NEWS & LETTERS, December 2009
World in View
Nepal, India unrest
by Gerry Emmett
The prominence of Maoist groups in recent events in Nepal and India show that the historic problems of Maoism have not been overcome by its current representatives. In Nepal, the massive popular demonstrations that closed down the capital, Kathmandu, in early November have been followed by talks between United Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) leader Prachanda and the Nepali Congress president, Girija Prasad Koirala.
They will try to work out a compromise "third path" to settle the current upheavals which began when Prachanda, who had been elected to the presidency with 38% of the votes, tried to dismiss the head of the armed forces and institute a previous agreement that the Maoist guerrilla fighters would be integrated into a new military.
Prachanda was overruled by opposition from Congress and stepped down from the presidency, citing the need for civilian control of the military.
It is the real struggle of millions for greater freedom and economic justice that seeks expression through current events. Any government in Nepal will have to deal with the reality of being a small and impoverished country caught between the two massive state-capitalist powers, India and China.
India probably has a hand in current events through the Nepalese Congress. It was India that helped bring Prachanda into the electoral arena. Above all, the Maoists know that neither India nor China wishes to see a real social revolution on their borders. That is a dilemma for the Maoists.
The revolutionary peasantry and workers, women, youth, and LGBTQI people of Nepal will be the real measure of social progress. LGBTQI people have recently made some important advances, despite the negative position on gays that the Maoists have held.
In eastern India, the government is using an overblown threat from the naxalites, of the recently formed Communist Party of India (Maoist), to launch an invasion of remote tribal areas. "Operation Greenhunt" targets Maoists in areas that have long been coveted for capitalist development. Many Indian leftists have pointed out that it will put tribal peoples in the middle of a struggle they haven't started.
These Maoists (a minority even among India's Maoists) have been small, isolated groups in the jungles for decades, and much of their fighting has been intramural and factional. Unlike the Nepalese Maoists, they have no relation to mass struggles. They don't pose any threat to the Indian state and are being used as an excuse for military action to claim tribal lands.
As Indian leftist Nirmalangshu Mukherji pointed out, "the poorest of the poor and the historically marginalized will suffer the most in terms of loss of lives, livelihood and habitat."
|
