Kiran and Badal: Disbanding the PLA is a mistake
Posted by redpines on November 12, 2011
It’s not an easy situation. It’s true that leaders like Prachanda and Bhattarai appear to have “sold out” and abandoned anything resembling a revolutionary path. But it’s also true that these kinds of betrayals become more and more likely as a party moves toward power, when many new contradictions emerge. For instance, the danger of severe international isolation becomes very real. In turn, the temptation to take the capitalist road becomes stronger. Despite this difficult road, the revolutionary wing of the UCPN(M) continues to fight against the liquidation of the People’s Liberation Army, and for a road toward New Democracy and socialism.
The following statement by Vice Chairman Mohan Baidya ‘Kiran’ and General Secretary Ram Bahadur Thapa ‘Badal’, discusses the revolutionary wing’s opposition to the recent Seven Point Agreement between several major parties in Nepal. The agreement would effectively dismantle the PLA, as well as the Young Communist League, another people’s fighting force. Without the PLA, the gains made by Nepal’s decade-long People’s War may be in danger. However, Kiran and Badal suggest that even this dire situation is not a final blow to the revolution:
The conflict and movement can be managed not by disarming the PLA but by solving people’s political and economic problems. If no attention is paid on it none will be able to stop the creation of another historical mass movement.
Full Text of Press Statement by Comrade Kiran and Badal
November 6, 2011.
Respected media persons,
It is known to all that an agreement paper entitled “An agreement reached among the political parties on the issues including peace process” and jointly signed by the chairman of the UCPN (Maoist), chairman of CPN (UML), president of the Nepali Congress and leaders from United Democratic Madheshi Front was brought to public through media. The said agreement has seriously hurt at the credence and prestige of the great people’s war waged by the Maoists for ten years, the expectations, aspirations and dreams of the martyrs, disappeared and injured fighters and the outstanding records of devotion, heroism and sacrifice by the PLA and the entire freedom-loving masses as well. Although efforts have been made to beautify this agreement as a historical agreement that initiates a new era but in essence it has become a symbol of capitulation and a serious betray towards nation and the people. We strongly oppose this kind of agreement.
1.In the beginning of the agreement, it has been stated that “the political process including constitution writing needs to be pushed forward by bringing the peace process to a logical end”. The peace process must have been made an integral, interrelated and unified part of army integration and constitution writing. We firmly oppose for not making it so.
2.The sub-point (c) of the first point of the said agreement states that “the Maoist combatants must individually fulfil the criteria of security forces in which they are to be integrated”. Likewise, the sub-point (f) of the same point states that the entire weapons stored in the cantonments will come under the control of the Nepal Government after the army integration process starts. These kinds of expressions in the agreement paper clearly show that the army integration is being carried out in an individual basis, not in groups, and not armed but in an unarmed way. The Standing Committee (SC) and Central Committee (CC) decisions clearly state that the PLA integration will take place in groups and also armed in accordance with the special criteria of army integration. Likewise, in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) and the Interim Constitution (IC), it has been clearly mentioned that the PLA integration will be carried out as to provide them the role of combatants. However, it is clear that the said agreement is against the CPA and IC and also the SC and CC decisions as well. When PLA comes under the jurisdiction of the state, individual criteria and surrendering of arms to the state is utterly wrong, we fully oppose it. Our stand that the PLA integration must be in groups and armed continues.
3.In sub-point (b) of the same point of the agreement it has been stated that the Maoist combatants will be given the responsibility of “development and construction, forest security guard, industrial security guard and catastrophe management”. It goes against the decisions of our SC and CC meetings and the concept of army integration as well. PLA’s role can never be in the form of a forest guard and watchman. The CC and SC decisions, which state that the new force formed after the integration of PLA will have the responsibility of border security force as a regular combatant army, is correct and we firmly stand by this decision.
4.The ratio of integration of the armies has been fixed to be 65% from the security forces and 35% from the PLA in the sub-point (b) of the first point of the said agreement. To lessen the number of the PLA to be integrated goes against the party decision in which it was said that integration will be carried out in such a way that both sides will have 50% in number. And we oppose this too.
5.In our party, it has been explicitly emphasized time and again that the national security policy must be brought out before army integration. But, no attention has been paid in the said agreement in this regard. Our firm opinion is that the national security policy must be formulated before PLA integration.
6.We strongly oppose that the package, which has been proposed for those combatants who want to go for rehabilitation, is unjustified as compared to the role they had played for the political change in Nepal. We stress to manage sufficient package of rehabilitation so that it agrees with the role the PLA had played.
7.The sub-point (a) of the point number 4 of the said agreement has used abstract language on the question of establishing the fact-finding and reconciliation commission and the commission for investigating disappearances, and, in the same manner, the sub-point (b) of the same point does the same on the question of rescinding the false cases charged against the Maoists during the people’s war period. We strongly oppose both. We demand to mention these issues in concrete.
8.In the sub-point (a) of the sixth point of the said agreement, which is related with creating a conducive environment to implement the past agreements, it has been clearly said that the private and public properties that remain under the control of the Maoists will be returned back with compensation while on the other the agreement does not mention any concrete alternative arrangement for the landless and poor peasants, tillers and tenants after they return back the land that they had seized in the course of people’s war. We oppose this too and strongly demand to arrange alternatives land for those landless, poor peasants, tillers and tenants.
9.In the sub-point (b) of the point number 7 of the said agreement the issues like restructuring of the state and drafting of the new constitution are simply touched with no due importance. However, the seriously important questions like the content of the constitution in which consensus should be reached among the political parties has not been touched at all. We firmly oppose for not paying due attention to establish in the constitution the right of the workers, peasants, indigenous people, dalits, women, Madheshis, Muslims, people from the oppressed regions and national bourgeoisie and for remaining silent on the sovereignty of the country, national independence, territorial integrity and on building independent and self-reliant national economy.
In total, this agreement is not in favour of the nation and people. It has devalued the PLA. In the name of army integration, this agreement, keeping itself away from writing new constitution, has been limited to the task of disarming PLA. The great people’s war was initiated and the PLA was formed to defend national independence, establish people’s democracy, solve the basic problem of people’s livelihood, establish rights and defend the interests of workers, peasants, women, dalit, indigenous people, Madheshi, Muslims, people from the remote areas and including the national bourgeoisie. However, the PLA has been dissolved before these goals are fulfilled. We seriously object it.
We are in favour of real peace and writing people’s constitution. We want to honourably integrate the PLA. Taking army integration and constitution writing as an inseparable part of the peace process, we have been drawing attention of the leaders of various political parties on how to move forward. However, that was not taken up seriously. The conflict and movement can be managed not by disarming the PLA but by solving people’s political and economic problems. If no attention is paid on it none will be able to stop the creation of another historical mass movement. We specially appeal and request the political parties to think on it in a serious manner.
Finally, we specially request and appeal the entire patriotic, republican, left and the broad masses to raise forceful voice – relating the question of peace and army integration with that of constitution and as well paying attention to people’s interest – as to reach to a new accord and, by rescinding the aforesaid anti-nation and anti-people agreement, line up in a historical campaign of defending national independence, establishing people’s federal republic and building a new Nepal.
With Revolutionary Greetings!
November 2, 2011
Mohan Baidya (Kiran)
Unified C. P. N. (Maoist)
Ram Bahadur Thapa (Badal)
Unified C. P. N. (Maoist)