Revolution in South Asia

An Internationalist Info Project

Baidya at Nepal Maoist Plenum: Time is Ripe for Revolt

Posted by hetty7 on November 25, 2010

photo: jed brandt

This article was published by  myrepublica.

We urge readers to remember that these reports on the Maoist Central Committee meeting are, at this point, still coming to us through the bourgeois press — who have their own motives and worldview.  No one should assume that these are accurate. We will post actual texts of the various positions and speeches as soon as they become available in English. Baidya is also known by his nom de guerre, Kiran.

Maoist Plenum – Baidya Threatens Revolt Against Party

Post Bahadur Basnet

Palungstar, Gorkha, Nov. 23: Maoist Senior Vice-chairman Mohan Baidya has threatened to revolt against the party if the official party line is not implemented.

“If the  party doesn’t become revolutionary and gets bogged down in revisionism, we will have to raise the red flag for revolution,” a party leader quoted Baidya as saying while presenting his separate political document  in closed session on Monday, the second of the plenum being held in Palungstar, Gorkha district.

Baidya warned that he would not remain in the party if it sides with revisionism.

On Monday, Baidya and Vice-Chairman Dr Baburam Bhattarai presented their political documents at the jumbo meeting that kicked off on Sunday.

Baidya was agressive against Chairman Pusha Kamal Dahal for not implementing the official party line of “People’s Federal Democratic Republic” and achieving the goal through a people’s revolt, as decided during the Khariparti national conclave in 2008.

“The time has ripened for a revolt. We can capture state power through the fusion of a People’s War and a people’s revolt,” the source quoted Baidya as saying further while presenting his paper.

He said that he shares  many things with Dahal, but argued that such similarities in ideology alone are not enough. “The party line has not been implemented. Saying one thing in theory and doing quite the opposite in practice doesn’t lead the party anywhere,” he said in his nearly two-hour long paper presentation.

He stated that he was presenting the separate political document  to warn the party leadership against revisionism and to show a red flag to quide the party toward revolutionary goals. He argued that he doesn’t have any intention to snatch the party leadership.

Baidya also severely criticized  Bhattarai for his argument that “domestic feudalism” alone, not India, should be declared the party’s principal enemy. “Both domestic feudalism and India  have joined hands in the present context. So both should be declared the party’s principal enemy,” Baidya argued.

He said that he doesn’t disagree with Bhattarai  that the Maoists should push peace and the constitution, but ruled out the possibility of the country seeing the completion of the peace process and a new constitution due to the “regressive mindset” of other political parties, mainly Nepali Congress (NC).

“Other parties are against formulating a constitution in favor of the people; they are batting strongly  for issues like pluralism in the new constitution. If we agree with them, we will be dragged into revisionism ; we will follow the path of the CPN-UML,” he said.

Ruling out the possibility of achieving People’s Federal Democratic Republic through the ongoing peace process, Baidya has demanded  that the party complete “four types of preparations” — technical, ideological, organizational and political — and launch a people’s revolt.  It may be recalled that the Maoists had completed “four types of preparations prior to declaring People’s War” in 1996.

Similarly, another vice-chairmanm Dr. Baburam Bhattarai,  attacked Dahal saying the latter doesn’t have any ideological line and vacillates between the party lines of the two vice-chairman. “Both Baidya and I are clear about our lines, but the chairman is not. So he should clarify his line,” Bhattarai said, speaking for more than two hours.

He also criticized Dahal for giving the impression in the party that he himself is its headquarters. “Headquarters means collective leadership, not the chairman alone,” Bhattarai said.

Bhattarai pushed strongly for his party line of institutionalizing the political achievements made so far and completing the peace process and constitution drafting before taking another stride toward realizing communist ideological goals.

He also claimed that his line would ultimately prevail in the party. “History has proven that the line floated by me has always been correct,” he stated.

The Maoist vice-chairman also argued that the party cannot fight effectively by declaring both India and “domestic feudalism” as its principal enemy.

He argued that the nature of imperialism and expansionism has changed  in the globalized world. “Imperialism has spread its wings through the international finance system. There is no direct intervention by foreign countries. If any country directly intervenes in Nepal, I will be the first person to go to the battlefield,” Bhattarai stated.

Dahal is scheduled to present his document on Tuesday.  Leaders close to the Baidya and Bhattarai factions said that they would decide  their further move after listening to his synthesized document on the fourth day of the plenum. Party insiders say one of the two vice-chairmen is likely to register a dissenting opinion in the plenum.

The top leaders have agreed to pass a single document accommodating the similar views, let the two vice-chairmen register their dissenting opinions if any, and take up broader ideological disputes at the general conventions.


11 Responses to “Baidya at Nepal Maoist Plenum: Time is Ripe for Revolt”

  1. maitri said

    Go Comrade Kiran, keep the flag flying. Or is it too late?

  2. tikb said

    Hallo from Turkey
    All Comrade

  3. […] * Baidya at Nepal Maoist Plenum: Time is Ripe for Revolt […]

  4. Really Baidhya was the leading figure of hat Plenum. Most of the deligates raised the red flag in favour of revolution . There was a choros song- MLM : Zindabad, New Democratic Revolution : Zindabad.They stoodup in the revolutionary line, the line led by Com Baidhy.

  5. Rajesh said

    In my opinion, Prachanda’s political line, which pleads for peace and constitution writing and also talks about revolt in an abstract sense, is a mechanical mixture of revolution, non-revolution and anti-revolution. Therefore, it pleads for anything and nothing, both at the same time. One leg on peaceful transition of state power and another leg on violent means is what Pranchanda is talking about. This is all ambiguous, Third Dimensional and non-Marxist, if not anti-Marxist analysis. In this context, Bhattarai is clear. His political line is plain, simple and understandably well explained democratic socialism. His political line just mixes a few Maoist/Marxist phrases to create a level playing field. Mohan Baidhya has basically taken a Marxist/Maoist stand in regard to nature of state power, its transition through violent means, communist character, culture, ethics and morality and correction of the course of the party. His analysis that India is an principle enemy and contradiction between Nepali nation and India is the main contradiction does not reflect the phenomenon the expansionists, imperialist operate in 21st century. Most often, they operate through agents. These agents include reactionary ruling elites, their parties, comprador businesses, reactionary intellectuals organized in the name of human rights, democracy, NGOs, etc and the bureaucracy that is primarily corrupt. Therefore, if you simply target India that would be just a slogan, which will neither help change Nepali society nor that would expose the real expansionist design. This is the very domestic reaction which should be confronted against to liberate the masses. The revolutionaries should focus of the broad phenomenon of the revolutionary civil war until there is real, visual and armed attack against an independent nation. Hence, with this advice for consideration, I think, Mohan Baidhya’s political line is the revolutionary line, which could bring the desired result of emancipating the Nepali working class people.

  6. maitri said

    cheers Rajesh. Do you think that Baidya’s political line can win over the party? You say that Prachanda’s line is all and nothing. the question is, what is his political line and the real line of the Maoist party at the present? Is it Bhattarai’s line or Baidya’s? thanks.

  7. Shiva said

    The UCPN-M should have known by now that they have been cheated by the SPA, under pressure fron the big neighbour.
    It is folly to believe that imperialist and hegemonic powers will tolerate revolutionary change, even by peacful means.

    Mistakes are part of the revolutionary process.
    What is bad is not to learn from them.

    It is important not to provoke an international “war on terror” in Nepal. But that cannot be at the cost of mass struggle.
    What is needed first and foremost is the re-consolidation of people’s victories in the countryside; rebuilding of the revolutionary mass bases; restoring people’s government as before the CFA.

    As long as the Maoists adhere to the revolutionary mass line and do not fall for the “peaceful path to socialism”, they will win. There are no shortcuts and there is no expressway to revolution. The struggle will inevitable be prolonged, but victory is certain.
    What is important for the UCPN-M is to unite undergo thorough self-criticism, reassess the reality; and advance.

  8. Rajesh said

    Dear Maitri,
    Thanks for your feedback and questions. I like to share my assessment in brief.

    The UPCN (M) has been involved in a fierce two line struggle.

    The political line advocated by Bhattarai revolves around radical reform agenda, primarily focusing on peaceful processes and outcomes that include PLA integration, constitution writing, rapid economic development and emphasis on social justice.

    On the other side, Mohan Baidhya has been advocating for reassessment of the Chunabang decisions, which initiated the process of 12 points agreement that resulted to dissolution of people’s local governments/base areas and cantonizing PLA, etc. Moreover, he has been advocating for people’s revolt as a final means of attaining state power. He has been questioning leadership’s behaviors, which are not compatible with communist values, ethics and behaviors.

    Prachanda’s line includes both the above lines and makes a hybrid version.

    Now, UCPN (M) has no single dominant line. This is in a state of temporary equilibrium.

    As Mao has said that equilibrium is relative and temporary, whereas disequilibrium is absolute and permanent (Ten Major Relationships), this stage of equilibrium will vanish sooner than later. ‘PLA integration’ is one of the major yard sticks to conclude which line prevails. If PLA remains intact and comes out of the cantonment, the communist revolutionary line would prevail. If PLA disappears, the radical reform agenda line would prevail. The struggle will continue at a higher level.

  9. maitri said

    cheers Rajesh,

    how are the PLA? I mean, what condition are they in after being in cantonments under UN supervision for a few years? are they still a fighting force? also, what is the relative size of the PLA in comparison with the Nepal Army? I imagine that in the meantime, the Nepal army have been equipped with all kinds of equipment from US, EU, British imperialists and India also. also, among the people, do the Maoists still have a good name, a good reputation?

    also, do you think that if Bhattarai’s line came to dominate, that the Nepali Maoists would be able to do good radical reform in the way that has been done in Venuzuela under Chavez. be grateful for you opinions.
    thanks.

    is there any danger of the party splitting? ( this would be a disaster I think)

  10. Rajesh said

    Thanks Maitri.

    The PLA is one of the most disciplined forces, if we consider a few unwanted incidences as exceptions. However, their fighting will as well as abilities may not be the same after being in cantonments for some years. Hence, here the ideological depth and class character of the fighters will play a major role.

    All the 5 high level commanders have shown their loyalty to Prachanda’s ambiguous line in Palungtar. Hence, there is the possibility of the use of technical/military “command and control system” to paralyze them further.

    The grassroots level fighters who are a large majority have shown the zeal and temperament, which is favorable to continue the revolutionary tasks/tactic/strategy. Hence, in the numerical strengths and level of skill might have its influence, but there would be a sizable number of PLA fighters ready to carry on the fight, if and when the people’s war begin again from a higher spiral.

    The (R) Nepal army might have acquired more weapons, but that may not prevent the PLA to begin the battle from a position of strategic defense.

    The number of NA is around hundred thousand. Quite a few among them are functioning as domestic helps of the army officers, as construction workers primarily in building roads, as peace-keeping force outside the country and as guards of many corrupt politicians. So, their active fighting force may not be more than half of their actual size.

    Till now, UCPN (M) is not moving towards split. When internal democracy gets obstructed, the split could be the only available course. But, as of now, the internal democracy factor is in action, if not in full swing. If Prachanda’s rejection to call party congress continues for long, the split factor may get acceleration. Otherwise, the present two line struggle could the resolved through the party congress.

    I have no idea if there will be a better Nepal if Bhatarai’s line prevails. Certainly, there would be attempts for some tangible change. The result could be seen in quantitative improvements. But, as in India reformists including CPI, CPIM, CPI (ML) Liberation, etc and in Nepal CPN (UML) failed to bring desired transformation and radical change in power relationships in the society, Bhattarai’s line may not have a different outcome.

  11. maitri said

    thanks Rajesh for a good detailed answer. do you think the likelihood of going back to war is likely or not?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: