their relations. Of course there are some disintegrating forces which we need to recognize. There have been attempts to divide Nepal along ethnic lines but it has simply failed. It is because the bond of social integration in Nepal is quite strong. How do you see Nepal's future in the changing international scenario? I have predicted that the possible clash between the US and China could take place along the Tibet border. Both India and China have security interests in Nepal. Despite widespread poverty, India is trying to gain a position of superpower with the help of the US. So, we can't assume that India has remained aloof from the developments in Nepal. Nepali nationalism is very strong and aware. But as long as we remain poor, we can't protect our national interests. So, economic development is the main issue. Today's Nepal is not the Nepal of fifties. We have enough human resource and infrastructre for our development. What we need now is a committed leadership. How could Nepal's present problems be solved? The only solution is economic developmet of te country. We have infrastructure like roads, electricity, schools etc. even in far flung areas. Now we should be able to provide employment to the educated lot. You can't make people belonging to different castes and communities happy in the absence of economic development. |
Send your feedback to the
editor: spotligh@mos.com.np |
