Excerpts from the text:

The election results demonstrate the overwhelming anger of the masses against the outdated feudal monarchic rule in Nepal, the domination of India and the U.S., and the feudal parties which betrayed the masses for too long. They are a reflection of the growing aspirations of the Nepali masses for democracy, land, livelihood and genuine freedom from imperialist and feudal exploitation. It is these aspirations that completely trounced the parties that supported the king and the Indian ruling classes.

When an alternative like the CPN(M) came to the fore with an open commitment to abolish the feudal monarchy, abrogate all unequal treaties signed with India, and ensure democracy and equality for all, the masses veered towards it. Our party looks at the results as a positive development with enormous significance for the people of entire South Asia.

There are six major reasons: One, the masses of Nepal had enough of King Gyanendra’s autocratic and authoritarian rule. When they found an opportunity to throw it, out they grabbed it. There was never such an opportunity during earlier elections. Only the CPN (M) had shown its firm commitment to abolish the monarchy and it became the only alternative.

Two, the masses were fed up with Indian domination. Nepal had suffered too long under the unequal treaties signed with India such as the 1950 Indo-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship, the Mahakali Treaty, and so on. India always had an eye on the natural wealth of Nepal, and it supported the monarchy and advocated the so-called two-pillar theory of supporting the King as well as the Nepali Congress. It trained, supplied arms to the Royal Nepal Army, and sent all sorts of aid to contain the Maoist revolutionaries in Nepal. These acts fuelled the anger of the masses. They voted for the CPN (M), as no other party showed the guts to confront India.

Three, Nepal’s masses had enough of exploitation, oppression and intervention of the U.S. imperialists. Throughout the rule of King Gyanendra, and even until today, the U.S. stood by his side. It placed the CPN(M) on its list of terrorist outfits. This was a grave insult to the people.

Four, the CPN (M)’s promise to establish a democratic, federal, secular Nepal with freedom, democracy and equality for all the oppressed sections had an electrifying impact. For the first time, the oppressed sections were represented in the elections.

Five, the most important factor, is the positive impact created by the decade-long people’s war led by the Maoists. The Maoists established control over almost three-quarters of rural Nepal. Through the people’s revolutionary governments in the countryside, they carried out several reforms which brought the masses closer to them. The people’s war raised the political consciousness of the masses, enhanced their assertion, and roused their democratic aspirations. The growth of the mass movement for a CA all over Nepal was a logical offshoot of the people’s war. In this context, the parties that had been staging only shows in the name of fighting for a CA became irrelevant.

Lastly, though a less important factor, the support of local capitalists and a section of the traders who, even though they opposed the Maoists in general, thought that bringing them to power was the only guarantee for peace in Nepal.

This is the most difficult question to answer. The immediate problem is to get a coalition of forces that can meet the target of two-thirds majority in the CA to incorporate their radical reforms into the new Constitution. But to achieve a two-thirds majority, they have to rely on parties such as the NC and the social democratic UML. It is impossible to carry through the promised reforms with such a hotch-potch combination of forces. They will not be willing to be a party to the programme of the Maoists and will try to subvert any radical changes aimed at curtailing their own class interests. We believe that no radical restructuring of the system is possible without the militant mobilisation of the vast masses into bitter class struggle. It is impossible to make changes through measures initiated “from above,” that is, through state decrees and laws. To implement these laws, it is imperative to mobilise the masses and advance class struggle. Without this, the liberation of the poor is an impossible task.

And given the present coalition, even enacting the much-promised laws will be an almost impossible task. Hence a real, bitter and most cruel struggle for power will unfold. Lacking a majority in the CA, the Maoists will be powerless. They will have to compromise and adjust, sacrificing the interests of the oppressed in whose interests they came to power. Or they will have to mobilise the people and intensify the struggle through all means, including armed insurrection, to implement genuine democracy and establish people’s power. There is no other alternative.

We will be living in a fool’s paradise if we believe that the U.S. and India will be comfortable with the Maoists in Nepal or that they will adjust to the new reality. Although they will continue diplomatic relations, they will create an adverse situation if the new government does not obey their dictates. The U.S. tried its best to keep the monarchy alive as the King was a pawn to rule by proxy. As for India, it received a slap in its face when G.P. Koirala and his NC faced a defeat.

However, India has gained on another front. In the Tarai region, it supported the two Madhesi parties which won many seats. India will use these groups to create disturbances, if the new regime does not toe its line. Already, the Madhesi Janadhikar Forum has demanded that the Maoists should make their stand clear on the demand for Madhesi autonomy (Ek Madhes Ek Prades) and asked the Maoists to discontinue their relations with international forums like the RIM and CCOMPOSA.

Both U.S. and India can, for instance, hit at Nepal’s belly — its economy — by paralysing industrial production, blocking trade and supply lines thereby creating food shortages and shortage of consumer goods; in other words, they can squeeze Nepal through an economic blockade. This it will do if it thinks the new regime is going too far.

As it is, the situation in Nepal is delicate with almost 10 hours of load-shedding even in capital Kathmandu and a shortage of essential commodities. Nepal’s powerful neighbours can alter the balance through economic blackmail which could lead to social unrest and massive protests against the Maoists. Acute shortage of essential items and rising prices can lead to disenchantment with the fledgling regime and a dip in its popularity thereby giving an opportunity to the discredited parties to re-establish themselves. Thus the situation in Nepal will remain extremely delicate and unstable even though the Maoists have won an impressive electoral victory.

Comrades Prachanda and Bhattarai know this well and hence they have been appealing for India’s cooperation. They are on record that there will be no stability in Nepal without India’s cooperation. The fact that Nepal is a small country sandwiched between two powerful and big neighbours — India and China — and that it is a target for the U.S. imperialists make governance quite a difficult proposition. Hence the Maoists face an extremely difficult task ahead in balancing all these forces and carrying on with their people’s agenda.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail