Nepal in Transition:
Part 1 - The Background of the Struggle in Nepal
This is the translation of the first part of the two-part article on Nepal already published in Dec 06 and May 07 issues of SANDIKSHAN (Bengali). Readers are requested to read this part which deals with the background of the present transformation in Nepal ? without taking into account this background it is impossible to understand the depth of the peoples aspiration for a radical change, condition of struggle there, etc and moreover, to form an opinion regarding the political line of the revolutionary party leading a substantial section of the toiling masses there ? the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist).
? The Editorial Board, For A Proletarian Party
2006: An Eventful Year
A wave of change is sweeping through our neighbouring country Nepal since April 2006. In the previous year, on 1st February 2005, King Gyanendra took over dictatorial power over the country after dissolving the elected Cabinet and also the "House of Representatives" or the Parliament. These autocratic measures of the King brought the parliamentary parties and the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) closer together. On November 22, the 12 Point Agreement was signed between the CPN (Maoist) and members of the Alliance of Seven parliamentary Parties (SPA ? Seven Party Alliance). Mainly after the signing of this treaty the anti-monarchy struggle intensified. The Kathmundu valley was rocking with incessant protests against the autocratic rule of the king. When it was found that this turbulent mass movement could not be curbed even after naked oppression by the Royal Nepalese Army, King Gyanendra was forced to reinstate the elected parliament. The King, by means of a proclamation, reinstated the parliament and called the majority party to form the Cabinet. Under the leadership of Girija Prasad Koirala of the Nepali Congress, the Seven Party Alliance formed the govt.
The flow of events did not stop here, this time. The Nepali Congress was eager to reach a compromise with the King through the reestablishment of a parliament of the old type based on the constitution of 1990. Even though a parliamentary structure was constituted in the name of establishment of democracy (according to the constitution of 1990), yet in the last fifteen years there were ample examples which showed that the monarchy was in the main untouched. The supreme authority of the Royal Nepal Army remained in the hands of the King. Even the reigns of administrative power were concentrated in the hands of the King. The King had power to nominate more than half of the members of the Upper House of the parliament. To top it all, the power to sack an elected Prime Minister as well as dissolve the Cabinet of Ministers at his own will, remained in the hands of the King. The last fifteen years, particularly after Gyanendra became king, this power was used to dissolve the Cabinet of Ministers an innumerable number of times. This power was exercised by Gyanendra on February 2005 to dissolve the House of Representatives (parliament) and take all power in his own hands. The struggling people of Nepal were very careful this time, so that the leaders of the Seven Party Alliance did not end the ongoing struggle with the formation of such a handicapped parliament which would be a puppet in the hands of the King. Whenever the people saw any attempt at deviating from or betraying their target of demolishing monarchy and establishing a Republic, they took to the streets and raised protests. They made it clear to the Seven Party Alliance govt that this time they would not tolerate any attempt to deviate from the aim of establishing a Republic. Actually, though the SPA formed the govt, the events unfolding in Nepal were not totally in their control. The main driving force in the present turn of events in Nepal was the organised force of the CPN (Maoist), who have already taken decisive control over a major part of rural Nepal, and was unswerving in the aim of totally uprooting the monarchy. Not only that, the people of the Kathmundu valley including the main cities of Nepal was continuing the struggle for overthrow of monarchy and establishment of a republic, and they had not allowed this movement subside. Under the pressure of the people's movement from below, the House of Representatives had already taken some steps whose effect on Nepal's politics is bound to be far reaching.
After forming the govt towards the end of April, on 18th May the House of Representatives announced some steps aimed at stripping the King of some his powers. Firstly, they have announced that the King will no longer be the Supreme Commander of the RNA, one of the main pillars of King's power. The name of the army has also been changed, the word "Royal" has been removed, and it is now the "Nepalese Army". The army has been brought under direct control of the House of Representatives (the parliament). The very post of the "Supreme Commander" is to be abolished and the cabinet will decide who will be the Chief of the Army. Secondly, the name of the govt has been changed from "His Majesty's Government" to "Nepal Government". In addition, the state has been declared a Secular State (instead of "Hindu State" as it was till then). In this context it is to be remembered that the main patron of Hinduism in Nepal was the King himself, who was popularly known as an Avatar (incarnation) of the Lord Vishnu, which had a big effect on the backward masses. Thirdly, in the same proclamation of the House of Representatives it was announced that the administrative power which was hitherto vested in the King and the Cabinet according to article 35 (2) of the Constitution, would henceforth be vested only on the Cabinet. Fourthly, the power to appoint the successor to the King would henceforth belong to the Cabinet. Fifthly, all income of the Royal Family would henceforth be subject to taxation. In addition, it was also stated in the same proclamation that the Budget of the expenses of the Royal Palace, as also all the allowances and perquisites, would be decided by the parliament. It is clear from these steps that though some of the privileges of the King are still in place, the power of the King is being curbed to a great degree [1].
Even after these, there has been talk of taking some more steps which are significant from the point of view of removing the power of the King. An enquiry committee had been formed for punishing those found guilty of causing the repression and atrocities on the mass movement in April. That committee has found King Gyanendra guilty of carrying out atrocities on the mass movement in April, and has recommended that the King be punished. In another later step the House of Representatives has taken a decision that the total amount of land in the hands of the Royal Family shall be ascertained, and all land in excess of the current land ceiling act shall be confiscated and distribute among the landless [2]. In the news which contained the previous statement, it was also stated that according to preliminary estimates of the govt the land in possession of Nepal's Royal Family is at least 1700 Hectares, whereas according to the then laws of the land, a citizen of Nepal cannot own more than 7 Hectares of land.
There is no reason to think that the govt formed by the SPA is taking these steps or decisions voluntarily. Actually, the SPA, and in particular the Nepali Congress, is trying its level best to ensure that the king retains some power in its hands. In a meeting with the Nepal Chamber of Commerce, the Prime Minister Mr Girija Prasad Koirala said that in his opinion, everyone including the King must be given a role in the democracy; the King, the Maoists and all other groups or organisations must be given a space, or else they will be disappointed [3].
There is a trouble going on how and to what extent the King's ruling powers are to be curbed. On the one hand is the Seven Party Alliance (SPA), who wants to reach an agreement with the King, and, while not restoring his previous position, want to reinstate him with some rights and powers in the same position. On the other hand is the CPN (Maoist) who has proclaimed the intention of totally uprooting the King's power. The tide of the popular movement in April has proved that the vast majority of the Nepalese people want to uproot monarchy and establish a republic. Some time after the formation of govt by the SPA, on 26th May, the Maoists signed a Disarmament (Arms Restriction) Pact. But a more significant treaty was signed on 16th June. On that day an Eight Point Agreement was signed by the govt and the CPN (Maoist). In this agreement it was decided that a Draft Interim Constitution would be prepared, and based on that Constitution an Interim Govt would be formed, which govt would announce the date of elections for the Constituent Assembly. Based on a unanimous decision the existing parliament would be dissolved. On the other hand, the CPN (Maoist) would also dissolve the govt formed by it. At the same time it was also decided that until the elections to the Constituent Assembly both the Nepali Army (previously known as RNA or Royal Nepal Army) as well as the Peoples Liberation Army of the Maoists would remain confined in their respective barracks and a representative team from the United Nations would supervise the process of Arms Management. A decision was taken to request the U.N. in writing regarding this. But after this, there took place some events which threatened to break down the talks and agreement between the Maoists and the SPA. The contradictions developed due to two main points. Firstly, the SPA or the Nepal Govt was demanding that the Maoists would have to surrender their armed forces (i.e., dissolve their armed forces) before joining the Interim Govt, which was totally unacceptable to the Maoists. The Second point of dispute has already been mentioned. The dispute is regarding whether the King will have any role to play in governing Nepal. It is obvious that the US imperialism has a strong role to play behind the SPA.
Ultimately, in order to proceed towards the establishment of a Republic in Nepal, an agreement was signed on 8th November between the Maoists and the SPA [4]. In that agreement it was decided that in the next year (2007) around the middle of June, the elections to the new Constituent Assembly (which would draft the new Constitution of Nepal) would be held. In the interim period (more specifically, from 1st Dec 2006 till the elections to the Constituent Assembly) an Interim House of Representatives and an Interim Govt will rule Nepal. The Maoists will also participate in this interim parliament and the govt. the old parliament will be dissolved. The members of the old House who opposed the anti-monarchy movement will not be included in the new House. However the remaining 209 members of the old House will be in the new House of Representatives. Apart from this, 73 representatives will be from the CPN (Maoist). In this context it may be mentioned that of the abovementioned 209 members, 95 are from Nepali Congress led by Mr Girija Prasad Koirala and 73 are from the CPN (UML). During this period the Maoists will confine their armed forces to the seven major cantonments of Nepal. Keeping aside the firearms necessary for the safety of the cantonment, the remaining arms will be preserved under lock and key. On the other hand, the Nepali Army will also be confined to their barracks in proportion to the Maoist army and its arms. It has also been resolved that they will not use these arms against any group or party. In this context it may be noted that the US imperialists opposed the inclusion of the Maoists in the govt before the disarmament process. This agreement has proclaimed several more steps to curb the power of monarchy. Firstly, the King will not have any say or control over the national administration. Also, the wealth of late King Birendra, Queen Aishwarya and their family will be placed in the hands of a Trust, and all the property and wealth inherited by King Gyanendra by virtue of his becoming King will be nationalised.
Needless to say, it is of great interest to us, where these turbulent times will ultimately lead Nepal to. The significance of the events of Nepal is indeed very great to the representatives of the advanced proletariat. In the present period, after the defeat of the first offensive of the international working class movement, when the revolutionary movement is not present in almost any country, Nepal is one of the most notable among the handful of countries where revolutionary movement has advanced or developed. After the proclamation of People's War in 1996, in the span of 10 years the poor toiling people's movement has taken great strides under the leadership of the CPN (Maoist). Even according to the enemy camp, almost three quarter of the country is under their control. That they are in a commanding position in Nepal's politics is proved by the recent mass upsurge and the following events. As a part of the proletarian movement it is our duty to study the twists and turns of this movement. In particular, a large number of questions have already been raised regarding their recent tactics. We must try to understand and analyse these issues. But before we can judge this movement and the role of the Maoists, we must have some knowledge about the country and the history of development of the people's movement. This is what we will try to understand in this part (Part1) of this article on "Nepal in Transition".
Nepal ? A Brief Geographical Description
As a neighbouring country we know that Nepal is a small country; its geographical area is 140,800 Sq Km, slightly more than that of Bangladesh. A large part of Nepal is within the Himalayan Mountain range. So arable land is very little, it is only 2.5 million Hectares, or only 21.68% of the total area. There has been very little industrialisation. Nepal is one of the poorest countries of the world. A major feature of Nepal's geographical position is that it is a landlocked country. And the countries surrounding it (India and China) are much larger and economically, militarily much more stronger than Nepal. Because it is landlocked, Nepal has to depend for its external trade on its neighbouring countries, particularly, India.
Geographically, as we move from the Northern to the Southern part, Nepal is divided into three parallel regions running from Western to Eastern borders of Nepal. Of these three, the Northernmost is the mountainous area which is called "Parbat" in Nepal. Population is very sparse in this region. The middle region, though hilly too, is of lesser altitude. This region is called "Pahar". It is in this region there are some valleys, including the Kathmundu valley, which has Kathmundu, the Capital of epal, as also the principal stronghold of the monarchy. The region to the south of this is called the "Terai", which is low-lying plain land at the foot of the Himalayas bordering India. In terms of agricultural production this is the most developed area of Nepal. The majority of Nepal's population live in the valleys and in the Terai. 40% of the population live in the Terai.
History prior to 1950
In the eighteenth century Nepal emerged as a centralised nation. Before that it was divided into various states of different sizes ruled by different kings. It was King Pritvi Narayan Shah, king of one such small state called Gorkha, who defeated the other feudal lords, captured Kathmundu, and established the centralised state of Nepal in 1768. The present royal family of Nepal are his descendants. After Pritvi Narayan Shah, his descendants tried to expand their kingdom of Nepal. From 1788 to 1791 they tried to capture Tibet, but were ultimately defeated by the Chinese Emperor's army and had to pay huge amount of money as penalty. In 1814-16, there was a war with the British East India Company over the conquest of the small adjacent states of Nepal, in which war Nepal was defeated and forced to sign the notorious Sugouli Agreement by which they were forced to cede Sikkim and parts of Terai.
In 1846, Jung Bahadur, a British loyalist, came to power through the court-massacre, an infamous palace war. Since then, till 1950, for 104 years descendants of Jung Bahadur, known as the Rana Dynasty, virtually ruled Nepal. Though the kings of the Shah Dynasty (descendants of Pritvi Narayan Shah) remained Titular Monarch, the Prime Ministers of the Rana Dynasty (descendants of Jung Bahadur) were the actual rulers. The Rana-s were pupets of the British and came to their help in repressing the ?Sepoy Mutiny' as well as helped the British in both World Wars [5].
The Fall of the Rana Dynasty & the Subsequent Era
Right after the First World War, a struggle for democracy and against the feudal rule of Rana Dynasty started developing. In the 1930s a party called Praja Parishad took birth and there was a massive rally in Kathmundu against the Rana rulers. The struggle against the Ranas intensified many-fold during and after the Second World War. In the last part of 1946 the Nepali Rashtriya Congress was created. the bourgeois?petty-bourgeois leadership of the Nepali Congress had very close link with the Indian National Congress, and used to direct all its political activities from India. However, it would be wrong to think that only the educated petty bourgeoisie carried out the struggle against the Rana monarchy. The poor peasant masses of Nepal too built up a struggle to eradicate feudalism and the Rana monarchy. This struggle took the form of armed struggle. The armed struggle against the Rana monarchy became especially intense in the Terai region. In quite a number of cities the rebels captured power. Because of the departure of the British the Rana monarchy lost the main buttress of their power. Rather, they fell into even ore adverse conditions, because the Indian ruling class, in an attempt to establish its hegemony over neighbouring nations, started giving direct support to the anti-Rana movement. Faced by he dual attack of the ever increasing unrest within the country on the one hand, and pressure of the powerful Indian ruling class on the other, the Rana monarchy succumbed and came to a compromise. In December 1950, there started a round of discussion between the Ranas and the Indian govt; and as a result, in February 1951 King Tribhuban Narayan Shah of the Shah dynasty was enthroned [6]. A cabinet of Ministers was formed under the king of which 5 members were from the Ranas and 5 members were from the Nepali Congress. Naturally, not a single step was taken to eradicate feudalism. This was a direct betrayal of the aspirations of the struggling peasant masses by the Indian ruling class and the Nepali bourgeoisie; and as a result of this, for the whole of the 1950s as well as first few years of the 1960s there took place sporadic armed revolts by the peasantry, scattered over different regions of Nepal. The Nepalese Army crushed these revolts ruthlessly. An important leader of this phase of peasants' struggle was Bhim Panth, who was captured and murdered brutally by the Nepalese Army in 1955. At that time the Indian Army too had taken a role in crushing these revolts [7].
In the same proclamation of 1950 which reinstated Tribhuban as King with full honours, it was also promised that elections would be held by 1952. Even King Tribhuban had promised formation of a Constituent Assembly and incorporation of a Republican (Democratic) Constitution. But what actually occurred was that a multi party democracy was started with very little powers in real terms under the supreme power of the King. However, even this system was actually incorporated through the elections of 1959. Under pressure from a widespread mass movement with the demand of elections, the then King Mahendra announced elections in 1959. King Mahendra unilaterally declared a Constitution too. in this constitution the main power remained in the hands of the King. The total control of the army remained in the hands of the King. Also he was given the total control over foreign policy. The king reserved the right to take any step without even consulting the Prime Minister. He even had the right to sack Prime Minister, right to suspend any part or whole of the constitution! In this election the Nepali Congress secured a majority, and B P Koirala, the elder brother of the present Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala, became Prime Minister. The cabinet formed by the Nepali Congress took some minuscule measures of land reform. This reform centred on some tax-free land called Birata land given away by the Ranas. The King or the feudal Lords did not like even this role, this trivial reform, of the Nepali Congress. In addition, the peasant revolts that started in the 1950s were still continuing. Finally, in December 1960, this make-believe "democracy" was brought to an end. Ending the ?multi-party democracy (!)' the King installed a party-less Panchayat, which was in place till 1990 when a system of ?multi-party democracy (!)' was reinstalled again. With the end of ?multi-party democracy (!)', all political parties including the Nepali Congress were banned. The leaders of the Nepali Congress, including B P Koirala, were arrested. B P Koirala spent the next 8 years in jail, and after that, another 8 years in exile in India [8].
The revoking of whatever little democracy was there did not go un-protested. Though the Nepali Congress spoke of peaceful movement, armed resistance continued in some areas. But after the Sino-Indian war of 1962 the situation changed radically. After this war, the need for a ?Stable Nepal' emerged as an urgent necessity to the ruling class of India, because of Nepal's geopolitical location in the Indo-China border. As a result, India stopped backing the opposition parties of Nepal. As the fight of the Nepali bourgeoisie, especially the Nepali Congress, was dependent on the help of the Indian ruling class, so even their limited struggle against the King was, for all practical purposes, stopped for the time being.
From Party-Less Panchayat Back To Multi-Party ?Democracy (!)'
After the king concentrated all power in his hands in the name of party-less Panchayat syste,, and the attitude of the indian ruling class towards the anti-monarchy struggle changed, the Nepali Congress started compromising to a greater and greater degree with the King. Throughout 1960s and 1970s the King was successful in further consolidating his power.
By the inspiration of the Naxalbari Movement in India, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, there was an armed uprising in Jhapa district. But, because of the limitedness of the mass base of this revolt, the monarchy did not have much trouble in crushing it. In the last part of the 1970s the anti-monarchy movement again started gaining momentum. In the Kathmundu valley students took to the streets demanding democracy. There were also peasant revolts in different rural areas. In the face of ever increasing protests, in May 1979 King Birebdra announced that a referendum would be held to decide whether the party-less Panchayat system would remain, or, a multi-party democracy would be installed. One year later the referendum was held. The party-less Panchayat triumphed by a very narrow margin. It was common knowledge that in that election held under the undisputed sway of the King, there was widespread rigging in favour of the King. This was only natural. However, in the face of the protests fro below, though he still clung to power through the party-less Panchayat system, yet the King made some concessions. Even though there were still to be no political parties participating in the Panchayat elections, yet some freedom was given for forming political parties and activities. Through the whole of 1980s the anti-monarchy and pro-democracy movement continued in many forms. The Panchayat elections were boycotted at different times. According to one information source, the communists boycotted the Panchayat elections in 1986, and in the Rolpa district there was cent percent boycott. This fact is significant, because it is the same Rolpa district which is today a stronghold of the Maoists' movement. It is also one of the most remarkable among the districts where in 1996 the Peoples War started under the leadership of the CPN (Maoist).
Throughout the whole of the 1980s, there continued the movement for the abolition of monarchy in guise of party-less Panchayat system. During this period the Nepali Congress started to compromise more and more with the King. Due to this they started becoming isolated from the people, and different communist groups started gaining in strength. The anti-monarchy movement reached an apex in the last part of 1980s. in March 1989, the govt of India proclaimed that the tenure of Indo-Nepal treaty regarding trade and communication had ended, and all roads for flow of commodities were shut down. This decision of the Indian govt created a crisis in Nepal's economy. Due to this economic crisis mass protests started in Nepal. Though it initially started as anti-Indian agitation, it soon burst into a turbulent movement for democracy. It reached its peak in 1990. Contrary to popular belief, this movement was not limited to the students-youth-intellectuals of the Kathmundu valley. It had actually spread widely in the rural areas of Nepal. At that time, one momentous event was the huge assembly of more than hundred thousand people with the aim of taking over the royal palace in Kathmudu. The assembly had to be dispersed by firing, which killed numerous people. Significantly there was wide participation of the rural poor in this incident. After the events of that day King Birendra was forced to retreat. He dissolved the Panchayat system and started the multi-party democracy. Though there was a slight extension of democratic rights due to this, yet the system offered very little democratic rights even compared to a general bourgeois democratic system. As before, the whole power remained centralised in the hands of the King. As before, the King retained the supreme control over the army (RNA), his main pillar of power. The parliament did not even have the right to promulgate any laws without King's consent, and most administrative powers remained in the King's hand. The King retained the power to dissolve the elected parliament and Cabinet, and to nominate his own Cabinet of ministers. Naturally, there were also no attacks on the feudal relations. So, in totality, under the guise of multi-party democracy, monarchy continued. The bourgeois and petit-bourgeois parties like Nepali Congress and CPN(UML) in a bid to get some crumbs of power under the King, compromised with the King and again betrayed the anti-feudal struggle of the Nepali people.
From Multi-Party ?Democracy (!)' to the Present Phase
The birth of Communist Party of Nepal dates back to 1949. In the early 1950s the party played a role in organising the peasant rebellion which had spread to different parts of Nepal, particularly in the Terai. But from the mid 1950s the leadership of the Communist Party took the line of compromise with the King. In the early 1970s, influenced by the Naxalbari movement of India, in eastern Nepal there was an armed revolt in Jhapa, but the revolt of early 1970s was mainly comprised of the petit bourgeois youth. But this revolt initiated a two-line struggle within the communist camp. The old reformist leadership was talking of anti monarchy joint struggle with the bourgeois parties like Nepali Congress, and was intent on keeping the struggle limited to the establishment of a parliamentary democracy. Their aim was a slight extension of democracy, keeping monarchy intact. Another trend, which was developed mainly under the leadership of the Communist Party of Nepal (4th conference), took the line of complete abolition of monarchy in order to establish a New Democratic Nepal through Protracted Peoples War. After the beginning of somewhat freedom of political activities, both these camps developed and their mass bases expanded. In the first parliamentary election held in 1990 after the establishment of multi-party democracy, the CPN(UML), which represented the reformist wing, took part. They won in 69 seats and became the second largest party in the parliament. Another wing, which had its origin in the fourth conference, went through a period of ups and downs, breaks and mergers, during the whole of 1980s. Some of the groups among them united into an organisation called Unity Centre. Later it was from this Unity Centre that the CPN (Maoist) was born. In that election of 1990, the Unity Centre participated forming an organisation named Sanjukta Janamorcha (united peoples front) and won in 9 seats, which made them the third largest party in the parliament. This part of history perhaps points to the fact that throughout the 1980s the anti-monarchy anti-feudal struggle was getting more and more intensified and due to the conciliatory character of the Nepali Congress the lower strata of the populace were getting more and more organised under the leadership of different communist groups.
After the introduction of the multi party democracy the betrayal of the parliamentary parties, and then, the anti people character of these parties experienced by the people when governments led by these parties were in power, became more exposed and these parties got further alienated from the poor toiling people. Side by side, the aspiration for the solution of the problems crippling the life of the poor toiling people, the aspiration for which they struggled, was left neglected and the discontent of the masses regarding the system grew more and more. The inflammable situation through which the life of toiling masses were passing through can be gauged from a 1995 interview of Comrade Baburam Bhattarai, one of the topmost leaders of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist): in many districts of west-central Nepal poor peasants' struggle became so intensified that the Armed Police conducted a cruel offensive named ?Operation Romeo' in the Rolpa district. In this single district more than 1000 poor were arrested, more than 10,000 had to go on hiding in adjacent districts. Not only in Rolpa, Rukum, Baglang etc districts saw advance of peasants' struggles under the leadership of the Maoist Party [9]. We can understand from this that when the CPN (Maoist) declared Peoples War in 1996, that people's war started based on the developing class struggle of the peasants of west-central Nepal. The rapidity at which the Peoples War spread over to wider tracts in Nepal also show how intense was the spontaneous agitation, unrest of toiling masses.
What this Backdrop Tells Us
This background of anti monarchy struggle of Nepal shows us that the present movement of the toiling masses is expressing the deep-rooted aspiration of the people there who were being exploited, tortured by the feudal oppression for a long, long period, for establishing a real democratic republic. After many fluctuations, rises and falls through decades the struggle reached its present phase. There were two trends of which one is being led by Nepali Congress, and later, CPN (UML) etc bourgeois, petit bourgeois parties. In this era of imperialism and socialist revolution, because of the natural class limitation and weakness of these classes and the very weak development of capitalism in Nepal allied with dependence on Indian ruling class, these classes are mainly compromising. Since 1950 it was seen that the Nepali bourgeoisie, who were mainly represented by the Nepali Congress, never tried to uproot feudalism. When during the early 1950s Tribhuban was crowned replacing the Rana-rule and keeping intact the monarchy the anti feudal struggle was silenced by repression, then also they acted treacherously. Later, they tried their best for getting only some share of power keeping the monarchy intact instead of uprooting the monarchy; and in 1990 too they betrayed with the peoples' anti monarchy struggle. Due to these betrayals and compromising character they gradually alienated them from the people. Since 1990 another trend, that of anti feudal struggle, developed under the leadership of CPN (Maoist). With the aim of establishing a new democratic Nepal uprooting feudalism totally and eliminating the exploitation, oppression of regional hegemonic powers like that of India, peasant struggle expanded to a large zone of Nepal, under the leadership of CPN(M). At recent phase also we saw tussle ? between the US imperialists and India backed Seven Party Alliance govt on the one hand, and on the other hand the masses of peasantry led by the CPN(M). To understand the course which Nepal will take, we are to understand the dynamics of the movement led by CPN(M). the next part will deal with that.
Source:
1. www.himalayantimes.com; 18 May 2006
2. Aljajeera.net; 5 August 2006
3. www.rediffmail.com; rediff news, 7 August 2006
4. www.nepalnews.com; the full version of the November 8 treaty
6. http://countrystudies.us/nepal/peasant movement in nepal
7. http://www.hri.ca/partners/insec
8. http://countrystudies.us/nepal/
9. The Independent (a newspaper of Nepal), 13-19 December, 1995
Comments:
No Comments for View