Maoist chairman Puspa Kamal Dahal 'Prachanda' has warned that Nepal could head towards disintegration if it does not stick to the path of consensus politics to prevent such catastrophe.
Speaking at the special press meet organised by the Reporters' Club on Friday, he said attempts were being made to paint the ethnic issues with communal colour to disintegrate the country.
He accused 'regressive elements and foreign forces who claim to be strong democrats' for fanning the communal fire especially in the southern belt.
He expressed dissatisfaction at the remarks the leaders of the Madhes-based parties recently made at the Constituent Assembly (CA) saying they were disintegration-oriented.
He emphasised that the political parties should work together until the new constitution is written. "But, the consensus should not be achieved on the basis of giving certain post to a certain person," he said.
He also stressed that the post of president and chairman of CA should not become a component of power sharing. "Power sharing means sharing of ministerial posts," he said.
Friday, July 11, 2008
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Reading Marx's Capital with David Harvey
Reading Marx's Capital with David Harvey is a series of videos on the David Harvey.org site which Democracy and Class Struggle strongly recommend you view.
If you thought Marx's Capital was to difficult Harvey will help you through it, if you thought you have read it and understood it all - he will challenge you to think again.
There is a link of the top right of this page to David Harvey site - take a look.
Prachanda confers with PM on govt formation
Maoist chairman Prachanda met Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala Thursday evening and discussed the structure of the next government.
At the half-hour long meeting held in Baluwatar, the Maoist Chairman is said to have emphasised that the parties needed to give continuity to coalition culture, and that the Nepali Congress should be part of the new government.
The two also discussed the Madhesi parties' position over the constitution amendment bill introduced by the government in the Constituent Assembly.
Senior Maoist leader Dr Baburam Bhattarai and Home Minister Krishna Situala were also present at the meeting.
Yesterday, following the signing of the seven-party agreement on Madhesi demands, Prachanda said the new government, likely to be led by him, would be in place within a week.
Speaking to journalists earlier today he said efforts were on to form a coalition government. He also said he was hopeful of some Madhesi parties joining the government
At the half-hour long meeting held in Baluwatar, the Maoist Chairman is said to have emphasised that the parties needed to give continuity to coalition culture, and that the Nepali Congress should be part of the new government.
The two also discussed the Madhesi parties' position over the constitution amendment bill introduced by the government in the Constituent Assembly.
Senior Maoist leader Dr Baburam Bhattarai and Home Minister Krishna Situala were also present at the meeting.
Yesterday, following the signing of the seven-party agreement on Madhesi demands, Prachanda said the new government, likely to be led by him, would be in place within a week.
Speaking to journalists earlier today he said efforts were on to form a coalition government. He also said he was hopeful of some Madhesi parties joining the government
The Nepal Government has handed over a letter formally requesting the extension of the term of United Nation Mission in Nepal
Kathmandu, July 10 (ANI): The Nepal Government has handed over a letter formally requesting the extension of the term of United Nation Mission in Nepal (UNMIN) by six more months to the UN Secretary General.
According to Nepalnews, deputy chief of the Nepal's permanent mission at the UN headquarters in New York, Madhuban Poudedl handed over the letter requesting extension of mission's term extension for the continuity of peace process.
Poudel said that the UN Secretary General Ban-ki Moon will submit the letter to the Security Council around the second week of July and it is expected to be approved immediately.
The UNMIN's current term is expiring on July 23.
According to Nepalnews, deputy chief of the Nepal's permanent mission at the UN headquarters in New York, Madhuban Poudedl handed over the letter requesting extension of mission's term extension for the continuity of peace process.
Poudel said that the UN Secretary General Ban-ki Moon will submit the letter to the Security Council around the second week of July and it is expected to be approved immediately.
The UNMIN's current term is expiring on July 23.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Nepali democrats and the fig leaf of democracy
by Dharmendra Bastola
There is a saying: ‘ a political death is several times more merciless than a real death’. If there is any one who has suffered from political death, it is Girija Prasad Koirala and his feudal autocracy. According to the general norms of democracy, after an electoral defeat, the defeated party must leave the government and allow the largest party to form a new government. But GP Koirala has ignored and mocked such norms and values, and stayed in power without any political legitimacy. This exposes the true nature of Nepalese democracy-it is in fact is a feudal and comprador autocracy and a bourgeoisie dictatorship. If GP Koirala really abided by the democracy he advocates, he would have resigned long ago and let the new government be formed.
Giraja’s recent comments ‘Minus Girija’, ‘confusion in the international community’ and ‘wondering elsewhere’ and ultimately ‘arriving to the parliament to declare resignation’ portray many meanings. The meaning is: if there was no confusion in the international community, or if he was not wondering elsewhere instead of coming to the Constituent Assembly, Girija would have submitted resignation right after the defeat in the election. Does a sovereign nation depend on the ‘clarity’ or ‘confusion’ of the international community even after a political process has been decided? Can the people of that country realise self-respect, who have a leader, but roaming aimless unless instruction comes from outside? This is what a real character of the Nepalese democracy and its democrats. Again the Nepalese messiahs of democracy are never tired to deliver lectures as if they are the number one democrats or even a pioneer of the kind of democracy, ironically, which can never move unless it is moved from outside.
There are many examples of how leaders respect their own democracy. In India, Sonia Gandhi gave up the post of Prime Minister. Similarly, in the United States of America, Hillary Clinton has now given her support to her Democratic Party rival Barrack Obama. Contrary to these examples, Nepali democrats are sticking to their posts even after suffering defeat. And, even after declaring his resignation, GP Koirala is provoking a disastrous agenda that may split the country, as has happened in Korea, Vietnam, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, the former Yugoslavia and the former USSR. This is the true intention behind the slogan ‘one Madhes, one Pradhes’.
Where are the real stakes in this political process? The seven point agenda that the NC has put forward were not the milestone to depart from the seven party alliance, SPA, this case had occurred many times in the past. But these seven points are quite crucial because the general political orientation of the 12 point agreement was almost over along with the deposition of monarchy and having the Federal Republic of Nepal brought into being. And the struggle over state and democracy has so intensified in these two months, and taken Nepalese society to a new height. By which the validity of the democratic republic has now weathered away for the both: to the Maoist as well as to the parliamentary parties. Hence, the necessity of the New Democratic Republic has emerged up for the Maoist and the necessity of social fascism has emerged up for the parliamentarian parties. Any confusion on this question will lead to political disaster, not only for the political transformation of the Nepalese society, but also for the interest of the national integrity and sovereignty.
The NC blames the Maoists for not respecting democratic norms. But history has shown again and again that it is not the communists but the capitalists who violate norms and values. Isn’t it the Maoist party that supported the Congress government by supporting the two third majority provisions in the constitution to remove the prime minister or to change government? Has our party ever tried to remove Girija from the post, even though there were many complaints from the UML over this constitutional provision? Isn’t this enough evidence for any one that it is only the CPN(M) that has truly valued the established norms and values? Fundamentally, this so called democracy is nothing but bourgeois dictatorship. This bourgeoisie dictatorship does not and cannot tolerate anything that is in the interest of the masses of the people and is against the feudalists and autocrats. This is one fact, which is enough to prove how hollow the dictum of democracy is and why it is the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. As long as Girija was in power every thing was fine for him as well as for the Congress. The moment the election results kicked them out of power, they moved against the mandate of the people. Now it is very clear to all, that the democracy of the Nepalese democrats is nothing but a fig leaf to hide their undemocratic character and their class dictatorship.
Once again, what are the real political stakes? The outstanding contradictions are whether Nepalese society should go forward or not; whether the Nepalese people are sovereign or not; whether Nepalese society can be restructured or not; whether the Nepalese economy can be re- organized or not? This issue is linked with three major factors that are related to the changes in Nepalese society. Those issues are: the NC does not want the Nepal Army to be democratized to serve the Nepali people.; the NC does not want to abolish the feudal mode of production and reorganize the Nepalese economy; the NC does not want to restructure Nepalese society into national and regional autonomous republics according to the principal of the nation to the right of self determination. So the real question is whether the Maoist should be allowed to form a government and write a new constitution that has to be written two years from the CA election.
Regarding federalism and autonomous states, it is important to understand the meaning, definition as well as the scientific methodology to resolve oppression of one nation by another. Lenin said:
The right of nations to self-determination means only the right to independence in a political sense, the right to free, political secession from the oppressing nation. Concretely, this political, democratic demand implies complete freedom to carry on agitation in favour of secession, and freedom to settle the question of secession by means of a referendum of the nation that desires to secede. Consequently, this demand is by no means identical with the demand for secession, for partition, for the formation of small states.
If the parliamentarians are to respect the right of nations to self determination, they must respect the Tharuwan, Kochila, Mithila and Bhojpura peoples through equality, freedom and the right to self determination. Instead, the demand of the parliamentary parties is not for establishing freedom for the oppressed masses of people, rather it is a demand to establish a set of feudal lords, bandits and looters in every state. Their conception is not designed to end oppression but to promote national chauvinism and autocratic feudalism. Why is the slogan ‘one Madhesh one Pradesh’? Has the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) ever put forward slogans such as ‘one Pahad, one Pradesh’? This is not a political solution. In fact, the federation of autonomous republics relates to a tactical question to shatter the chains of bourgeoisie exploitation and allow the masses to develop politically, economically, and culturally by creating equality for the people. By this process, national and regional chauvinism and oppression will be abolished, and the conditions will be developed so that all the national and regional barriers will be demolished.
But this kind of society, which is radically different from an exploitative bourgeois society, cannot be established unless the old one is smashed. Marx pointed out in 1871 that “the proletariat cannot simply lay hold of the ready-made (that is, the bourgeois) state machine and wield it for its own purpose, that it must smash it, break it up.” As Marx said, as long as the old state still exists, it will try and stop the people establishing a new state.
{writer is a central committee member of communist party of Nepal (Maoist)}
There is a saying: ‘ a political death is several times more merciless than a real death’. If there is any one who has suffered from political death, it is Girija Prasad Koirala and his feudal autocracy. According to the general norms of democracy, after an electoral defeat, the defeated party must leave the government and allow the largest party to form a new government. But GP Koirala has ignored and mocked such norms and values, and stayed in power without any political legitimacy. This exposes the true nature of Nepalese democracy-it is in fact is a feudal and comprador autocracy and a bourgeoisie dictatorship. If GP Koirala really abided by the democracy he advocates, he would have resigned long ago and let the new government be formed.
Giraja’s recent comments ‘Minus Girija’, ‘confusion in the international community’ and ‘wondering elsewhere’ and ultimately ‘arriving to the parliament to declare resignation’ portray many meanings. The meaning is: if there was no confusion in the international community, or if he was not wondering elsewhere instead of coming to the Constituent Assembly, Girija would have submitted resignation right after the defeat in the election. Does a sovereign nation depend on the ‘clarity’ or ‘confusion’ of the international community even after a political process has been decided? Can the people of that country realise self-respect, who have a leader, but roaming aimless unless instruction comes from outside? This is what a real character of the Nepalese democracy and its democrats. Again the Nepalese messiahs of democracy are never tired to deliver lectures as if they are the number one democrats or even a pioneer of the kind of democracy, ironically, which can never move unless it is moved from outside.
There are many examples of how leaders respect their own democracy. In India, Sonia Gandhi gave up the post of Prime Minister. Similarly, in the United States of America, Hillary Clinton has now given her support to her Democratic Party rival Barrack Obama. Contrary to these examples, Nepali democrats are sticking to their posts even after suffering defeat. And, even after declaring his resignation, GP Koirala is provoking a disastrous agenda that may split the country, as has happened in Korea, Vietnam, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, the former Yugoslavia and the former USSR. This is the true intention behind the slogan ‘one Madhes, one Pradhes’.
Where are the real stakes in this political process? The seven point agenda that the NC has put forward were not the milestone to depart from the seven party alliance, SPA, this case had occurred many times in the past. But these seven points are quite crucial because the general political orientation of the 12 point agreement was almost over along with the deposition of monarchy and having the Federal Republic of Nepal brought into being. And the struggle over state and democracy has so intensified in these two months, and taken Nepalese society to a new height. By which the validity of the democratic republic has now weathered away for the both: to the Maoist as well as to the parliamentary parties. Hence, the necessity of the New Democratic Republic has emerged up for the Maoist and the necessity of social fascism has emerged up for the parliamentarian parties. Any confusion on this question will lead to political disaster, not only for the political transformation of the Nepalese society, but also for the interest of the national integrity and sovereignty.
The NC blames the Maoists for not respecting democratic norms. But history has shown again and again that it is not the communists but the capitalists who violate norms and values. Isn’t it the Maoist party that supported the Congress government by supporting the two third majority provisions in the constitution to remove the prime minister or to change government? Has our party ever tried to remove Girija from the post, even though there were many complaints from the UML over this constitutional provision? Isn’t this enough evidence for any one that it is only the CPN(M) that has truly valued the established norms and values? Fundamentally, this so called democracy is nothing but bourgeois dictatorship. This bourgeoisie dictatorship does not and cannot tolerate anything that is in the interest of the masses of the people and is against the feudalists and autocrats. This is one fact, which is enough to prove how hollow the dictum of democracy is and why it is the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. As long as Girija was in power every thing was fine for him as well as for the Congress. The moment the election results kicked them out of power, they moved against the mandate of the people. Now it is very clear to all, that the democracy of the Nepalese democrats is nothing but a fig leaf to hide their undemocratic character and their class dictatorship.
Once again, what are the real political stakes? The outstanding contradictions are whether Nepalese society should go forward or not; whether the Nepalese people are sovereign or not; whether Nepalese society can be restructured or not; whether the Nepalese economy can be re- organized or not? This issue is linked with three major factors that are related to the changes in Nepalese society. Those issues are: the NC does not want the Nepal Army to be democratized to serve the Nepali people.; the NC does not want to abolish the feudal mode of production and reorganize the Nepalese economy; the NC does not want to restructure Nepalese society into national and regional autonomous republics according to the principal of the nation to the right of self determination. So the real question is whether the Maoist should be allowed to form a government and write a new constitution that has to be written two years from the CA election.
Regarding federalism and autonomous states, it is important to understand the meaning, definition as well as the scientific methodology to resolve oppression of one nation by another. Lenin said:
The right of nations to self-determination means only the right to independence in a political sense, the right to free, political secession from the oppressing nation. Concretely, this political, democratic demand implies complete freedom to carry on agitation in favour of secession, and freedom to settle the question of secession by means of a referendum of the nation that desires to secede. Consequently, this demand is by no means identical with the demand for secession, for partition, for the formation of small states.
If the parliamentarians are to respect the right of nations to self determination, they must respect the Tharuwan, Kochila, Mithila and Bhojpura peoples through equality, freedom and the right to self determination. Instead, the demand of the parliamentary parties is not for establishing freedom for the oppressed masses of people, rather it is a demand to establish a set of feudal lords, bandits and looters in every state. Their conception is not designed to end oppression but to promote national chauvinism and autocratic feudalism. Why is the slogan ‘one Madhesh one Pradesh’? Has the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) ever put forward slogans such as ‘one Pahad, one Pradesh’? This is not a political solution. In fact, the federation of autonomous republics relates to a tactical question to shatter the chains of bourgeoisie exploitation and allow the masses to develop politically, economically, and culturally by creating equality for the people. By this process, national and regional chauvinism and oppression will be abolished, and the conditions will be developed so that all the national and regional barriers will be demolished.
But this kind of society, which is radically different from an exploitative bourgeois society, cannot be established unless the old one is smashed. Marx pointed out in 1871 that “the proletariat cannot simply lay hold of the ready-made (that is, the bourgeois) state machine and wield it for its own purpose, that it must smash it, break it up.” As Marx said, as long as the old state still exists, it will try and stop the people establishing a new state.
{writer is a central committee member of communist party of Nepal (Maoist)}
Madhesi leaders spit venom at supplementary bill
Even though the three Madhesi parties allowed the resumption of Constituent Assembly (CA) meeting, Wednesday evening, their leaders blasted the government-sponsored and seven party-approved supplementary bill on constitution amendment claiming it does not address their demands.
"Don't think that this is the end of our struggle. Our struggle has just started," said Upendra Yadav, coordinator of Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (MJF), indicating possibility of continued confrontation among major parties.
Addressing the CA meeting, he said that the Madhesi parties had to allow the resumption of the CA only because the country was heading to a collapse due to lack of budget, delay in formation of new government and similar important matters.
Mahantha Thakur, chief of Terai Madhes Loktantrik Party (TMLP), also blasted the supplementary bill. "In fact, we had not expected you (seven parties) to fulfill our demands," he said, adding that Madhesi struggle will continue.
Rajendra Mahato, chief of Nepal Sadbhavana Party (NSP), also strongly deplored the bill and warned of intense struggle.
Even as the Madhesi parties had demanded single Madhes province and group entry of Madhesis in the national army, the bill has provisions, which state that Nepal will be a federal democratic republic by upholding the aspirations of autonomous provinces of Madhesis, indigenous people and people from backward and other regions. The bill adds that the detailed definition regarding such provinces would be determined by the CA.
Regarding the demand of group entry of Madhesis in the army, the bill says that the army will be made inclusive on the basis of principle of equality and inclusion.
"Don't think that this is the end of our struggle. Our struggle has just started," said Upendra Yadav, coordinator of Madhesi Janadhikar Forum (MJF), indicating possibility of continued confrontation among major parties.
Addressing the CA meeting, he said that the Madhesi parties had to allow the resumption of the CA only because the country was heading to a collapse due to lack of budget, delay in formation of new government and similar important matters.
Mahantha Thakur, chief of Terai Madhes Loktantrik Party (TMLP), also blasted the supplementary bill. "In fact, we had not expected you (seven parties) to fulfill our demands," he said, adding that Madhesi struggle will continue.
Rajendra Mahato, chief of Nepal Sadbhavana Party (NSP), also strongly deplored the bill and warned of intense struggle.
Even as the Madhesi parties had demanded single Madhes province and group entry of Madhesis in the national army, the bill has provisions, which state that Nepal will be a federal democratic republic by upholding the aspirations of autonomous provinces of Madhesis, indigenous people and people from backward and other regions. The bill adds that the detailed definition regarding such provinces would be determined by the CA.
Regarding the demand of group entry of Madhesis in the army, the bill says that the army will be made inclusive on the basis of principle of equality and inclusion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)