Page 3 of
3 Nepal: Little peace for the
peacekeepers By Dhruba Adhikary
direction. Those who subscribe to this
assumption believe that Washington will remove the
"terrorist" tag from Nepali Maoists before long.
The path ahead, however, does not look so
smooth. As has been indicated by Maoist leaders,
they have not given up the revolutionary agenda.
What has been changed is the method to reach state
power. All recent understandings and agreements,
and commitments to engage in competitive politics,
are simply
part
of the changed strategy to reach power. Top Maoist
leader Prachanda himself has publicly made it
clear that although his party has agreed to take
the course of competitive politics, it does not
have faith in the parliamentary system. It is one
more clear indicator that once firmly in the
saddle, Maoists would start implementing a
revolutionary plan of action.
Those who
think Maoists have ceased to be a force to be
reckoned with do not apprehend their resurgence in
foreseeable future. New Delhi appears to be one of
them. That is why the Indian leadership is
extending goodwill and support so that Maoists
quickly become a power-sharing partner in the
incumbent coalition.
As one Indian
journalist, Shastri Ramachandaran, wrote last week
in The Tribune newspaper, India has to be
"ever-present on the scene, but not visible;
available but not interfering".
It is in
this context that some analysts have read media
reports that among the persons present at the
prime minister's official residence when the draft
constitution was being finalized, on the night of
December 15, were a couple of men who were not
speaking the Nepali language. They were
non-Nepalis.
Ironically, like the Indian
establishment, Maoists in India too think that
their counterparts in Nepal have become a weakened
force. But unlike the government in New Delhi,
Indian Maoists are of the view that Nepali Maoists
have deliberately renounced the revolutionary path
in exchange for a share of power in the present
multi-party system. In a statement published in
Indian newspapers on December 17, the Communist
Party of India (Maoist) made a strong appeal to
its comrades in Nepal to withdraw from the
agreement with the alliance of seven political
parties as it would be detrimental to the
interests of revolutionary movements in the whole
of South Asia. The Indian Maoist spokesman, Azad,
also criticized Prachanda for praising the
government in New Delhi.
"Prachanda's
repeated praise for India's role in bringing about
the agreement ... creates illusions among the
masses about India rather than preparing them for
fighting the Indian expansionists who are keen on
skirmishing Nepal in future," Azad has been quoted
by an Indian newspaper, The Hindu, as saying.
India's aim, according to Azad, is to disarm and
isolate Maoists and grab the natural wealth of
Nepal, particularly its huge hydro potential.
Mohan Bikram Singh, a seasoned leftist leader who
was guru to some of the Maoist leaders today, had
issued a warning note even earlier. He blamed
Nepali Maoists for being selfish and
self-centered.
Who then will be the
ultimate winner - Nepali Maoists or New Delhi's
rulers with unlimited ambitions? In short, it is
the rulers who may carry the day. "But trends set
by Maoist movements in the region appear
irreversible," said Madan Regmi, who heads a
non-government organization called the China Study
Center.
Azad's observations make it
abundantly clear that any bid that New Delhi may
make to lure Indian Maoists to a power-sharing
scheme, as is being worked out in Nepal, is
unlikely to succeed. Indian Maoists are unlikely
to jump on the bait.
Dhruba
Adhikary, who has been a Dag Hammarskjold
fellow, is a Kathmandu-based journalist.
(Copyright 2007 Asia Times Online Ltd. All
rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East, Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
