Nepal's Maoist Double Cross

[notsuperstitious]

Editorial : Nepal's Maoist Double Cross

So the chairman of Nepal's Maoist radicals brags that he and his fellow-travellers tricked United Nations officials and admits that the 2006 peace deal was a sham - and gets caught on videotape doing it. The video of the recently resigned Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal, also known as Prachanda, was shot in January 2008 and just surfaced.

Revealingly, he instructs his fellow communists not to be fooled by the compromises struck with Nepal's democratic government. Seizing total power, he makes clear, remains the communist goal.

The latest crisis in Nepal is a useful case study in communist duplicity and instructive for those who believe that the path to peace with guerillas is cutting deals with them. The Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) joined Nepal's government after a decade-long insurgency that left more than 12,000 dead. Under terms of the 2006 Comprehensive Peace Agreement, the Maoists agreed, among other things, to cut the size of their force in half, place their weapons under U.N. supervision and participate peacefully in the political process. In the 2008 elections, the Maoists emerged as the largest party in parliament with 30 percent of the vote, and Prachanda was named prime minister.

But the communists didn't consider the war really ended. The Maoists steadily maneuvered to increase their power with a view toward implementing their revolutionary agenda.

The latest step was an attempt to remove Nepal Army chief Gen. Rookmangud Katawal, who had resisted Maoist demands to integrate their guerrilla army into the national force. He maintained that the "former" guerrillas are brainwashed fanatics seeking to seize control of the army. He's got a point.

Nepal's President Ram Baran Yadav blocked Prachanda's move to sack Gen. Katawal. Prachandra resigned in protest. Nepal's supreme court now has the case.

Prachanda says it is a question of civilian control of the military. That's rich. Meanwhile communist thugs are taking to the streets in coordinated demonstrations calling for further intervention from the U.N.

The video of a relaxed Prachanda addressing his party faithful exposed the Maoists' cynical manipulation of the political system. In true communist spirit, Prachanda said that the compromises struck with the government were only tactical expediencies, and that the "bidroha," or rebellion, was still on. He joked about how they duped the United Nations Mission in Nepal (UNMIN) into thinking they had 35,000 fighters when in fact they only had 7,000 to 8,000, which allowed them to swell their ranks to 20,000 while claiming to be demilitarizing. And he confirmed Gen. Katawal's suspicions by saying it would take only a small number of his guerrillas to establish "complete Maoist control" of the Nepal Army.

He added that they had not turned over their weapons as required and that relief money earmarked for the victims of the civil war would be diverted to party coffers. "You and I know the truth," he slyly told his comrades, "but why should we tell it to others?"

In an unguarded moment, Prachanda revealed he is still a terrorist at heart and those who make deals with him are dupes. "Why would we abide by [the peace deal] after we win?" he said on the tape. "Why would we follow it when we have the upper hand?"

The situation in Nepal and Pakistan's Swat Valley illustrate the risks in bargaining with extremists, who do not change their goals, only their methods. The lesson is important when contrasted to Sri Lanka and Colombia, where we have seen the value of taking the fight to insurgents. U.S. deal makers should understand that there is more than one way to lose a guerrilla war. Sometimes it happens with the stroke of a pen.

 

[notsuperstitious]

The true face of the maoists, something most people already knew. Their idea is to get control over napal and no means are too low. There are forces in South Asia that do not want peace and for them India is a great scape goat to pin all their blame. BNP, the maoists are all part of that group, probably supported by foreign powers who want to create trouble for India. These powers keep getting exposed - good news for all.

I hope the rest of the parties in Nepal realise what mortal threat the Maoists pose them, once Maoists take control of power, its a purge, hope they learn from history and unite and defeat the maoist terrorists.

 

[Nemesis]

Fateh, this is a biased article. Americans are not fond of Maoists insurgencies, and they would jump at a chance to make any revolutionary movement look bad. Any opinion of revolutionary movements from an American point of view is irrelevant as their opinions would always be biased.

As far as this videotape that the article is referring to, i believe that Prachanda has already clarified his stand when asked at a media conference. He does not deny making the statements in the tape but has said that a "lot of water has flown under the bridge since then".

Edit - and Indian Maoists are not terrorists by the way, they are political rebels fighting the Indian parliamentary system.

 

[notsuperstitious]

Fateh, this is a biased article. Americans are not fond of Maoists insurgencies, and they would jump at a chance to make any revolutionary movement look bad. Any opinion of revolutionary movements from an American point of view is irrelevant as their opinions would always be biased.

As far as this videotape that the article is referring to, i believe that Prachanda has already clarified his stand when asked at a media conference. He does not deny making the statements in the tape but has said that a "lot of water has flown under the bridge since then".

Edit - and Indian Maoists are not terrorists by the way, they are political rebels fighting the Indian parliamentary system.

Nemesis, first of all, bad idea to try to discredit the source, its an EDITORIAL, yes it carries opinion, so? Shooting the messenger will not help, a request.

Yes Prachanda said a lot of water has flown under the bridge, and this time he must be telling the truth. yes of course, only two days ago he's resigned on the issue of recruiting tens of thousands of maoist workers in the army and planting generals of his choice at the helm (effectively taking over the army). Yes, lots of water alright!!!

This is why i call communism a religion, requires blind faith.

And don't bring in indian maoists in this, will only derail the thread.

 

[Nemesis]

Okay we won't being in Indian naxals.

But about Nepalese maoists, tell me something, if they enjoy popular support, who are we to interfere? Why is the Indian ambassador interfering in Nepal's problems?

Nemesis, first of all, bad idea to try to discredit the source, its an EDITORIAL, yes it carries opinion, so?

Editorials by American media on revolutionary movements will always be biased. Just like, the opinions of the Chinese media will always be in favour of maoists movements. We can't use them to justify our opinions.

This is why i call communism a religion, requires blind faith.

A religion based on facts as opposed to superstition is no religion at all.

I'm not a communist by the way, so your remark that i'm blindly supporting maoists holds no water.

 

[notsuperstitious]

Okay we won't being in Indian naxals.

But about Nepalese maoists, tell me something, if they enjoy popular support, who are we to interfere? Why is the Indian ambassador interfering in Nepal's problems?

Editorials by American media on revolutionary movements will always be biased. Just like, the opinions of the Chinese media will always be in favour of maoists movements. We can't use them to justify our opinions.

A religion based on facts as opposed to superstition is no religion at all.

I'm not a communist by the way, so your remark that i'm blindly supporting maoists holds no water.

First of all, I'm not using that article to justify my opinion. The video is there for all to see, their attempt to take over the army is there for all to see, if its an issue of peoples will, then why are the maoists trying to subvert democracy? once they have full power, what happens to the other parties? to democracy? a grand purge? a great leap forward? a cultural revolution? and what about the consequences for india? Whats happening there has implications for india, for people of nepal who did not vote for maoists and for those who voted hoping they can vote for someone else the next election.

I did not say you have blind faith, but you seem to believe prachanda lied THEN but is telling the truth NOW despite his two day old attempt to take over the army, doesn't compute mate. why does a political party want to take over the army? humanitarian grounds? i don't think so.

 

[Nemesis]

The video is there for all to see, their attempt to take over the army is there for all to see,

Perhaps they are trying to subvert the army, perhaps not. I have seen the video, i have also read Prachanda's response. You can choose to believe the video, may be you're right and i'm wrong.

once they have full power, what happens to the other parties?

The whole point of a revolution is to do away with all political parties. Idealistic? Sure, but this is what they believe in.

and what about the consequences for india? Whats happening there has implications for india,

Irrelevant. This is Nepal's problems, if it has implications for India then we need to tackle it in our own borders, and not interfere in the affairs of other nations.

I did not say you have blind faith, but you seem to believe prachanda lied THEN but is telling the truth NOW despite his two day old attempt to take over the army, doesn't compute mate. why does a political party want to take over the army? humanitarian grounds? i don't think so.

I don't believe anything, i was pointing out that you can't use American newspaper editorials as ammo to criticize Nepal's Maoists. What these papers conveniently forget that Maoists have popular support in Nepal. Maoists have also made Nepal a secular nation and have done away with the feudal aristocracy.

 

[ajpirzada]

can someone tell me wats goin on in nepal... two lines will be gud enough
thanks

 

[wtf]

can someone tell me wats goin on in nepal... two lines will be gud enough
thanks

The country was a monarchy which was seen as incompetent (parliament was suspended). There was protests ongoing for fuller democracy. At the same time wide areas were under Maoist control.

At some point these two groups joined together and Army refused to act against its own people. So monarchy was abolished and elections were held. A mixed parliament resulted with Maoists getting a lead and Prime ministership (Prachanda).

Now Maoists want all the guerillas to be integrated into the Army. Army does not want that and so Army chief was fired. President (who is not a Maoist) did not allow the firing. So Maoist PM, Prachanda resigned.

Meanwhile search for scapegoats are on. Prachanda first was reported to have blamed India for Nepal's situation. Then he clarified that he was not talking about India, just about external intervention. Now this article is saying that Prachanda is power greedy.

My understanding (from having Nepali friends) is that Maoism was fueled by unemployment and Prachanda wants a quick way of getting people jobs -hence the grab on Army. A huge return of Nepali workers from India and Nepals go-slow policy on foreign investment has not helped. And tourism industry is a mess right now due to the economic crisis and lack of peace.

 

[notsuperstitious]

The whole point of a revolution is to do away with all political parties. Idealistic? Sure, but this is what they believe in.

Thats called dictatorship.

Irrelevant. This is Nepal's problems, if it has implications for India then we need to tackle it in our own borders, and not interfere in the affairs of other nations.

I've not said India should interfere, but India has every right to be concerned at the emerge of a dictatorship that will be a puppet in the hands of the Chinese. I said the other nepalese parties should unite and remove this mortal threat. If its a war, India should help the nepal govt this time unlike the last time when India did not help the govt because they did not want to 'interfere'.

I don't believe anything, i was pointing out that you can't use American newspaper editorials as ammo to criticize Nepal's Maoists. What these papers conveniently forget that Maoists have popular support in Nepal. Maoists have also made Nepal a secular nation and have done away with the feudal aristocracy.

Not at all, the popular support is what this artilce is in favor of, hence its worried the maoists want to get rid of the basic mechansm of guaging popular support of the people - democracy.

 

[Hellfire]

can someone tell me wats goin on in nepal... two lines will be gud enough
thanks

Line 1: Screwing of local population in a game between India & China.

Line 2: Nepal being led Tibet route slowly.


can elaborate if the two line rider is removed

 

[wtf]

If its a war, India should help the nepal govt this time unlike the last time when India did not help the govt because they did not want to 'interfere'.

Look, the war is over. It is not even a constitutional crisis this time. All that has happened is that the Prime minister resigned. The President is still in power and Parliament is intact. No one is fighting the army or sending terrorists across.
Helping unpopular governments is the best way to earn long term badwill. Not just that, any direct interference would immediately cause China to send out their own army and that's a fight we don't want and one which we can't win now. Let's let the Nepali people sort out their own mess, shall we ?

Newsweek (the US edition) carried a story which blamed the Army for ignoring ceasefire agreement and recruiting people (thus sidelining the Maoists who were promised jobs) and of the Army chief of being pro-Monarchy. So both sides, Prachanda and Army have things to complain about. But as long as they don't settle this on the streets or ask India for help, India has no business there.

 

[notsuperstitious]

Look, the war is over. It is not even a constitutional crisis this time. All that has happened is that the Prime minister resigned. The President is still in power and Parliament is intact. No one is fighting the army or sending terrorists across.
Helping unpopular governments is the best way to earn long term badwill. Not just that, any direct interference would immediately cause China to send out their own army and that's a fight we don't want and one which we can't win now. Let's let the Nepali people sort out their own mess, shall we ?

Newsweek (the US edition) carried a story which blamed the Army for ignoring ceasefire agreement and recruiting people (thus sidelining the Maoists who were promised jobs) and of the Army chief of being pro-Monarchy. So both sides, Prachanda and Army have things to complain about. But as long as they don't settle this on the streets or ask India for help, India has no business there.

Hi,

I think you got me wrong. I'm not saying interefere, I'm saying IF there's war then help the pro democracy faction as maoists can't be trusted (as is evident from the video). We refused to help the army last time but chinese kept selling weapons (possibly to both sides).

I'm strictly against using indians as cannon fodder. We know where that road leads.

 

[Hellfire]

Hi,

I think you got me wrong. I'm not saying interefere, I'm saying IF there's war then help the pro democracy faction as maoists can't be trusted (as is evident from the video). We refused to help the army last time but chinese kept selling weapons (possibly to both sides).

I'm strictly against using indians as cannon fodder. We know where that road leads.

Nepal army is pro-India. the present UPA government has made lots of mistake on foreign policy front.

By allowing chinese bases to be set up in Srilanka, Maldieves and now allowing chinese influence in Nepal, they have made sure that Indian security interests have been severely undermined.

As such, India has to ensure that Nepal stays in its fold - need be with active intervention.

 

[Contrarian]

I think the 'accidental' release of this video has been a masterstroke. Its put Prachanda on the backfoot.

Nepal should not be allowed to sign the Treaty with China. Its high time India start's upping the ante against China in our own neighbourhood.

And secondly, how the fcuk does it matter whether the editorial is pro-American or Pro-xyz, its Pro-Indian, as Maoists are anti-Indian. Prachanda wants to take Nepal to China, i sure hope the mandarins at the South Block are planning ahead of him.