Nepal: Basanta on class struggle, revolutionary strategy, the international communist movement, and two-line struggle in the party

Interview with Basanta, Politburo Member, Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist)

Tuesday, 13 December 2011

Q. You said there is class struggle in the making of the new constitution. Can you elaborate which classes are aligned in to Nepal to backwards from the marching forward and how it is reflected in the expression of the new constitution. How they are placed in different parties?  Which are the parties totally retrograde?

A. Constitution is a political document that guides the state power of the given country to drive forward. Like the state power, constitution is also relative to a certain class, oppressor or the oppressed. At one point of the people’s war, the Constituent Assembly came into being as a political tactic to drive forward the unfinished task of new democratic revolution in Nepal. The classes, which were fighting militarily during people’s war, are now clashing ideologically and politically in the Constituent Assembly. The front of class struggle has definitely changed but not the objective.

With the demolition of monarchy, feudalism has become weak in Nepal. The comprador bourgeois has acquired upper hand in the state power. However, the characteristic of the state power has not changed yet. The contradiction formed of the entire people of oppressed class, nation, region and sex on the one side and the comprador and bureaucratic bourgeoisie, which is leading the reactionary state power, on the other, is the principal contradiction. It is manifested now in the Constituent Assembly too. To write a constitution that paves the way forward to resolving the basic contradictions emerged out of semi-feudal and semi-colonial condition of Nepal and restructuring the state power accordingly is the task our party is trying to accomplish from the Constituent Assembly. However, two-line struggle seems to be sharp on the content of the constitution.

It is principally the class not a party, we are confronting with, in the Constituent Assembly. However, the ideological and political line of a party represents the interest of a certain class. In this sense, we have to struggle with the parties too. The Nepali Congress, a section of UML and some parties from Madhesh represent the interest of comprador and bureaucratic bourgeoisie and feudalism in Nepal. So we have sharp contention with them in the Constituent Assembly. Continue reading

Nepal: More background on intense inner-party struggle over the way forward for Nepal’s revolution

[This article refers to the principal leaders of the UCPN(Maoist) and its most important meetings since 2005. For the benefit of non-S0uth Asian readers: Pushpa Kemal Dahal “Prachanda” is the Chairman of the UCPN(Maoist), and Mohan Baidya “Kiran”  is a vice-chairman. Baburam Bhattarai has occupied several different positions in recent years. The Palungar Meeting of 7,000 party leaders was concluded on November 28. The Chunwang Meeting was held in 2005, which laid the basis for the 12 Point Understanding between 7 parliamentary parties and the UCPN(Maoist) in early 2006. They cooperated during the mass uprisings in the spring of 2006 that toppled the monarchy. The Comprehensive Peace Agreement which ended the people’s war and gave legal status to the UCPN(M) was signed in November 2007. The Karipati Meeting was held in 2009.–Frontlines ed]

Palungtar is just the beginning

by Dr. Rishi Raj Baral, Chief Editor of Samaybadda

The sixth plenum of the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) has formally concluded but the ideological debate continues. In fact, it has just started. There were many questions to be resolved at the plenum and this meeting has raised some new questions as well.

Debates and discussions are not new things. There used to be sharp debates even when the ‘People’s War’ was on after the Second National Conference of Party of 2002, the issue of debate was ´Prachanda Path´ and ´Democracy in the 21st Century´.

The article by Baburam Bhattarai, “The Question of Building a New Type of State” – originally published in The Worker, a Maoist mouthpiece, in February 2004 – was the subject of heavy criticism. It was necessary to criticize the article because it was pleading for a revisionist line.

The party decision taken during the Chunwang Meeting gave birth to many confusions and illusions. Reevaluation of Mao’s and Lenin´s views on state and revolution and imperialism was the main issue of debate. Besides this, the ´12-Point Understanding´ was also an issue of debate as it raised many questions about the People’s War and the continuation of revolution. Continue reading