Jawala-jee, I did not intend to "cheapen" Maoist movement, neither would I go for overrating it. When I am in an analytical mode, I would evaluate things in a case by case basis. Dudh ko dudh, paani ko paani. That's the way it has to be. Maoists movement had some unforgivable flaws and blunders, or whatever name suits it. The Maoist brand, communist banner and use of violence against innocent civilians were all unwarranted. And the source of this blunder was what I talked about Prachanda earlier. Kura tyaso thiyo. I was not intending to say that Gyanendra Shah, GP Koirala, Sher Bahadur Deuba and Madhav Nepal are more studious and intelligent individuals than Prachanda. However, I would add that Maoists seriously lack appreciation of free thinking, free market and freedom that is going to be vital requirement for reconstruction of Nepal. Their dogmatism is going to be a big pain in the ass of economic reform of Nepal, I am afraid. That said, we have noticed some degree of flexibility/reformism/adaptability in the Maoists. Their adoption of "democratic republic" is a proof to that. And this was not something that came out of blue. They showed the first major sign of ideological flexibility in 2001 by accepting the notion of pluralism in their new doctrine called "democracy for 21st century". Actually that is what makes their commitment to "democratic republic" credible. I had a long discussion on this very subject in ND google group with a member who was skeptic of the Maoists and was apprehensive that Maoists are up for establishing "North Korean republic" in Nepal. I was trying to convince him that Maoist's "abataran" to "democratic republic" is real and credible. There I was kinda defending the Maoists. Again, what I was doing was -Dudh ko dudh, paani ko paani. Here is that conversation: The following article by Murariraj Sharmaji was the starter: - http://www.nepalnews.com/archive/2006/others/guestcolumn/may/guest_columns_may06_06.php My first comment: From: .. To: "nepal democracy" Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 5:23 PM Subject: [ND] Re: Murari ji's article in Newpal news.com > > I appreciate and agree with Murariji's various suggestions to the > government to consolidate it's power, although I would have preferred > to see them under the aegis of "institutionalizing Monarchy's surrender > to people's power of Jana-andolan" rather than what Murariji described > as "to grapple with twin threats to democracy". > > There are no twin threats to democracy, unless "democratic republic" is > no democracy. > > If "democratic republic" is democracy, then it is not the Maoists and > even not the Monarchy that are threats to democracy. It is Girija's > group which is in power and have dislike for "democratic republic", > that is threat to democracy. > > Let me elaborate. > > King is no threat anymore. He has surrendered. It's a real surrender. > And remember, it was the CREDIBILITY of pro-republic voice of people > (not SPA !) that made the King to surrender. Since the voice and the > people are not going to disappear until a brand new constitution is > written, it will be a paranoia to fear that King will try to restore > his power. > > (Muraraji has reported something interesting- "the monarchy has already > mobilized its supporters to lobby the international community to save > itself". Is this really an authentic report ? Even if it is, it is only > "to save itself", not to restore his power, I suppose.) > > So, monarchy trying to consolidate it's lost power for until CA's > election is not a realistic possibility. Then, this kind of fear > actually indirectly encourages the King to do so. The best thing for us > to reinforce his surrender is to publicly acknowledge his surrender and > institutionalize that. > > The Maoists are no threat to republic democracy. Does anybody has a > doubt ? The Maoists, as of now, are the only guard after andolankari > mass to democratic republic. Once again, let's give "democratic > republic" a status of "democracy". Let's not talk about the obsolete > "democracy" our parties were trying to save from the Maoists in the > past. That's obsolete. We are talking about a brand new democracy. And > the Maoists are guard and a part of it, not a threat. > > Now, since we all are familiar with Girija et al's dislike for > "democratic republic", it does not require much elaboration how he > could be a threat. > > I believe we have it at last. Everything is set for a peaceful, CA > mediated, transition of Nepal to a republic democracy. If Girija et al > do not misuse state resources to manipulate it otherwise, a peaceful > democratic republic Nepal is a foregone conclusion. So, it is monarchy > loving Girija et al who might screw things up and throw the country > into uncertainty and chaos. So, a constant vigilance, warning and > support for every single right thing the government does is the need of > hour. > > There was so strong popular demand to GP Koirala not to take oath from > the King. He defied. I hope this is his first and last defiance to > popular voice and also the last loving gesture to the King. > > Back to the original discussion. There is one, perhaps the major one > (as it appears also in the box) suggestion by Murariji regarding > disarmament of the Maoists before the election of CA, which I would > like to understand correctly before I say I disagree. > > Let me put it this way, I think there are two issues that are or must > be twin in nature. "Disarmament of the Maoists" and "liberation of RNA > from monarchy" are or must be twin issues and I think the former should > be made contingent upon the later. > > If Murariji's suggestion was to deal with them independently, then I > think that is neither realistic, not it does any good to the cause of > democracy. > > Murariji has suggested several good steps to make RNA loyal to the > people/parliament. They are must. However, they are not going to > completely liberate RNA from monarchy. If we want to liberate RNA > completely from monarchy, it is monarchy (the source of loyalty) that > should be taken care of primarily. I do have some suggestions, some > moderate, some drastic, to that effect. Instead of elaboration, this > will be suffice to say that all are meant to imply that > king/palace/monarchy is suspended until further notice by CA's final > verdict. If we cut off the source, we can be sure about the termination > of supply. > > Otherwise the transfer of loyalty will remain uncertain. And in this > situation, we should not hurry to disarm the Maoists. We should only > ask for a permanent ceasefire and strict adherence to it. > > What about the possibility of the still armed Maoists influencing the > result of CA ? > > Well, if we check mostly what kind (of political persuasion) of people > are concerned about this, we will find that they are handful of > anti-republicans (Nepalis) and foreigners who understand the Maoists by > their brand name than anything else. Pro-republic mass of Nepal is not > really concerned about that. > > I have yet to hear the Andolankari mass and civil society of Nepal > worrying about the armed Maoists influencing the election of CA. When > and if ever they did, I will too. > > > ... From my reply to Murariji's reply (partly quoted) ----- Original Message ----- From: ... To: "nepal democracy" Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 12:59 PM Subject: [ND] Re: Murari ji's article in Newpal news.com > >>But the gap between what they said and did in the past is so wide >>that I cannot take them in their face value. As far as the rhetoric >>goes, authoritarian regimes often use more nationalist, >>pro-democratic and pro-people flourish than democratic ones. >>I will withhold my final verdict on the Maoist intentions until >>they begin to bridge the gap between their words and deeds. > > Murariji, > > There are a lot of things about which we should be apprehensive of the > Maoists. For example, I think, in future democratic Nepal, they are > going to be a pain in our ass in case of strengthening market economy, > implementing privatization and other free market policies. And this is > not because Maoists have shown wide gap between what they say and what > they do, but because they have not. > > As far as the gap between words and deeds is concerned, if we compare > our ruling governments/parties and the Maoists, the later will turn out > to be the least dishonest, least phony, least hypocritical and least > lying party. > > (How many sentences that were not phony and not dishonest GP Koirala > might have uttered throughout his leadership and premiership ? Not > many.) > > It is open that the Maoists have often tried to justify unjustifiable > things. However, they have generally never lied or hid facts or their > intentions. On the other hand, our governments always have lied and hid > facts and truth. > > Just compare admissions from our successive governments and the Maoists > about violation of human rights and other war crimes. How many reported > extrajudiciary killings and "disappearances" have been admitted by our > governments ? For God's sake, "disappearance" is another name for "the > state is lying". Is there any reported case that Maoists have refused > to take responsibility ? I have seen none. > > The Maoists are indeed a misguided (with a flawed ideology and use of > violence) group. However, they have shown amazing degree of honesty, > initiative, flexibility and consistency in their ways and decisions. > > It is not only from the trend of their behavior, but also from > ideological flexibility as I explained in my earlier email, Maoist's > commitment for "democratic republic" needs to be trusted, or given a > benefit of doubt, as you put. > > In terms of likelihood, the chances of Maoists breaking their public > commitment to "democratic republic" and pushing for "North Korean > republic" is thousand times less than the chances of SPA reinstating > "constitutional monarchy" in Nepal. > > In terms of reliability for "democratic republic", the Maoists are the > most reliable ally. Then comes UML and other small left parties. NC is > the weakest link. And Girija's group of NC is the most unreliable and > the most untrustworthy group among all democratic forces. > > Girija's unreliability for "democratic republic" is not a random, > practical and accidental coincidence. It has to do with his family > value and identity. It has to do with keeping BP Koirala's dream > unquestioned. BP Koirala's dream does not have Nepal without monarchy. > NC is having a hard time moving beyond BP Koirala's dream of > "constitutional monarchy" that, unfortunately, as the past decade > showed, was a Gorkhali Utopia. > > I know a lot of our friends genuinely and originally believe in > "ceremonial monarchy". I am not questioning their beliefs. However, for > Girija et al, "ceremonial monarchy" is nothing but a validity to BP > Koirala's dream of co-existence of the King and the people in Nepal. > > I am more than confident that the election of CA is going to give > majority votes for "republic". I am not sure what happens next. Girija > et al might try to save monarchy despite the clear majority vote for > republic democracy. I am not going to accept this kind of deceptively > negotiated "ceremonial monarchy". > > I will accept "ceremonial monarchy" only if it got clear majority in > the election of CA. > > However, I am sure, Nepali people are going to vote for "republic". > It's on the wall, literally on the wall, on the wall of democracy in > Ratnapark, "My Nepal, serene Nepal, republic Nepal. Khabardar Girija !" > > > Deepak Khadka My latest reply to follow-up by Murariji ----- Original Message ----- From: ... To: "nepal democracy" Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 5:50 PM Subject: [ND] Re: Murari ji's article in Newpal news.com > > Murariji, > > I fully agree with your emphasis on keeping vigilance to all political > protagonists' activities. As it has been proven by their records, each > and every party of Nepal has this or that weaknesses and > vulnerabilities. > > As for the Maoists, a proper understanding of their flaws and actions > rather than a propagandist condemnation will enable us to be properly > vigilant about them. > > Maoist war activities (including "extortion" and "abduction") needs to > be stopped. How can we stop it ? This is how I would like to spend my > precious thoughts and words instead of just wishing it. > > The Maoists are continuing their war activities because they are not > sure monarchy is gone yet and specifically because they don't believe > Girija's government is upto that job. > > We can't blame them for not trusting Girija, can we ? > > I was just reading this news forwarded by Padamji. Girija's statements > made me throw up. This man is still not getting it. He says, > > "I'm expected to lead rather than being led by popular opinion." > > "What is the harm if he stays as Lord Pashupati?" > > http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/5922_1695553,0015002500000000.htm > > This is the reason the Maoists have not stopped their war activities. > So a realistic way to stop Maoist's war activities completely is to > make Girija not oppose "democratic republic". > > That does not mean we should not try other ways. We should. We must. > However, supporting Girija does not make our case strong. > > That said, I would also like to make a point that Nepali intelligentsia > (including some members of this forum) have made a tremendous error > throughout the past decade by being a part of propaganda machine of the > establishment that run a PROXY war of the palace with the Maoists and > called it a war to "save" democracy. > > Yes, our governments did not fight with the Maoists to save > "democracy". They fought to save "monarchy". It's as bright as a > daylight, at least today. Isn't it ? > > It was king's proxy war our parliamentary parties fought for nothing. > Girija is still fighting. Let's stop supporting Girija's fight for > saving monarchy. > > Let's do something realistic rather than wishful things to stop > Maoist's war activities and mentality once for all. > > D... _________________________