Maoists float 50-point CMP

Maoists float 50-point CMP
BY YUVRAJ ACHARYA
http://www.kantipur online.com/ kolnews.php? nid=155641

KATHMANDU, Aug 2 - With a view to forming a new coalition government
under its leadership, the CPN (Maoist) has proposed a 50-point
common minimum program (CMP), pledging to build a competitive
democratic polity that is strong and prosperous.
Maoist leaders tabled the proposal, aimed at garnering support for
government formation, at their meeting with the other 24 political
parties represented in the Constituent Assembly.

"While respecting constitutional provisions and the people's desire
for drastic change and economic prosperity…., we have made ourselves
ready to run a government to build a strong and prosperous Nepal as
per the wish and demand of the people and national necessity," the
Maoist CMP stated.

The party reiterated its commitment to the principles of an
inclusive multiparty democratic system, and to a federal democratic
republic, human rights, social justice, forward-looking change and
lasting peace. "The concepts of a competitive democratic system,
human rights, civil and fundamental rights, freedom of speech and
publication and rule of law, as envisioned in the Interim
Constitution preamble, will be established in practical terms," the
CMP added.

The party has pledged to constitute a state-restructuring commission
to convert Nepal into a federal system. For this the agreement
signed with Madhesis, ethnic Janajatis, political parties and
various organizations will be taken into consideration and the
advice of experts incorporated.

The party has vowed to respect the UN principles of right to self-
determination of ethnic Janajatis and look into factors like the
language and culture of various ethnic groups, natural resources,
demography and prospects of economic development while drawing up a
future federation. "Proportional inclusion will be guaranteed to
women, dalits, Janajatis, Madhesis and backward regions in all
organs and levels of the state," the proposed program stated.

The program is divided into five headings--nationali ty and promotion
of the national interest, implementation of a federal democratic
republic and state restructuring, lasting peace and guarantee of
peace and security, immediate relief and reconstruction and
revolutionary change and socio-economic transformation.

Contd from Pg 1

For promotion of the national interest, the party has proposed to
forge national consensus on national security, foreign policy and
water resources. "Initiatives will be taken for changing, reviewing
or repealing the treaties signed with other countries as per
necessity," said the program paper.

The Maoists' proposed program emphasized a foreign policy aimed at
economic development of the country and upliftment of the people's
economic standards. "Foreign policy will be redefined as per the
changed political scenario and the functioning of the foreign
affairs ministry and the foreign service will be restructured on the
basis of national necessity."

The Maoist program also proposed a high-level security commission to
prepare national security policy and restructure the security
sector. The party in its program vowed to integrate and rehabilitate
the Maoist combatants and manage their weapons within three to six
months.

In the program, the Maoists pledged to form a peace and
reconstruction commission, a truth and reconciliation commission, a
state restructuring commission, a commission on disappearances and a
land reforms commission. It has vowed to make necessary arrangements
for monitoring past peace accords through the peace and
reconstruction commission.

Besides, the program proposed an administration reforms commission,
a youth commission and a powerful Muslim commission.

The program proposed setting up a special fund for the relief,
rehabilitation and support of people affected by violence and
conflict. It has given priority to reconstruction of destroyed
infrastructures.

The Maoists proposed a model of economic activity through the
partnership of government, cooperatives and the private sector. It
pledged to formulate immediate short-term, mid-term and long-term
plans for development and give priority to agriculture, hydropower,
tourism, human resources and infrastructure.

The Maoists have proposed to categorize hydel projects for purposes
of investment. "Small and medium-size projects will be run through
internal investment and big and export-oriented projects through
foreign investment," the proposed program stated.

The Maoists propose to attract foreign investment in
industrialization and development for the benefit of the country.
The party pledged dual citizenship for Non-Resident Nepalis to
attract their investment in national development.

The Maoist program proposed revolutionary land reforms to end feudal
ownership of land and establish access of peasants to the land.

The program also proposed that primary health care, employment and
education up to high-school will be made part of the fundamental
rights of the people. The party proposed to reduce the age criteria
for senior citizens to 70 from existing 75 for purposes of the old
age allowance. It pledged an increment in the allowance amount for
widows and old people.

We will study contents: parties

Presenting the CPM, Maoist leaders urged the other parties to
support them in forming a new government, on the basis of the
program. They claimed that the CMP was not theirs alone but belonged
to all the parties, which respect the people's mandate and want some
forward-looking changes and lasting peace in the country. "We have
tried in the CMP to address the people's desires for peace and
progress," said Maoist spokesman Krishna Bahadur Mahara.

The parties, however, did not give their nod to the program right
away, saying they needed some time to study it. The meeting could
not take any decision as they told the Maoists that they would come
up with their comments at the next meeting.

"We have a comment only on the Maoists' precondition that we should
unconditionally allow their government to function for two years,"
said NC spokesman Arjun Narsing KC. "We will support the government
based on its future attitude and functionings. "

Coming out of the meeting, CPN (UML) leader Bishnu Poudel said his
party wants a government of national consensus and needs time to
comment on the Maoist program.

Posted on: 2008-08-02 20:50:03 (Server Time)

............ ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ...

Maoists to form govt
The Maoist central committee decided after two days of debate on Friday to form a new government, hinting its three pre-conditions could be negotiable.
POSTED ON 01 AUG 2008 | 6:14 PM NST
http://www.nepaliti mes.com.np/ 2008/08/3/ 68

The decision could be the beginning of the end of the uncertainty over the formation of a new government that has been dogging the country.Nearly four months after elections in which the Maoists emerged as the largest party, it still hasn't been able to cobble together a government.

The Maoists have accused the NC, India and the United States of trying to keep them from forming a government, while the other parties have said the Maoists have shown that they are incapable of working with them.

On Friday, Maoist spokesman Krishna Bahadur Mahara said members put forth four options: form an all-party consensus government, set up a majority government with other parties or a minority government, or remain in the
opposition.

"We will not try to agree on a common minimum program with the other parties and form a government," Mahara said, "and we will begin discussions with them right away." President Ram Baran Yadav had given the Maoists till next Thursday to form a government.

The decision could be an indication that the inter-party disagreement within the Maoist leadership over whether or not to go into government has been sorted out. Analysts took this as a good sign, but cautioned that bargaining over portfolios could further delay government formation.

Earlier the Maoists had laid out pre-conditions for forming a government: the NC-UML-MJF alliance should be dismantled and there should be a guarantee that the government will not be brought down for two years.Mahara said the party was sticking to its first condition, and would try to convince the 24 other parties to agree to it.

The Maoists central committee also expressed regret that the alliance with the UML had broken down during the presidential election, and admitted the party's "weakness" and not being able to sustain the left parties unity.

............ ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ..

Note No. 462
1-Aug-2008
NEPAL: Wobbling From Crisis to Crisis: Update No. 167
By Dr. S. Chandrasekharan.
http://www.southasi aanalysis. org/notes5/ note462.html

In the last few days Nepal has been moving from one crisis to another and the unity that was seen earlier stopped with the removal of monarchy and declaring Nepal a republic. It took more than three months to elect a President and a Vice President but the government is yet to be formed.

It is not realised that the immediate and the foremost task of the political parties is to frame a new constitution within the stipulated two years and in that sense the constitutional assembly is the supreme body. Instead, what we see is constant infighting and wrangling over the posts and powers ( spoils) for an interim government that is yet to be formed. If the present trend continues the new constitution will not be finalised even in the next five years!

Another phenomenon we see is the bewildering changes in the alignment of the parties and contradictory statements being made by political leaders. It is getting almost difficult to believe anybody’s statement as final!

It is also not realised that the configuration of the constituent assembly is such that of the four main parties, three will have to join to form a two thirds majority and of the three, one will have to be the Maoist party to take all important decisions concerning the constitution and governance. Consensus should have been the watch word and instead the parties are going in different directions. This trend will have to be reversed.

It all started with the three non Maoists parties ganging up together to form a “left democratic alliance” just on the eve of presidential and vice-presidential elections. As “Rising Nepal” had said this coalition is an unnatural one with no common ideology except to teach the Maoists a lesson. A lesson has been learned by the Maoists that ‘overreach’ can sometimes misfire and it so happened that both their candidates lost.

Miffed over the results, Maoist leader Prachanda declared that they will not form the government but would sit in the opposition as their candidates lost in the elections. But then they form the largest component in the constitutional assembly and their support is necessary for running the government and in constitution making.

The other parties having realised the situation took the stand that the Maoists having the largest number in the constituent assembly should be asked to form the government. Both the Nepali Congress and the UML, in turn declared that they would stay in opposition. But the fact of the matter is that no party wants to stay out of power and all are eager to share the power and the spoils that go with them!

It was surprising to see on 24th July one senior leader of UML K.P.Oli declaring that his party would w “stake its claim for government leadership, if the three party combine moved on to form a new government.” He was saying this when his party leadership was cozying up to the Maoists and the three party left democratic alliance was already cracking. Surely, Oli must be aware that his party coming third in terms of numbers cannot run a government even for a day and cannot carry on the task of constitution framing with the help of the other two parties alone without the Maoists.

It was at this point on 24th July, in the 25 party meeting on government formation, Prachanda made three demands for his party could form the government. These were one-. The left democratic alliance should be dissolved. two- There should be a commitment to give stability to the Maoist led government until a new constitution is drafted. three- Key Maoist concerns should be reflected in the common minimum programme of the coalition government.

These three conditions were rejected by the other three main parties and now Prachanda has said on record that these were not “pre conditions” which means he is flexible now.

There was no need for him to demand the dissolution of the three-party alliance which even otherwise is bound to break by its own inner contradictions as was seen in the incident relating the Vice President taking oath in Hindi.

For six days various student organisations, youth wings, other organisations affiliated to the Maoists, Nepali Congress and the UML took to the streets first in Kathmandu and then to other parts of the country demanding an apology from the Vice President for taking the oath in Hindi. Meantime a PIL case was filed in the Supreme Court which in turn issued a show cause notice to Vice President why he took the oath of office and secrecy in Hindi. Significantly, the MJF office in Kathmandu was vandalised by the agitators. The MJF in retaliation called for a total bandh in the four Terai districts where they are strong and life was brought to a standstill in those districts.

Poor Paramananda Jha, the Vice President did not realise that the divide between the Pahadis and the Madhesis is still deep despite the coalition and he had to make an abject surrender. In a statement he apologised to those hurt by his action and promised to focus on working towards integrity, prosperity, national unity and welfare of Nepalis. A public apology of this kind from a Vice President is unthinkable. The Vice President should have stood his ground. The protests were however withdrawn after the apology. No body ever pointed out that in the previous government Maoist minister Matrika Prasad Yadav did not take his oath in Nepali.

Another avoidable crisis was created when the cabinet decided that G.P.Koirala with a 35 member delegation would attend the SAARC summit meeting at Colombo. This was strongly opposed both by the UML and the Maoists. The UML suggested that only the President should go as Koirala was only heading a care taker government and thus has no right to represent Nepal. The UML was joined by the Maoists also. In fact a resolution to this effect was about to be passed in the assembly but better sense prevailed. Koirala had to accept his mistake of not consulting other parties on such important foreign policy matters before he was allowed to go but with a reduced entourage of only ten persons that included his daughter Sujatha Koirala. Thus, an international embarrassment was avoided. It is a pity that other parties did not have the grace to let the old man attend an international meeting in his official capacity which perhaps would be his final one! Barring Bhattarai there is no living person like G.P. in Nepal who has suffered and done so much for bringing democracy to Nepal.

President Raj Baran Yadav began his consultations with various parties on the formation of the next government. Prachanda objected to the President making active efforts to form the government which he said is beyond his brief. His contention was that the post of President is purely ceremonial in nature and has nothing to do with inviting parties for forming the government. In a way he is right as the fourth amendment to the interim constitution spells out clearly the role and powers of the president.

When President Yadav invited the Maoist party being the largest to form the government on 29th July, Prachanda accepted the offer with alacrity despite his earlier objections. He has been busy in discussing a “concept” paper prepared by his colleagues Mohan Vaidya and Dev Gurung. The concept paper deals with nationalism, federalism, relief package for the people, peace process, management of PLA and its integration and other socio economic policies.

It may take a week for the Maoists to come up with a definite programme after consulting other parties.

The trend we see now is that the Maoists and other leftist parties including the UML are forming an informal leftist grouping in the days to come. The idea will be to isolate the centrist Nepali Congress. The MJF is seen to be in a kind of wilderness and not sure of the direction they are to take except to talk of Madhesi rights in every forum and in every meeting.

............ ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... .

Interview on recent events with Prachanda by Vijay Chalise
Posted by n3wday on August 2, 2008
http://southasiarev .wordpress. com/2008/ 08/02/interview- with-prachanda- by-vijay- chalise/

This important interview expounds the CPN(M)’s views of many of the burning controversies of late, such as the presidential elections, Koirala’s participation in the SAARC conference, and the Maoists participation in the new government. Many thanks to Democracy and Class struggle for making this available.

Vijay Chalise, editor of Gorkhapatra interviews Chairman Prachanda:

The last question which the Indian journalists had asked CPN-Maoist Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal alias Prachanda went like this, “Some Indian journalists wrote in their articles that your personality stands out when you are referred to as “Prachanda” instead of “Pushpa Kamal Dahal”, what do you personally feel?

Responding to this last question, he said that he liked being called “Prachanda.” But Prachanda also gave the reasons for his answer. “The name Prachanda encompasses the entire Nepal, all classes, castes, regions and gender. Some aura of tradition comes from the name `Pushpa Kamal Dahal’ like it comes form Girija Prasad Koirala and Madhav Kumar Nepal.

Hence I like the name `Prachanda’ not because of its established meaning but because I wish to move towards progress. Some people these days have stopped using my nom de guere `Prachanda’ and I feel that this is very reactionary, but I do not know its underlying meaning, why are they doing so? The following is the excerpts of the interview taken by Vijay Chalise, editor of Gorkhapatra with Prachanda:

Some national and international status quoist forces seem to be bent on stopping the `left’ parties, especially the CPN-Maoist from forming the government, and under the same maneuverings there are moves being made to appoint Girija Prasad Koirala as the Prime Minister once again. In the given situation, till when will the next government be formed?

Some forces from within and outside the country having reactionary and status quoist tendencies are not still happy with the outcome of the Constituent Assembly elections. The people voted overwhelmingly for the CPN-Maoist, a force that has always stood by forward looking change, which the status quoist forces have failed to reconcile with. Hence different kinds of conspiracies are being hatched not to allow the CPN-Maoist form the government. Had some other party, excluding the Maoists emerged as the largest party in the CA then the government would have been formed within a week. The Nepalese at large well know this reality. Presently efforts are underway to keep the status quoist in power both from within and outside the country. If attempts are made to retain the old faces in the government then it will not be acceptable. The next government should be formed as per the aspirations of the popular will, if something else is tried then it would only invite an accident. But the Nepalese will ultimately emerge victorious. The next government will be of the Maoists as mandated by the people.

The politics of consensus that went strong for three years has come to an end following the presidential elections and the political game of the majority has started. Does any possibility of the Maoists leading the next government remain in such a situation?

Politics of consensus virtually ended after the amendment of the interim constitution. As far as the formation of government in the leadership of the Maoist is concerned, it is not true that its possibility has ended. The majority can side with the Maoists from some quarters. The meeting of the 25 parties was held some days ago. Those who voted for the other side voiced at the meeting that they were no more in that alliance. As around twenty to twenty one parties have echoed their voice that the next government has to be formed under the leadership of the Maoists, there are ample grounds for it to lead the next government with the support of the majority.

You mentioned that 20 to 21 parties were in support of the Maoists. Going by the mindset of the other parties in the past days, does it look likely that they would allow the Maoist to prove majority?

This is as one can understand a game. Our party has been assessing the past parliamentary politics as an anti-national, anti-social and dirty game. This is the reason why we made it clear that we had been morally pushed to the opposition following the presidential elections. We hence frankly admitted that we did not have any stakes in forming the next government. This has given the message that we are different compared to other political parties. We tried to convey the message that the norms and values of the CPN-Maoist are different than the other parties. But if we have to play a similar game of dirty politics, we will not join the government but will remain in the opposition.

Won’t your decision to remain in the opposition shadow the mandate of the CA and won’t it obstruct the constitution drafting process?

There are two parts of the CA. First is the process of drafting a new constitution and the second is the legislature that should look into the day to day running of the government. The CA does not have ruling and opposition parties. The process of drafting a new constitution always moves ahead in the CA. All parties have equal role and responsibility to draft the constitution. Whenever the legislature parliament meets, only then will the House have the opposition and the ruling parties. Hence I do not feel that our decision to remain in the opposition would adversely affect the constitution drafting process.

Although the CA has to facets, won’t the political wrangling in the legislature parliament have an impact in the constitution drafting process?

Just because any party decides to sit in the opposition in the legislature parliament one should not have the notion that it would affect the constitution drafting process. But the reality is such that if the government is not formed as per the popular mandate of the people, then the constitution drafting process could witness hitches and even be impeded because of the political disputes among the parties in the legislature parliament. Some form of mental state would certainly surface when the Maoist choose to remain in the opposition. Since the CPN-Maoist is the largest party in the CA, the constitution cannot be drafted without its active participation, what should we call this, can this be described as the positive strength of the Maoists? This is a big issue. There has to be two thirds majority to pass each Article of the Constitution, the backing of the Maoists is needed even to include the commas and full stops in the Constitution. Hence the Constitution cannot be drafted without the support of the Maoists. All this clearly reveals that those who have the impression that they should sideline the Maoists at the moment are inviting conflict in the nation.

One breed of politicians has been terming the Maoists preparations to lead the next government as “totalitarianism. ” They have been claiming that they had to cobble together a new alliance to teach the Maoists a lesson. How have you been looking at such maneuverings?

When the Nepalese fought for their rights in the yesteryears, they were dubbed as terrorists. Those who wiped out tens of thousand of people are here with us today. We joined the peace process, contested the elections and became the largest party by getting overwhelming support of the people. If attempts are made to dub us as totalitarians at this juncture then those who make such charges give out the odour of the despotic rulers and reactionaries of yesterday. It all appears that those who had consolidated their position by appeasing the ousted monarch have been trying to put on his cloak. Although the then monarch had to march out, his henchmen are trying to behave like him which will not be tolerable to the people. The CPN-Maoist waged a struggle for the last three months not to become a totalitarian force but to uphold the people’s mandate. The CPN-Maoist is a party that believes in politics based on norms and values. Those who have been dubbing the Maoists as “totalitarians” are out to push the nation into a grave crisis.

You have mentioned that you would only join the government if the other parties concede to your three pre-conditions, but the Nepali Congress and the CPN (UML) have been declining to abide by them, how can we expect to have consensus politics in this situation?

The conditions we put forward ought to be understood this way. We called the meeting of the 25 parties. Of them nearly 20 to 21 parties voiced that the Maoist should lead the next government. It was only after this that the Maoists put forward the three pre-conditions in order to move ahead in a different way amidst the changed political situation. The political situation has changed after the presidential elections. Thus we asked the three parties to clarify whether their coalition was only for the elections or would it also go further ahead. If it is such that their alliance was forged to take ahead, then the situation would be such that the Maoist will have to remain in the opposition. We did not mean to instruct the three parties to dissolve the alliance. All we told them was that they should clarify the nature of the alliance. If they want us to form the government then our programmes and policies for the next two years should be reflected in the commitment paper to be signed by the other parties that wish to join the Maoist led coalition.

There has been some reshuffling in the structure of the ruling coalition in India, and the Indian communists have withdrawn the support they had extended to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. It is said that the new coalition in India does not want the Maoist to rise to power? Is it that the political parties in Nepal are obstructing the Maoists from assuming power with the motive of fulfilling India’s interest?

I do not feel that just because the communist withdrew their support to the government, there would be a total shift in India’s foreign policy. Irrespective of whichever party has come to power in India, be it Congress-I or BJP, stability in its foreign policy has already started showing. The thing is that Nepalese politics has always been guided by Indian interest and maneuvering. Some political parties chart out their policies according to the wishes of India. This is not a new phenomenon but something which has been there since a long time. The Indian establishment has helped the parties in Nepal to put the 12 point agreement in place and accordingly backed the efforts of the parties to hold the elections to the CA and move ahead in the peace process. Hence I do not feel that the peace process would be derailed this soon. But the manner in which the CPN-Maoist came up with its plans and policies on the issues of nationalism and loktantra, they must have somehow doubted whether our party could move ahead in its own way. Hence the four month long lingering that has been taking place on whether the Maoists should form the government is not because of the Nepali Congress, the CPN (UML) or India only. There is a subtle difference between the class opinion and political opinion between the Maoists and the foreigners. It is because of this difference that they have been weighing what they need to do if the Maoists were to be allowed to form the government. But I would like to make it clear that the CPN-Maoist does not move ahead at the instruction of any foreign power. Our strength is the people of Nepal and we will always uphold their aspirations.

Integrity of the Nepali people is the main agenda of the Maoist. We will not forge any alliance with any force by subsiding this.

The left parties enjoy almost two-thirds majority in the Constituent Assembly, but the power always seems to be under the control of reactionary and rightist forces. As a leading communist party, why has CPN (Maoist) not been able to take them into confidence?

There should be dominance of the left parties in all the matters, including the formation of government and selection of leadership. Before the CA elections, we painstakingly worked for moving ahead by forging unity among the left parties. We made the same efforts even after the elections. But, an anomaly is that we, the communist forces, failed to be united during the presidential elections. Analysts and readers should understand what positive and negative aspects were there during the presidential elections. All the leftist forces are not communists in behaviour. Some leftists have carried out anti-national activities. When the street movement was going on, some so-called leftist forces joined the royal government by saying that there was no more regression. Other leftists said the regression was partly corrected. Many people have misconception that all the leftist forces are equal. We need to alert the Nepali people against such misconceptions. Under the guise of leftists, there are ultra-rights. Why did they reject our call to forge unity among the leftist forces before the elections? Who showed the foolishness in believing that the valley was under their control in the elections? Following the elections, why was our effort to forge working unity among the leftists for electing the president and forming a new government dampened? Why they forged alliance with the rightist and ultra-rightist forces will clearly show who they are. So, we should understand the definition of communism and know the real communists.

Despite the election of the president on a majority voting system, there was consensus among the political parties in the election of the Chairman of the Constituent Assembly. Does this indicate that the parties have realised that there is no alternative to consensual system?

I do not think that the parties have fully realised this. There would have been consensus in the elections of the President and Vice-President had there not been any debate regarding the candidates. Because of the candidate’s personality, there was consensus in the election of the Chairman. This has indicated that there can be political consensus on specific issues if all the parties realise that country is in need of it.

It is said that Nepal’s politics is influenced by foreign pressure. Does the President’s election prove this?

It has widely been felt that there has been foreign interference in Nepal’s internal politics. In the later phase, the interference has increased fast. There was foreign interference behind the delay in the formation of the new government and the way the election of the President was held. Leaders of some political parties have the tendency of pleasing foreigners. The thought of reaching a consensus just for electing Girija Prasad Koirala as the President from the Nepali Congress or making Madhav Kumar Nepal the President from the CPN (UML) is not a Nepali thought. It is also neither the thought of the NC nor the UML. Anybody having common sense cannot have such a thought. When we proposed Ram Raja Prasad Singh as the presidential candidate, Dr. Ram Baran Yadav and Ramprit Paswan were declared the candidates overnight. We had been holding consecutive dialogues with the UML. We asked them to give the candidacy of a Dalit, somebody from the ethnic or indigenous community, Madhesi or a woman instead of Nepal to make the post inclusive. Had the UML proposed the name of Paswan at the very outset, we would have easily agreed. But why didn’t the UML propose his candidacy in the beginning, this is something to look into. Now I doubt whether Nepal’s name was proposed at the behest of foreign powers. What stopped the UML from proposing Sahana Pradhan’s name to which we had given a nod earlier.

The 15th SAARC Summit is taking place in some days and there aren’t any possibilities of changing the caretaker government. It was only on Saturday that it was made public that caretaker Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala is representing Nepal in the Summit? What are your comments?

It is a fact that a conspiracy is being hatched to prevent the new Maoist led government to take part in the SAARC Summit. Had the Maoist led government participated in the SAARC, then the address of the PM would certainly deviate from tradition and would be entirely different. I had regular meetings with the Sri Lankan Ambassador to Nepal and the Sri Lankan Foreign Minister. They extended their invitation to me to participate in the Summit and even asked for my photograph, but I could not give my photograph, as it was not clear whether the political standoff would fizzle out. I had however prepared my address, which was quite different and encompassed the burning issues of Nepal. I feel that I was stopped from heading the new government and participating in the Summit as it was feared that a new message would be disseminated to the world through my address.

............ ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... .........

Interview
"They betrayed us"
UML presidential candidate Madhab Kumar Nepal speaks his mind about the Maoists in an interview with Nepali Times.

From: Nepali Times, Issue #411 (01 Aug 2008 - 07 Aug 2008)
http://www.nepaliti mes.com.np/ issue/2008/ 08/3/Interview/ 15084

Nepali Times: Why do you think the Maoists ditched you overnight?
Madhab Nepal: Pushpa Kamal Dahal accepted me as presidential candidate only a couple of days ahead of the voting in the CA. At 11PM we were told the agreement would be signed the following morning. But they betrayed us. I had told Prachanda the issue of president would be a test to improve relations between two parties. But the Maoists have a use-and-throw policy. They used Gyanendra, and remember Prachanda used to say royalists are true nationalists?

What now?
We have shifted to majority politics from consensus politics. The Maoists started it by breaking off our agreement. There are no permanent friends and foes in politics, so things can change. But the Maoists squandered their opportunity, they lost the moral high ground. Today they are begging for the posts that they were earlier offering to other parties. Still, we have to give them a chance to form the government if they can. If they form the government, why not have Ram Bahadur Thapa as prime minister instead of Prachanda or Baburam? He is not tainted, we don't know of him visiting embassies, he is clean. He is even good-looking.

The Maoist want the NC-UML-MJF alliance dismantled.
Just face-saving rhetoric, it's a bluff. They can't wait to form the government. This alliance should continue and other parties should join in, the Maoists too. The alliance is not unnatural, it is the natural outcome of Maoist double-crossing. Drafting the constitution is now the goal of all parties, the Maoists should form the government and we should move ahead with the constitution- building process.

With you and Koirala out of the picture, what will be the fate of mainstream politics?
It shouldn't affect the peace process. I will play a positive role whether I am in or out of politics. I have asked the Maoist leaders to read the history of Peru and Cambodia. Nepali communism is not extreme left, it can't move towards totalitarianism.

How difficult will it be to agree on a government?
It is complicated. There is this trend of bargaining for key posts even if parties do not have a claim. I don't know where the bargaining will take the country. There has to be political stability for two years. It is because the Maoists were bad losers that the process got complicated, they have to learn to get used to defeats.

Why did your party lose the CA election?
First we were too tolerant towards the Maoists and wanted to prevent them from walking out of the peace process. Second, we were too confident about our position. Third, we did not consider the Maoists as our opponents. Fourth, we didn't think the Maoists would resort to violence and threat to the extent that they did and we were cowed down by their terror.

Then why did you decide to flirt with the Maoists?
Out party was against the extreme left and the status quo of the NC. We concluded that the left parties should come together. Despite their totalitarian thinking we thought we could turn them around. But they betrayed us.