Three Villains Who Harmed Nepal Most

Divash Sharma

Since 1950, after overthrowing the Rana regime, Nepalese people have been dreaming a dream of peaceful, prosperous, civilized and technologically advance Nepal.

During 1950s, the chances of Nepal taking speed in all these areas were really high. However, a villain poured cold water on all aspirations of people. He was an autocratic King, infamously known as Mahendra Shah. He snatched all powers in a coup d’état in 1960 and introduced one party system called Panchayat. Civil rights, human rights, freedom of associations, plural political exercises, all were banned and he ruled Nepal with iron fist. The one party system he introduced lasted till 1990 killing several hundred people and imprisoning and suppressing thousands. Although, the totalitarian system he introduced was defeated, his sons entered into a power sharing arrangement and continued to hang on somewhere till 2006. Mahendra was one of the key villains in modern Nepal who held Nepal back. He was a tyrant. However, he took some important steps in areas of physical infrastructure building including Birgung-Kathmandu, Kodari-Kathmandu and East-West highways. He was instrumental in expanding education foundation by supporting to establish several hundred schools, some colleges and a university. He also legally abolished untouchability and eliminated the caste based penal code. In economic front, he initiated public sector enterprises to support industrialization and cater facilities in areas of greater need. In international front, he aligned Nepal with non-aligned movement, stood for equidistance between power blocks and powerful neighbors including America and Soviet Union and between India and China. However, his contributions were too little in comparison to his crimes committed against Nepali people, particularly suppressing them politically and intellectually. Hence, Mahendra as a tyrant will be listed as one of the major villains Nepal, whereas he will also be credited as an initiator of some development endeavors.

The infamous Panchayat system was overthrown as the result of three decades long heroic struggle of people. Several historic political initiatives contributed in the down fall of the tyrannical system. It would be worth mentioning the armed struggle launched by the Nepali Congress during 1960s, the Jhapa rebellion of 1970s and its continuation by the Communist Party of Nepal (Marxist-Leninist) during 1980s, the militant students’ and workers’ movements and several popular uprisings including the uprising of 1979 that forced the regime to declare referendum and the people’s movement of 1989-90 that succeeded in overthrowing the Panchayat system, are a few important ones. Although, the people’s movement defeated Panchayat, it ended in a compromise that retained the monarchy in a bit different form. The movements and elections after the change of 1990 gave birth to new heroes and new villains. Not a single hero survived politically to lead the change process positively and constructively. However, several leaders projected as heroes converted themselves into villains. The tallest among these new converts was Girija Prasad Koirala. The more he survived physically the greater he accumulated the negative wealth and stood tallest among villains. Barring his history of long struggle against the tyrannical Panchayat system, his personal quality of determination and courage and his ability to reaching out even to diehard opponents; he was a garbage truck. Also, there were corruptions previously in public life, however Girija Prasad institutionalized it and introduced corrupt practices as a general rule rather than exceptions. He could be addressed as the “Father of Corruption in Modern Nepal.” His nepotism and cronyism of unparallel nature, scale and intensity would be remembered for a longtime to come. He is primarily responsible for creating a sandy base, which made Nepal now vulnerable, unstable, anarchic and ungovernable.

When Girija Prasad Koirala departed initially politically and afterward physically, his political successor appeared. He was none other than Pushpa Kamal Dahal, the charismatic chairman of the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), (UPCN (M). People had high hopes from him as he had led the decade-long civil war putting forward the agenda that there would be a new Nepal - a prosperous, civilized, egalitarian, developed and shinning Nepal. More than 13000 people had been killed by either side during the civil war and the hopes and aspirations after such a big sacrifice should be naturally high. When, the UCPN (M) took over the leadership of the government, there was some sort of euphoria. Jubilation was the flavor of the time. Gradually, frustrations shadowed hopes, anger brushed off cool expectations, turmoil replaced serenity and a different Pushpa Kamal came out from the thick cloud. The Pushpa Kamal appeared second time had some characters of Mahendra as he sounded highly intolerant to opposing voices, and he had some characters of Girija Prasad as he was a master money maker. Moreover, he was highly unstable and super ambitious. He wanted everything revolving around him – politics, party, parliament and government. He primarily lacked statesmanship, transparency and commitment to any cause other than his personal agenda of nepotism and cronyism. He contributed to create a mess so as to swim on it and to ensure his endeavors rewarding himself. By utilizing his party apparatus, he accumulated wealth and made himself a new financial Czar. However, he killed his charisma, respect, reputation and personality. Moreover, as a turncoat, he betrayed the cause of building a shinning Nepal and degenerated himself to a petty power broker. A leader of majestic height died politically and made Nepal suffering immensely in the process.

Nepal suffered a lot due to roles played by these three notorious villains.

Some Comments on UCPN (M) and Transitions to ...

The article "Pleasure of staying at the crossroads" by Rishi Raj Baral (posted on http://thenextfront.com/) has put forward a clear roadmap. It is well presented.

I have some comments.

1) Transition: Although, the incremental change, which amass the quantity, impetus and energy for a qualitative change is a continuous process, it has to lead somewhere to a clear break. In this way transition is a continuous process in generic interpretation but it is also an accumulative process for a phenomenal change. This change could be composting of biodegradable items that results in fertilizer or could be germination of seeds that gives birth to seedling or saplings. Now, within UCPN (M), both processes are active.

2)Time: It is natural that such a complex process of transition to reaction and transition to reigniting revolution takes time. However, being active and taking time and being lethargic and taking time are two different circumstances. Now, the “transition to reaction” team has been active as it is spreading its legs everywhere – party, parliament, government and foreign forces, whereas the “transition to reigniting revolution” team has become mostly a talking club barring a few good organizational and analytical works. Hence, the proposition put forward by Rishi that “Staying at the crossroads for long time means to harm oneself” is correct.

3)“Party within the party”: The concept, in practice, is a normal course for a brief period of split in any party. However, as a strategically workable concept, it is not only flawed but also suicidal. If Baidhya-Badal platform wishes that the two antagonistic Headquarters could stay together within a ‘party framework’, that is simply a concept, which would ultimately result to liquidation of them.

4)Break: Rishi’s conclusion that “restructuring the party is one and the only way to move forward” is the correct course this time as the other side – Prachanda-Bhattarai platform has already reached to a destination from where they could only travel to reaction and more reaction.

5)Two line or two tendencies: Being monolithic and too centralization had harmed the communist movement in the past and still it has been harming. So, “letting hundreds of flowers to bloom” should be the governing foundation that helps flourish the communist movement and the parties. Unity even with hundreds of friendly disagreements is what the communists should be happy with. Two lines, two tendencies, two platforms or even more are to be considered normal and natural.

6)Concluding point: Even if Baidhya-Badal platform rejects to move forward and refuses to clearly breaking relations with the Prachanda-Bhattarai camp, revolution in Nepal will not stop to take its further course. However, they have contributed most meaningfully in the Nepalese revolution in the past; they are still trying to carry the glory though with a bit hesitation; the leaders and cadres around them have wonderful contributions and splendid images of sacrifice and revolutionary maturity; and people have trust and expectations from them, so Nepali revolution could wait them for a while. Let’s try for the best, if that would not happen, another better option could take concrete shape and a new course may get acceleration.

http://thenextfront.com/politics/pleasure-of-staying-at-the-crossroads.html

Prachanda Path: A Dead Idealogical Synthesis

Prachanda Path was the creation of CPN (M) as an ideological synthesis of set of ideas emerged during the practice of revolution in Nepal. It was expected that this set of ideas emerging in the form of Prachanda Path will guide the basic line in the forward march of the Nepalese Revolution. Kiran was instrumental in its formulation as his belief was that just as Marxism in Germany, Leninism in Russia, and Maoism in China so Prachanda Path is Nepal's identity of revolution. (see: http://radhikaranjanmarxist.blogspot.com/2009/04/nepal-prachanda-path-new-doctrine.html). And, ideologues like Basanta were the principal elaborators (Bhashyakars) and propagators (see: International Dimension of Prachanda Path by Basanta, Issue number 10, The Worker, organ of the CPN (M).

However, christened after its the then all powerful Chairman Prachanda, Prachanda Path was initially abandoned during the unity process with the CPN (Masal-Unity Center) and died its natural death when Prachanda abandoned revolution.

Now, nobody talks about Prachanda Path, neither its ‘majestic pillar’ Prachanda nor its chief architect Kiran nor one of the great Bhasyakars Basanta. Prachanda Path is found in history books only. It is not only a dead phrase, but also a dead expectation. Strange, cdebasish62 has quoted long passages from Basanta’s article. Everybody has the right to correct himself/herself. Kiran and Basanta also could do the same through the MLM process of criticism and self-criticism. Now, the revolutionary platform within the UCPN (M) has to rename the ideological synthesis of the set of ideas emerged from the practice of Nepali revolution or drop such premature initiatives entirely.

http://thenextfront.com/politics/two-line-struggle-in-the-international-communist-movement.html#comment-2290