Ignored questions

SUMIT SHARMA SAMEER

As soon as the Maoist ideologue Dr Baburam Bhattarai was elevated to the office of prime minister, the intellectual discourse queued up in praise of him as a political messiah willing to help peace and constitution-writing processes reach its ´desired´ end. They seem to have been influenced by what Herbert Simons calls, ´bounded rationality´. Due to the lack of performers, Nepali society suffers from a psychic of ´idol´ worshipping, which is detrimental for any progressive society. Focusing on an individual´s idealization and not in a system and processes is a political gimmick often prevalent in the least developing countries like Nepal.

Personally, the author welcomes the Maoist move of handing over the keys of arms containers to the special committee as well as a few positive trends initiated by Dr Bhattarai; nevertheless as Dr Bhattarai represents the larger Maoist party, which has played a substantial role in both the making and the unmaking of Nepal´s history, he cannot be looked upon irrespective of the Maoist movement that has its own merits and pitfalls.

I wish the prime minister a successful tenure. However there are larger questions that Nepali society is required to ponder over if at all it is to learn anything from its recent past. Is Maoist party in transition? What does that transformation entail? Is Maoist adopting the policy of making a significant gain made through the constituent assembly on the one hand and trying to keep its radicalism intact on the other?

Is it possible to strike a fine balance between the merits of democracy and radicalism? Will such system be any different from social democracy? If yes, what are the differences and if not, was there a need to wage an armed revolution to achieve social democracy? Further, what are the achievements reaped and the costs paid because of the Maoist movement? Maoists have been credited for the achievements made out of their violent movement; will they have enough guts to assume the responsibility of its pitfalls? Can the democratic revolutionary Dr Bhattarai do so?

In a document titled ´Plan for the Historic Initiation of the People´s War´, which was adopted by the Maoist central committee in September 1995 before initiating the armed movement, it has been stated: "We shall never allow this struggle to become a mere instrument for introducing partial reforms in the condition of the people, or terminating in a simple compromise by exerting pressure on the reactionary classes. Thus, our armed struggle will be totally free of all sorts of petty bourgeois, narrow nationalist, religion-communal and casteist illusions." What has happened to these commitments that were once the motivations and foundations behind the Maoist movement?
Completion of the peace process and writing of the constitution for the land is our immediate need. But under the armor of peace and constitution, the nation cannot allow political parties and its leaders to sanction values that are harmful to a free and civilized society.
In a personal interaction, an influential youth leader, Mr Lekhnath Neupane spoke his heart; "Have we done justice to our cadres and their families who offered their martyrdom believing our ideology and stated objectives? How can we legitimize our armed movement without addressing the issues of inclusion and state restructuring? Will we not be considered criminals if we fail to provide political legitimacy to our movement? Accepting to hand over the keys without dignified negotiations is submitting our movement and pride. Where will this take our party?"

One can agree and disagree with Mr Neupane’s views; nevertheless these questions are quite genuine for Nepali society. It cannot be dismissed just because it comes from those who have been considered hardliners. They are the established radical reformers with a substantial hold within their party. And they are here to stay for some time, if not longer. Moreover, it is a larger society and nation that suffered the brunt of the Maoist movement and will keep suffering from similar movements if we hesitate to discuss the issues raised by groups and actors within such movements.

In addition, how will the Maoists, particularly Dr Bhattarai and Prachanda respond to the future when the generations of tomorrow will cast doubts on the rationality of their movement. Why have the lives of so many innocent people been taken for the sake of other innocents that the Maoists claim to be representing? Generations of tomorrow will be an active member of a rational society unguided by the swings of radicalism and populist metaphors. They cannot simply accept the proposed overnight changes, but will dig the roots to convince them to accept the rationale behind such changes. Every political party and their actors will have to toil hard to convince the critical mass. And hence they will have many reasonable questions that the Maoists have to be accounted for.

In the process of addressing the issues of peace and constitution writing, Nepali politics has once again unfortunately endorsed crime, violence, and impunity. Such process and methodology has been sanctioned in the past as we did not question the Congress’ and the Communist’s armed revolutions. Our focus has always been immediate, which is not unnatural, particularly under the pressing circumstances. Completion of the peace process and writing of the constitution for the land is our immediate need. But under the armor of peace and constitution, the nation cannot allow political parties and its leaders to sanction values that are harmful to a free and civilized society.

The future society must escape the vicious cycles of violent movements and counter-movements so that the politics can shift its attention to poverty and underdevelopment. But it will largely depend on whether our social and political institutions are willing to sow the seed today that can ensure platonic values-based future for tomorrow. As the nation is embarking on settling the thorny issues of the Maoist war, addressing the issues of inclusion and federalism, the larger society must get involved in a rationale debate that will not only help smoothen the transition of today, but will secure the dignity for tomorrow as well.

Aristotle once remarked: "Young men are easily deceived, for they are quick to hope". Indeed we are a young and a hopeful nation. We hope that the future course of our country will be set on a positive motion carving its own defined destiny. And mind it; we don´t want to get deceived this time.

The writer is the author of Unfinished Journey: The Story of a Nation

sharmasumit77@gmail.com

Published on 2011-09-13 01:10:13
http://www.myrepublica.com/portal/index.php?action=news_details&news_id=35923