Peoplesmarch November 2009

3 PEOPLE’S MARCH Nov. 2009

Somewhere in the impregnable jungles of Dandakaranya, the supremecommander of CPI (Maoist) spoke to ‘Open’ on issues ranging from theGovernment’s proposed anti-Naxal offensive to Islamist Jihadist movements

The supreme commander of CPI (Maoist) talks to Open in his first-everinterview.

At first sight, Mupalla Laxman Rao, who is about to turn 60, looks like aschool teacher. In fact, he was one in the early 1970s in Andhra Pradesh’sKarimnagar district. In 2009, however, the bespectacled, soft-spoken figure isIndia’s Most Wanted Man. He runs one of the world’s largest Left insurgencies—a man known in Home Ministry dossiers as Ganapathi; a man whose writ runslarge through 15 states. The supreme commander of CPI (Maoist) is a sciencegraduate and holds a B Ed degree as well. He still conducts classes, but now theyare on guerilla warfare for other senior Maoists. He replaced the founder of thePeople’s War Group, Kondapalli Seetharaamiah, as the party’s general-secretaryin 1991. Ganapathi is known to change his location frequently, and intelligencereports say he has been spotted in cities like Hyderabad, Kolkata and Kochi.After months of attempts, Ganapathi agreed to give his first-ever interview.Somewhere in the impregnable jungles of Dandakaranya, he spoke to RAHULPANDITA on issues ranging from the Government’s proposed anti-Naxaloffensive to Islamist Jihadist movements.

Q Lalgarh has been described as theNew Naxalbari by the CPI (Maoist).How has it become so significant foryou?

A The Lalgarh mass uprising has,no doubt, raised new hopes among theoppressed people and the entirerevolutionary camp in West Bengal. Ithas great positive impact not only onthe people of West Bengal but also onthe people all over the country. It hasemerged as a new model of massmovement in the country. We had seensimilar types of movements earlier inManipur, directed against Armyatrocities and Armed Forces SpecialPowers Act (AFSPA), in Kashmir, inDandakaranya and to some extent inOrissa, after the Kalinganagar massacreperpetrated by the Naveen Patnaikgovernment.

Then there have been massmovements in Singur and Nandigram

“We Shall Certainly Defeat the Government”In this interview, taken from the October 17, 2009 issue of ‘Open’, Ganapathi, General Secretary of the CPI (Maoist),

talks about the party’s work in Lalgarh, its response to the government’s upcoming military offensive, the political situationin Nepal, the defeat of the LTTE, the contradictory nature of Islamist movements in the world today, and the role of the newchieftain of US imperialism. http://www.openthemagazine.com/article/nation/we-shall-certainly-defeat-the-government

but there the role of a section of theruling classes is also significant. Thesemovements were utilised by the rulingclass parties for their own electoralinterests. But Lalgarh is a morewidespread and more sustained masspolitical movement that has spurned theleadership of all the parliamentarypolitical parties, thereby rendering themcompletely irrelevant. The people ofLalgarh had even boycotted the recentLok Sabha polls, thereby unequivocallydemonstrating their anger andfrustration with all the reactionaryruling class parties. Lalgarh also hassome distinctive features such as a highdegree of participation of women, agenuinely democratic character and awider mobilisation of Adivasis. Nowonder, it has become a rallying pointfor the revolutionary-democratic forcesin West Bengal.

Q If it is a people’s movement, howdid Maoists get involved in Lalgarh?

A As far as our party’s role isconcerned, we have been working inPaschim Midnapur, Bankura andPurulia, in what is popularly known asJangalmahal since the 1980s. We foughtagainst the local feudal forces, againstthe exploitation and oppression by theforest officials, contractors,unscrupulous usurers and thegoondaism of both the CPM andTrinamool Congress. The ruling CPM,in particular, has become the chiefexploiter and oppressor of the Adivasisof the region, and it has unleashed itsnotorious vigilanté gangs calledHarmad Vahini on whoever questionsits authority. With the State authorityin its hands, and with the aid of thepolice, it is playing a role worse thanthat of the cruel landlords in otherregions of the country.

Given this background, anyone whodares to fight against oppression andexploitation by the CPM can win therespect and confidence of the people.Since our party has been fightinguncompromisingly against theatrocities of the CPM goons, it naturallygained the confidence and respect of thepeople of the region.

The police atrocities in the wake ofthe landmine blast on 2 November [in2008, from which West Bengal ChiefMinister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee hada narrow escape] acted as the triggerthat brought the pent-up anger of themasses into the open. This assumed theform of a long-drawn mass movement,and our party played the role of acatalyst.


Q But not so long ago, the CPM wasyour friend. You even took arms andammunition from it to fight theTrinamool Congress. This has beenconfirmed by a Politburo member ofCPI (Maoist) in certain interviews. Andnow you are fighting the CPM with thehelp of the Trinamool. How did a friendturn into a foe and vice-versa?

A This is only partially true. Wecame to know earlier that someammunition was taken by our localcadre from the CPM unit in the area.There was, however, no understandingwith the leadership of the CPM in thisregard. Our approach was to unite allsections of the oppressed masses at thelower levels against the goondaism andoppression of Trinamool goons in thearea at that time. And since a section ofthe oppressed masses were in the foldof the CPM at that time, we foughttogether with them against Trinamool.Still, taking into consideration theoverall situation in West Bengal, it wasnot a wise step to take arms andammunition from the CPM even at thelocal level when the contradiction wasbasically between two sections of thereactionary ruling classes.

Our central committee discussedthis, criticised the comrade responsiblefor taking such a decision, and directedthe concerned comrades to stop thisimmediately. As regards takingammunition from the TrinamoolCongress, I remember that we hadactually purchased it not directly fromthe Trinamool but from someone whohad links with the Trinamool. Therewill never be any conditions oragreements with those selling us arms.That has been our understanding allalong. As regards the said interview byour Politburo member, we will verifywhat he had actually said.

Q What are your tactics now inLalgarh after the massive offensive bythe Central and state forces?

A First of all, I wish to make itcrystal clear that our party will

spearhead and stand firmly by the sideof the people of Lalgarh and entireJangalmahal, and draw up tactics inaccordance with the people’s interestsand mandate. We shall spread thestruggle against the State everywhereand strive to win over the broad massesto the side of the people’s cause. Weshall fight the State offensive bymobilising the masses more militantlyagainst the police, Harmad Vahini andCPM goons. The course of thedevelopment of the movement, ofcourse, will depend on the level ofconsciousness and preparedness of thepeople of the region. The party will takethis into consideration whileformulating its tactics. The initiative ofthe masses will be released fully.

Q The Government has termedLalgarh a ‘laboratory’ for anti-Naxaloperations. Has your party also learntany lessons from Lalgarh?

A Yes, our party too has a lot to learnfrom the masses of Lalgarh. Theirupsurge was beyond our expectations.In fact, it was the common people, withthe assistance of advanced elementsinfluenced by revolutionary politics,who played a crucial role in theformulation of tactics. They formedtheir own organisation, put forth theircharter of demands, worked out variousnovel forms of struggle, and stoodsteadfast in the struggle despite thebrutal attacks by the police and thesocial-fascist Harmad gangs. TheLalgarh movement has the support ofrevolutionary and democratic forces notonly in West Bengal but in the entirecountry. We are appealing to allrevolutionary and democratic forces inthe country to unite to fight back thefascist offensive by the Buddhadebgovernment in West Bengal and theUPA Government at the Centre. Bybuilding the broadest fighting front, andby adopting appropriate tactics ofcombining the militant mass politicalmovement with armed resistance of thepeople and our PLGA (People’sLiberation Guerilla Army), we will

defeat the massive offensive by theCentral-state forces. I cannot say morethan this at the present juncture.

Q The Centre has declared an all-out war against Maoists by brandingthe CPI (Maoist) a terroristorganisation and imposing an all-Indiaban on the party. How has it affectedyour party?

A Our party has already been bannedin several states of India. By imposingthe ban throughout the country, theGovernment now wants to curb all ouropen activities in West Bengal and afew other states where legalopportunities exist to some extent. TheGovernment wants to use this draconianUAPA [Unlawful Activities(Prevention) Act] to harass whoeverdares to raise a voice against fakeencounters, rapes and other policeatrocities on the people residing inMaoist-dominated regions. Anyonequestioning the State’s brutalities willnow be branded a terrorist.

The real terrorists and biggestthreats to the country’s security arenone other than Manmohan Singh,Chidambaram, Buddhadeb, otherruling class leaders and feudal forceswho terrorise the people on a dailybasis.

The UPA Government had declared,as soon as it assumed power for thesecond time, that it would crush theMaoist ‘menace’ and began pouring inhuge funds to the states for this purpose.The immediate reason behind this moveis the pressure exerted by thecomprador bureaucratic bourgeoisieand the imperialists, particularly USimperialists, who want to plunder theresources of our country without anyhindrance. These sharks aspire toswallow the rich abundant mineral andforest wealth in the vast contiguousregion stretching from Jangalmahal tonorth Andhra. This region is thewealthiest as well as the mostunderdeveloped part of our country.These sharks want to loot the wealth


and drive the Adivasi people of theregion to further impoverishment.

Another major reason for the currentoffensive by the ruling classes is the fearof the rapid growth of the Maoistmovement and its increasing influenceover a significant proportion of theIndian population. The JanatanaSarkars in Dandakaranya and therevolutionary people’s committees inJharkhand, Orissa and parts of someother states have become new modelsof genuine people’s democracy anddevelopment. The rulers want to crushthese new models of development andgenuine democracy, as these areemerging as the real alternative beforethe people of the country at large.

Q The Home Ministry has madepreparations for launching a long-termbattle against Maoists. A huge force willbe soon trying to wrest away areas fromyour control. How do you plan toconfront this offensive?

A Successive governments invarious states and the Centre have beenhatching schemes over the years. Butthey could not achieve any significantsuccess through their cruel offensive inspite of murdering hundreds of ourleaders and cadres. Our party and ourmovement continued to consolidate andexpand to new regions. From two orthree states, the movement has nowspread to over 15 states, giving jittersto the ruling classes. Particularly afterthe merger of the erstwhile MCCI andPeople’s War in September 2004 [themerger between these groups led to theformation of the CPI (Maoist)], theUPA Government has unleashed themost cruel all-round offensive againstthe Maoist movement. Yet our partycontinued to grow despite sufferingsome severe losses. In the past threeyears, in particular, our PLGA hasachieved several significant victories.

We have been confronting thecontinuous offensive of the enemy withthe support and active involvement ofthe masses. We shall confront the newoffensive of the enemy by stepping up

such heroic resistance and preparing theentire party, PLGA, the variousrevolutionary parties and organisationsand the entire people. Although theenemy may achieve a few successes inthe initial phase, we shall certainlyovercome and defeat the Governmentoffensive with the active mobilisationof the vast masses and the support ofall the revolutionary and democraticforces in the country. No fascist regimeor military dictator in history couldsucceed in suppressing forever the justand democratic struggles of the peoplethrough brute force, but were, on thecontrary, swept away by the high tideof people’s resistance. People, who arethe makers of history, will rise up likea tornado under our party’s leadershipto wipe out the reactionary blood-sucking vampires ruling our country.

Q Why do you think the CPI(Maoist) suffered a serious setback inAndhra Pradesh?

A It was due to several mistakes onour part that we suffered a serioussetback in most of Andhra Pradesh by2006. At the same time, we should alsolook at the setback from another angle.In any protracted people’s war, therewill be advances and retreats. If we lookat the situation in Andhra Pradesh fromthis perspective, you will understandthat what we did there is a kind ofretreat. Confronted with a superiorforce, we chose to temporarily retreatour forces from some regions of AndhraPradesh, extend and develop our basesin the surrounding regions and then hitback at the enemy.

Now even though we received asetback, it should be borne in mind thatthis setback is a temporary one. Theobjective conditions in which ourrevolution began in Andhra Pradeshhave not undergone any basic change.This very fact continues to serve as thebasis for the growth and intensificationof our movement. Moreover, we nowhave a more consolidated mass base, arelatively better-trained people’sguerilla army and an all-India party

with deep roots among the basic classeswho comprise the backbone of ourrevolution. This is the reason why thereactionary rulers are unable to suppressour revolutionary war, which is nowraging in several states in the country.

We had taken appropriate lessonsfrom the setback suffered by our partyin Andhra Pradesh and, based on theselessons, drew up tactics in other states.Hence we are able to fight back thecruel all-round offensive of the enemyeffectively, inflict significant losses onthe enemy, preserve our subjectiveforces, consolidate our party, developa people’s liberation guerilla army,establish embryonic forms of newdemocratic people’s governments insome pockets, and take the people’s warto a higher stage. Hence we have anadvantageous situation, overall, forreviving the movement in AndhraPradesh. Our revolution advanceswave-like and periods of ebb yieldplace to periods of high tide.

Q What are the reasons for thesetback suffered by the LTTE in SriLanka?

A There is no doubt that themovement for a separate sovereignTamil Eelam has suffered a severesetback with the defeat andconsiderable decimation of the LTTE.The Tamil people and the nationalliberation forces are now leaderless.However, the Tamil people at largecontinue to cherish nationalistaspirations for a separate Tamilhomeland. The conditions that gave riseto the movement for Tamil Eelam, inthe first place, prevail to this day. TheSinhala-chauvinist Sri Lankan rulingclasses can never change their policyof discrimination against the Tamilnation, its culture, language, etcetera.The jingoistic rallies and celebrationsorganised by the government andSinhala chauvinist parties all over SriLanka in the wake of Prabhakaran’sdeath and the defeat of the LTTE showthe national hatred for Tamils nurturedby Sinhala organisations and the extent


to which the minds of ordinarySinhalese are poisoned with suchchauvinist frenzy.

The conspiracy of the Sinhala rulingclasses in occupying Tamil territoriesis similar to that of the Zionist rulers ofIsrael. The land-starved Sinhala peoplewill now be settled in Tamil areas. Theentire demography of the region isgoing to change. The ground remainsfertile for the resurgence of the Tamilliberation struggle.

Even if it takes time, the war for aseparate Tamil Eelam is certain torevive, taking lessons from the defeatof the LTTE. By adopting a proletarianoutlook and ideology, adopting newtactics and building the broadest unitedfront of all nationalist and democraticforces, it is possible to achieve theliberation of the oppressed Tamil nation[in Sri Lanka]. Maoist forces have togrow strong enough to provideleadership and give a correct directionand anti-imperialist orientation to thisstruggle to achieve a sovereign People’sDemocratic Republic of Tamil Eelam.This alone can achieve the genuineliberation of the Tamil nation in SriLanka.

Q Is it true that you received militarytraining from the LTTE initially?

A No. It is not a fact. We hadclarified this several times in the past.

Q But, one of your seniorcommanders has told me that somesenior cadre of the erstwhile PWG didreceive arms training and other supportfrom the LTTE.

A Let me reiterate, there is norelation at all between our party and theLTTE. We tried several times toestablish relations with the LTTE butits leadership was reluctant to have arelationship with Maoists in India.Hence, there is no question of the LTTEgiving training to us. In spite of it, wecontinued our support to the strugglefor Tamil Eelam. However, a fewpersons who had separated from theLTTE came into our contact and we

took their help in receiving initialtraining in the last quarter of the 1980s.

Q Does your party have links withLashkar-e-Toiba or other Islamicmilitant groups having links withPakistan?

A No. Not at all. This is onlymischievous, calculated propaganda bythe police officials, bureaucrats andleaders of the reactionary politicalparties to defame us and thereby justifytheir cruel offensive against the Maoistmovement. By propagating the lie thatour party has links with groups linkedto Pakistan’s ISI, the reactionary rulersof our country want to prove that wetoo are terrorists and gain legitimacyfor their brutal terror campaign againstMaoists and the people in the areas ofarmed agrarian struggle. Trying toprove the involvement of a foreign handin every just and democratic struggle,branding those fighting for theliberation of the oppressed as traitorsto the country, is part of thepsychological-war of the reactionaryrulers.

Q What is your party’s standregarding Islamist jihadist movements?

A Islamic jihadist movements oftoday are a product of imperialist—particularly US imperialist—aggression, intervention, bullying,exploitation and suppression of the oil-rich Islamic and Arab countries of WestAsia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia,etcetera, and the persecution of theentire Muslim religious community. Aspart of their designs for globalhegemony, the imperialists, particularlyUS imperialists, have encouraged andendorsed every war of brazenaggression and brutal attacks by theirsurrogate state of Israel.

Our party unequivocally opposesevery attack on Arab and Muslimcountries and the Muslim communityat large in the name of ‘war on globalterror’. In fact, Muslim religiousfundamentalism is encouraged andfostered by imperialists as long as it

serves their interests—such as in SaudiArabia and other Gulf countries, andKuwait, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan.

Q But what about attacksperpetrated by the so-called ‘Jihadis’on innocent people like it happened on26/11?

A See, Islamic jihadist movementshave two aspects: one is their anti-imperialist aspect, and the other theirreactionary aspect in social and culturalmatters. Our party supports the struggleof Muslim countries and people againstimperialism, while criticizing andstruggling against the reactionaryideology and social outlook of Muslimfundamentalism. It is only Maoistleadership that can provide correct anti-imperialist orientation and achieveclass unity among Muslims as well aspeople of other religious persuasions.The influence of Muslimfundamentalist ideology and leadershipwill diminish as communistrevolutionaries and other democratic-secular forces increase their ideologicalinfluence over the Muslim masses. Ascommunist revolutionaries, we alwaysstrive to reduce the influence of theobscurantist reactionary ideology andoutlook of the mullahs and maulvis onthe Muslim masses, while uniting withall those fighting against the commonenemy of the world people—that is,imperialism, and particularly Americanimperialism.

Q How do you look at the changesin US policy after Barack Obama tookover from George Bush?

A Firstly, one would be living in afool’s paradise if one imagines thatthere is going to be any qualitativechange in American policy—whetherinternal or external—after BarackObama took over from George Bush.In fact, the policies on national securityand foreign affairs pursued by Obamaover the past eight months have shownthe essential continuity with those ofhis predecessor. The ideological andpolitical justification for these


regressive policies at home andaggressive policies abroad is the sametrash put forth by the Bushadministration—the so-called ‘globalwar on terror’, based on outright liesand slander. Worse still, the policieshave become even more aggressiveunder Obama with his plannedexpansion of the US-led war ofaggression in Afghanistan into theterritory of Pakistan. The hands of thisnew killer-in-chief of the pack ofimperialist wolves are already stainedwith the blood of hundreds of womenand children who are cruelly murderedin relentless missile attacks fromPredator drones in Afghanistan andPakistan. And, within the US itself, bail-outs for the tiny corporate elite andattacks on democratic and human rightsof US citizens continue without anychange.

The oppressed people and nationsof the world are now confronting aneven more formidable and dangerousenemy in the form of an African-American president of the mostpowerful military machine and worldgendarme. The world people shouldunite to wage a more relentless, moremilitant and more consistent struggleagainst the American marauders led byBarack Obama and pledge to defeatthem to usher in a world of peace,stability and genuine democracy.

Q How do you look at the currentdevelopments in Nepal?

A As soon as the Communist Partyof Nepal (Maoist) [CPN(M)] came topower in alliance with the comprador-feudal parties through the parliamentaryroute in Nepal, we had pointed out thegrave danger of imperialist and Indianexpansionist intervention in Nepal andhow they would leave no stoneunturned to overthrow the governmentled by CPN(M). As long as Prachandadid not defy the directives of the IndianGovernment, it was allowed tocontinue, but when it began to goagainst Indian hegemony, it was

immediately pulled down. CPN-UMLwithdrew support to the Prachanda-ledgovernment upon the advice ofAmerican imperialists and Indianexpansionists. We disagreed with theline of peaceful transition pursued bythe UCPN(M) in the name of tactics.We decided to send an open letter tothe UCPN(M). It was released in July2009.

We made our party’s stand clear inthe letter. We pointed out that theUCPN(M) chose to reform the existingState through an elected constituentassembly and a bourgeois democraticrepublic instead of adhering to theMarxist-Leninist understanding on theimperative to smash the old State andestablish a proletarian State. This wouldhave been the first step towards the goalof achieving socialism through theradical transformation of society and alloppressive class relations. It is indeeda great tragedy that the UCPN(M) haschosen to abandon the path ofprotracted people’s war and pursue aparliamentary path in spite of havingde facto power in most of thecountryside.

It is heartening to hear that a sectionof the leadership of the UCPN(M) hasbegun to struggle against the revisionistpositions taken by Comrade Prachandaand others. Given the greatrevolutionary traditions of theUCPN(M), we hope that the inner-partystruggle will repudiate the rightopportunist line pursued by itsleadership, give up revisionist standsand practices, and apply mindscreatively to the concrete conditions ofNepal.

Q Of late, the party has sufferedserious losses of party leadership at thecentral and state level. Besides, it iswidely believed that some of the senior-most Maoist leaders, including you,have become quite old and suffer fromserious illnesses, which is also cited asone of the reasons for the surrenders.What is the effect of the losses and

surrenders on the movement? How areyou dealing with problems arising outof old age and illnesses?

A (Smiles…) This type ofpropaganda is being carried outcontinuously, particularly by theSpecial Intelligence Branch (SIB) ofAndhra Pradesh. It is a part of thepsychological war waged byintelligence officials and top policebrass aimed at confusing anddemoralizing supporters of the Maoistmovement. It is a fact that some of theparty leaders at the central and statelevel could be described as seniorcitizens according to criteria used bythe government, that is, those who havecrossed the threshold of 60 years. Youcan start calling me too a senior citizenin a few months (smiles). But old ageand ill-health have never been a seriousproblem in our party until now. You cansee the ‘senior citizens’ in our partyworking for 16-18 hours a day andcovering long distances on foot. As forsurrenders, it is a big lie to say that oldage and ill-health have been a reasonfor some of the surrenders.

When Lanka Papi Reddy, a formermember of our central committee,surrendered in the beginning of lastyear, the media propagated that moresurrenders of our party leaders willfollow due to ill-health. The fact is thatPapi Reddy surrendered due to his lossof political conviction and his petty-bourgeois false prestige and ego. Hencehe was not prepared to face the partyafter he was demoted by the centralcommittee for his anarchic behaviorwith a woman comrade.

Some senior leaders of our party,like comrades Sushil Roy and NarayanSanyal, had become a nightmare for theruling classes even when they were intheir mid 60s. Hence they were arrested,tortured and imprisoned despite theirold age and ill-health. The Governmentis doing everything possible to preventthem from getting bail. Even ifsomeone in our party is old, he/she


continues to serve the revolution bydoing whatever work possible. Forinstance, Comrade Niranjan Bose, whodied recently at the age of 92, had beencarrying out revolutionary propagandauntil his martyrdom. The social fascistrulers were so scared of thisnonagenarian Maoist revolutionary thatthey had even arrested him four yearsback. Such is the spirit of Maoistrevolutionaries—and power of theideology of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism which they hold high. Whenthere are serious illnesses, or physicaland mental limitations to performnormal work, such comrades are givensuitable work.

Q But what about the arrests andelimination of some of your seniorleadership? How do you intend to fillup such losses?

A Well, it is a fact that we lost somesenior leaders at the state and centrallevel in the past four or five years. Someleaders were secretly arrested andmurdered in the most cowardly manner.Many other and state leaders werearrested and placed behind bars in therecent past in Jharkhand, Bihar,Chhattisgarh, Orissa, West Bengal,Maharashtra, Haryana and other states.The loss of leadership will have a graveimpact on the party and Indianrevolution as a whole. We are reviewingthe reasons for the losses regularly anddevising ways and means to preventfurther losses. By adopting strictlysecret methods of functioning andfoolproof underground mechanisms, byenhancing our mass base, vigilance andlocal intelligence, smashing enemyintelligence networks and studyingtheir plans and tactics, we hope to checkfurther losses. At the same time, we aretraining and developing newrevolutionary leadership at all levels tofill up the losses.

Q How do you sum up the presentstage of war between your forces andthose of the Indian State?

A Our war is in the stage of strategicdefence. In some regions, we have anupper hand, while in others the enemyhas the upper hand. Overall, our forceshave been quite successful in carryingout a series of tactical counter-offensiveoperations against the enemy in ourguerilla zones in the past few years.

It is true that our party has sufferedsome serious leadership losses, but weare able to inflict serious losses on theenemy too. In fact, in the past threeyears, the enemy forces suffered morecasualties than we did. The enemy hasbeen trying all means at their disposalto weaken, disrupt and crush our partyand movement. They have tried covertagents and informers, poured in hugeamounts of money to buy off weakelements in the revolutionary camp, andannounced a series of rehabilitationpackages and other material incentivesto lure away people from therevolutionary camp. Thousands ofcrores of rupees have been sanctionedfor police modernization, training andfor raising additional commandoforces; for increasing Central forces; fortraining Central and state forces incounter-insurgency warfare; and forbuilding roads, communicationnetworks and other infrastructure forthe rapid movement of their troops inour guerilla zones. The Indian State hasset up armed vigilante groups andprovided total support to theindescribable atrocities committed bythese armed gangs on the people.Psychological warfare against Maoistswas taken to unheard of levels.

Nevertheless, we continued to makegreater advances, consolidated the partyand the revolutionary people’scommittees at various levels,strengthened the PLGA qualitativelyand quantitatively, smashed theenemy’s intelligence network in severalareas, effectively countered the dirtypsychological-war waged by theenemy, and foiled the enemy’s all-out

attempts to disrupt and smash ourmovement. The successes we hadachieved in several tactical counter-offensive operations carried out acrossthe country in recent days, the militantmass movements in several states,particularly against displacement andother burning issues of the people,initiatives taken by our revolutionarypeople’s governments in variousspheres—all these have had a greatimpact on the people, whiledemoralizing enemy forces. There arereports of desertions and disobedienceof orders by the jawans posted inMaoist-dominated areas. Quite a fewhave refused to undertake training injungle warfare or take postings in ourareas, and had to face suspension. Thistrend will grow with the further advanceof our people’s war. Overall, our party’sinfluence has grown stronger and it hasnow come to be recognized as the onlygenuine alternative before the people.

Q How long will this stage ofstrategic defence last, with the Centreready to go for the jugular?

A The present stage of strategicdefence will last for some more time.It is difficult to predict how long it willtake to pass this stage and go to thestage of strategic equilibrium orstrategic stalemate. It depends on thetransformation of our guerilla zonesinto base areas, creation of moreguerilla zones and red resistance areasacross the country, the development ofour PLGA. With the ever-intensifyingcrisis in all spheres due to the anti-people policies of pro-imperialist, pro-feudal governments, the growingfrustration and anger of the massesresulting from the most rapaciouspolicies of loot and plunder pursued bythe reactionary ruling classes, we areconfident that the vast masses of thecountry will join the ranks ofrevolutionaries and take the Indianrevolution to the next stage.

PM


OPEN LETTER TO UNITED COMMUNIST PARTY OF NEPAL (MAOIST)FROM THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF INDIA (MAOIST)

(Downloaded from internet)

Dear Comrades, We have beenkeenly, with great concern, followingthe recent developments taking placein your country, Nepal. With theCPN(Maoist) emerging as the singlelargest party in the elections to theConstituent Assembly in April 2008and the formation of the newgovernment consisting of a coalition ofseveral Parties, some of which areknown for their anti-people, pro-feudal,pro-imperialist and pro-Indianexpansionist past, an ideological-political debate has arisen in the entirerevolutionary camp in India and theworld regarding the path, strategy, andtactics pursued by your Party, now theUCPN(M), in advancing the revolutionin Nepal. All these make it all the moreurgent to conduct a deeper debate onthe ideological-political line pursued bythe CPN(M), particularly after it cameto power through elections, after adecade-long heroic people’s war andforming the government with some ofthe arch-reactionaries who had earnedthe wrath of the Nepalese masses.

Several issues need to be debated byMaoist revolutionaries throughout theworld in the context of the UCPN(M)pursuing a line and policies that, in ourunderstanding, are not consistent withthe fundamental tenets of MLM andteachings of our great Marxistteachers—issues such as proletarianinternationalism; stages and sub-stagesof revolutions and its practicalapplications in semi-colonial semi-feudal countries; understanding of theLeninist concept of state andrevolution; nature of parliamentarydemocracy in semi-colonial, semi-feudal countries of Asia, Africa andLatin America; meaning of firmness ofstrategy and flexibility in tactics; andsuch other related questions. There are

also some other specific issues raisedby your Party in the name of creativeapplication of MLM such as theconcept of 21st century democracy ormulti-Party democracy, PrachandaPath, fusion theory, and so on, whichin our understanding, is a basicdeparture from Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and should be widely anddeeply debated.

It is true that Marxism is not adogma but a guide to action. ThoseMarxist-Leninist revolutionaries whofollowed it only in letter and discardedits spirit have failed to understand theessence of Marxism, failed tounderstand what com Lenin had taught,that is, ‘concrete analysis of concreteconditions is the living soul ofMarxism’. Such dogmatists failed toapply MLM to the concrete practice ofrevolution in their countries and hencefailed to make any real advances in therevolutions in their respectivecountries. Dogmatism, no doubt, hasbeen a bane of the Marxist Leninistmovements and hence the struggleagainst dogmatism should be aninseparable part of the ideologicalstruggle of the Communist Party.

However, in the name of the struggleagainst dogmatism, there have beenserious deviations in the InternationalCommunist Movement (ICM), oftengoing into an even greater, and moredangerous, abyss of right deviation andrevisionism. In the name of creativeapplication of Marxism, communistparties have fallen into the trap of rightopportunism, bourgeois pluralist Euro-Communism, rabid anti-Stalinism,anarchist post-modernism and outrightrevisionism. Right danger orrevisionism in the ICM has emerged asthe greatest danger in the periodfollowing th e usurpation of the

leadership of the CPSU and state powerin the Soviet Union after the demise ofcomrade Stalin. Com Mao and othergenuine revolutionaries had to wage aconsistent ideological-political struggleagainst revisionism and reformism inthe ICM and also within the CPC.However, despite the great strugglewaged by com Mao and other MarxistLeninist revolutionaries all over theworld against revisionism, it has beenthe revisionists who have temporarilywon and dominated the ICM in thecontemporary world. The ideological-political debate over the creativeapplication of MLM to the concretepractice of the revolution in Nepal hasto be conducted with a correct grasp ofthis international struggle ever since thetime of com Lenin, and particularly byMao against Khrushchev revisionism.

“Fight against dogmatism” hasbecome a fashionable phrase amongmany Maoist revolutionaries. They talkof discarding “outdated” principles ofLenin and Mao and to develop MLMin the “new conditions” that are said tohave emerged in the world of the 21stcentury. Some of them describe theirendeavour to “enrich and develop”MLM as a new path or thought, andthough this is initially described assomething confined to revolution intheir concerned country, it inexorablyassumes a “universal character” or“universal significance” in no time. Andin this exercise individual leaders areglorified and even deified to the extentthat they appear infallible. Suchglorification does not help in collectivefunctioning of Party committees andthe Party as a whole and questions online are hardly ever raised as they stemfrom an infallible individual leader. Insuch a situation it is extremely difficulton the part of the CC, not to speak ofthe cadres, to fight against a serious


deviation in the ideological-politicalline, or in the basic strategy and tacticseven when it is quite clear that it goesagainst the interests of revolution. The“cult of the individual” promoted in thename of path and thought provides acertain degree of immunity to thedeviation in line if it emanates from thatindividual leader.

Our two Parties, CPI(Maoist) andCPN(Maoist), have a considerably longperiod of fraternal relationship, a periodgoing back to the late 1980s (thenexisting as MCC and PW) when thepresent leadership of your Party wasstill a part of the revisionist Party inNepal pursuing a parliamentary line.We had been a keen and enthusiasticwitness to the ideological strugglewaged by your leadership againstrevisionism, its clean break with therevisionist line and its initiation ofpeople’s war in February 1996.

While extending support to therevolution in Nepal, we both (thenerstwhile MCC and PW) had alsopointed out from time to time some ofthe mistakes we had identified in theunderstanding and practice of theCPN(M), and also the possibledeviations that might arise due to itswrong assessments and concepts.However, we never interfered withpolitical-organisational mattersconcerning the internal affairs andinner-Party struggles within your Party.But whenever called upon, or, when wefelt there is danger of a seriousdeviation ideologically and politically,we gave our suggestions as a fraternalrevolutionary Party during the severalbilateral meetings between ourrespective high-level delegations orthrough letters to your CC. It was onlywhen some of the ideological-politicalpositions stated by your Party publiclyhad deviated from MLM, or when opencomments were made by yourChairman Prachanda on variousoccasions regarding our Party’s line andpractice, or when open polemical

debate was called for on Internationalforums, that our Party had gone intoopen ideological-political debates.These open debates were conducted ina healthy and comradely manner guidedby the principles of proletarianinternationalism.

Since then our relations developedeven further, but since 2003 we havemarked the serious turn in yourideological-political line regarding theNepalese revolution and the worldproletarian revolution as well. After thatyou have further advanced on thispolitical line, so there is a need toconduct a deeper debate and come toan overall assessment regarding thetheory and practice pursued by yourParty, synthesise the experiences gainedin the course of the people’s war inNepal, and the lessons, both positiveand negative, they provide to the Maoistrevolutionaries in the contemporaryworld.

We are sending this Open Letter toyour Party so as to conduct a polemicaldebate both within your Party and theMaoist revolutionary camp worldwide.This step has become necessarybecause of the very seriousdevelopments that have taken place inthe course of development of therevolution in Nepal that have a bearingon our understanding of imperialismand proletarian revolution as well as thestrategy-tactics to be pursued by Maoistrevolutionaries in the contemporaryworld; there is also serious deviationfrom the ideology of MLM. Hencethese are no more the internal mattersconcerning your Party alone.

Moreover, such a debate is theurgent need of the hour in the backdropof vicious propaganda by therevisionists as well as the reactionaryruling classes in India that the IndianMaoists should learn from the NepaliMaoists who were supposed to haverealized at last “the futility of achievingtheir cherished goal of socialism andcommunism through armed struggle”.

Sermons are being preached by therevisionists who had always acted asthe strongest advocates ofParliamentary democracy in India,opened up their social fascist fangswherever they had been in power eversince the days of the Naxalbari revolt,acted as a safety valve to vent the furyof the masses into peaceful channels,and played the notorious role ofdiffusing militant movements anddepoliticizing and demobilizing themasses, thereby serving the Indianruling classes and the imperialists mostfaithfully—all in the name of peacefulpath to people’s democracy andsocialism. These revisionists have beenwriting articles claiming that at last theNepali Maoists have come to thecorrect track and that it should serve asan eye-opener to the Indian Maoistswho should, at least now, give up their“unrealizable dream of capturingpolitical power through the bullet” and,instead, try to achieve it through theballot as their counterparts in Nepal aredoing today.

We earnestly hope that the CC andall the Party members of UCPN(M) willevince keen interest in this ideological-political debate and take the correctrevolutionary positions based on ourguiding theory of MLM and the lessonsprovided by the rich experiences of theworld revolution. We also hope thatMaoist revolutionaries worldwide willparticipate in this debate and enrich theexperiences of the world proletariat inadvancing the world proletarianrevolution.

In this context, we also regret to saythat you have not cared to respond toour proposal to have a bilateralexchange of views with your CC afterthe April 2008 elections. UntilDecember 2008 there was not even areply from your CC to the letter we hadsent on May 1st in this regard. Nor wasthere any response from your side toour proposal to hold the meeting ofCCOMPOSA in order to continue theunited struggle of the Maoist forces and


anti-imperialist forces of South Asiaagainst Indian expansionism andimperialism, particularly Americanimperialism.

At last we received a letter fromyour International department inDecember 2008 and a meeting of ourtwo delegations materialized soon after.Basing on the discussions we held withyour delegation and the material thatwas available to us regarding thecurrent developments in your Party andthe stands you had taken on variousissues our CC held detailed discussionsand drew conclusions based on MLM,the experiences of world revolution,and the actual situation prevailing inNepal and the contemporary world.

Firstly, we are glad that a seriousinner-Party struggle has broken out inyour Party on crucial issues related toadvancing the revolution in Nepal.Such a struggle within the Party hasbeen the need of the hour since long, atleast from the time your Partyleadership, in our opinion, had begunto pursue a disastrous course of“hunting with the hound and runningwith the hare”, i.e., striking allianceswith the reactionary feudal, compradorpolitical Parties with the sole aim ofoverthrowing the King and themonarchy while at the same timespeaking of advancing the revolutionin Nepal through a “final assault” orinsurrection. Even prior to this, yourParty’s concept of multi-Partydemocracy or 21st century democracy,its non-proletarian stands on thequestion of assessment of Stalin, fusiontheory etc were subjects of seriouspolemical debate. Our Party dealt withthese issues through articles in ourmagazines and interviews by ourspokespersons right from 2002, andparticularly from 2006. We had alsopointed out the non-Marxist positionsthat you had taken on the question ofstate and revolution, on the question ofdisarming and demobilizing of the PLAby confining it to the barracks under

the supervision of the United Nations,and on the question of integration ofthe two armies, demobilization of theYCL, abandoning the base areas andthe great revolutionary achievements ofthe decade-long people’s war, policy ofappeasement adopted towards Indianexpansionism, and so on. However,there was no serious debate on theseissues from your side. Hence it has beenan encouraging sign to see the inner-Party struggle within your Party onsome of these issues at last.

After the dangerous journey thatyour Party had traversed in the pastthree years we earnestly hope that yourParty rank and file will review thedangerous right opportunist positionsand the disastrous consequences thatthese have given rise to, and alsoreconsider and rectify the wrong linepursued by your Party leadershipheaded by com Prachanda. Such a freeand frank, thoroughgoing review of theideological-political line pursued by theParty leadership and the seriousdeviations from the fundamental tenetsof MLM that had taken place in thename of creative application of MLM,will help in establishing the correct linethat can advance the revolution to itsfinal victory in Nepal. We are confidentthat the correct revolutionary line willbe re-established through such aserious, thorough-going ideological-political struggle within your Party. Inthis context we also wish to express ourstrong disagreement on the so-calledunity between your Party and the break-away group of Mohan Bikram Singh’sMashal. We think such a unity with aproven Rightist group will not help infurthering the cause of the revolutionin Nepal but will take the Party furtherdown the path of revisionism andreformism. This unity based on theprinciple of ‘two combining into one’will further strengthen the hands of thereformists and right opportunists withinthe UCPN(M), or the UCPN/Maoism-Mao Thought as it is presently beingcalled.

Now we take up the serious issuesand deviations that have come to thefore in the course of the developmentof the Nepalese revolution.Interestingly, some of these deviationsfrom the basic tenets of MLM had beentheorised by your Party as anenrichment and development of MLMand summed up as Prachanda Path.

On 21st CenturyDemocracy

Your Party had claimed that its“decision on multi-party democracy isa strategically, theoretically developedposition” and that it is applicable evento conditions obtaining in India.{FromPrachanda’s Interview in Hindu} Youattributed universal significance to itand claimed that it is an attempt tofurther develop MLM. Hence there isa need for every proletarian Party totake a clear-cut stand on this so-called“enrichment of MLM”.

The conceptual problem ofdemocracy in the leadership ofUCPN(M) had begun at least by 2003.The 2003 CC Plenum of your Party hadpassed the paper on the developmentof democracy in the 21st century. In thatpaper you proposed that there shouldbe “peaceful competition between allpolitical parties against feudalism andforeign imperialist forces”. You saidthat “within a certain constitutionalprovision multi-party competitionshould exist as long as it’s againstfeudalism, against foreign imperialisticinterference”. You said during ourbilateral meetings too that the peacefulcompetition that you are talking of wasin the post-revolutionary period and notbefore. But later on you began to beevasive and vague on whether thismulti-Party competition was alsofeasible before the seizure of power bythe working class. Then, with theconclusion of the 12-point agreementwith the SPA you made an about-turnand asserted that your Party was readyto compete with other comprador-feudal parties! What democracy you


aspire to develop through peacefulcompetition with such Parties is beyondone’s comprehension.

In his interview to The Hindu in2006, com Prachanda said: “And we aretelling the parliamentary parties that weare ready to have peaceful competitionwith you all.”

Here there is no bungling of words.The UCPN(M) leader has directlyassured the comprador bourgeois-feudal parliamentary parties that hisParty is ready to have peacefulcompetition with all of them. And bydescribing this decision on multipartydemocracy as a strategically, theore-tically developed position comradePrachanda has brought a dangerousthesis to the fore—the thesis of peacefulcoexistence with the ruling class partiesinstead of overthrowing them throughrevolution; peaceful competition withall other parliamentary parties,including the ruling class parties thatare stooges of imperialism or foreignreaction, in so-called parliamentaryelections; abandoning the objective ofbuilding socialism for an indefiniteperiod; and opening the doors wide forthe feudal-comprador reactionaries tocome to power by utilizing thebackwardness of the masses and themassive backing from domestic andforeign reactionaries or the bourgeoisand petty bourgeois forces to hijack theentire course of development of societyfrom the socialist direction tocapitalism in the name of democracyand nationalism. Overall, com.Prachanda’s conclusions regardingmultiparty democracy creates illusionsamong the people regarding bourgeoisdemocracy and their constitution.

Com Mao had pointed out: “Thosewho demand freedom and democracyin the abstract regard democracy as anend and not as a means. Democracy assuch sometimes seems to be an end, butit is in fact only a means. Marxismteaches us that democracy is part of thesuperstructure and belongs to the realm

of politics. That is to say, in the lastanalysis, it serves the economic base.The same is true of freedom. Bothdemocracy and freedom are relative,not absolute, and they come into beingand develop in specific historicalconditions.” (Ibid)

Genuine democracy is achievedthrough a consistent and uncompro-mising struggle against imperialism andfeudalism—both in the sphere of thebase and superstructure—andaccomplishing the tasks of the NewDemocratic Revolution. Freedom, atthe individual level, as Marx said, is therecognition of necessity; at the politicallevel, it entails smashing the chains thatbind us to the imperialist system.

Your Party says it has synthesisedthe experiences of 20th centuryrevolutions by taking lessons from thepositive and the negative experiencesof the 20th Century; from revolutionsand counter-revolutions of the 20thCentury. But what lessons has it taken,and Maoists should take, from theexperiences of Communist parti-cipation in so-called Parliamentarydemocracy in countries like Indonesia,Chile, Nicaragua, El Salvador andothers? Would your Party have pursuedthe same path as above if it hadcorrectly synthesized and taken lessonsfrom 20th century revolutions? Is thereanything wrong if one concludesfrom,both your concept of 21st CenturyDemocracy and multiparty competitionand the practice of abandoning people’swar, that you are following the samepath treaded by the revisionist partiesin the above-mentioned countries?

In an article in our theoretical organPeople’s War in 2006, we had pointedout the futility of participating inelections and how it would ultimatelyhelp the reactionary ruling classes. Wepointed out:

“And even if a Maoist Party comesto power through elections, and mergesits own armed forces with those of theold state, it can be overthrown through

a military coup, its armed forces mightbe massacred by those of thereactionaries, its leaders and Partycadres might be eliminated. ….. And ifit wants to be part of the parliamentarygame it has to abide by its rules andcannot carry out its anti-feudal, anti-imperialist policies freely. Even theindependence of the judiciary has to berecognised as part of the game ofparliament and can cause obstructionto every reform which the Maoist partytries to initiate after coming to powerthrough elections.

“Then there will be severalindependent institutions like thejudiciary, the election commission, thehuman rights commission sponsored bythe imperialists, the media, variousartistic, cultural and even religiousbodies, non-government organisations,and so on. If one declares one’scommitment to multiparty democracy,one cannot escape from upholding theseso-called independent institutions.Many of these can work for counter-revolution in diverse subtle ways. Onecannot forget the subtle manner inwhich the western agencies infiltratedand subverted the societies in EastEuropean countries and even in theformer Soviet Union.”

Your Party had correctly explainedin the document on 21st centurydemocracy, released in June 2003, therole played by the proletarian Partyafter assuming state power in thefollowing terms:

“Experience has proved that afterassuming state power, when variousleaders and cadres of the Party areinvolved in running the state affairs,then there is strong chance that physicalenvironment may swiftly reduce theParty into a bureaucratic, careerist andluxurious class. With intensification ofthis danger the Party will become moreformal and alienated from the masses,in the same proportion. This processwhen it reaches to certain level of itsown development, it is bound to betransformed into counter-revolution. In


order to prevent such danger as counter-revolution to happen, it is important todevelop further organizationalmechanism and system so that Party isconstantly under the vigilance, controland service of the proletariat andworking masses according to thetheory of two-line struggle andcontinuous revolution. For this it is veryimportant that there should be amechanism to guarantee overallpeople’s participation in two linestruggle and that one sectioncomprising of capable and establishedleaders and cadres should be constantlyinvolved in mass work and anothersection should be involved in runningthe state machinery and that aftercertain interval of period there shouldbe re-division of work therebystrengthening the relationship betweenthe whole Party and the generalmasses.”

The above-mentioned role is quiteimpossible in the present situation whenyour Party is sharing power with therepresentatives of the old feudal,comprador class and has a servilerelationship with imperialism. So it wasnot surprising to see most of theestablished leaders taking up the roleof administering a state that remains aninstrument of oppression of the massesand in no way represents the aspirationsof the masses.

On the Path of Revolutionin semi-colonial semi-feudal countries:

Fusion TheoryThis has been a much-debated issue

ever since the time of the victoriousrevolution in China. During the GreatDebate between the CPSU and CPC inthe early 1960s, the path of revolutionin the countries of Asia, Africa andLatin America was firmly establishedby the CPC.

The document adopted by the CCof the CPN(M) in 1995 had correctlyformulated the strategy of protractedpeople’s war after analyzing thespecificities of Nepal:

“The synthesis of all the specificitiesclearly shows that it is impossible forthe armed struggle in Nepal to make aquick leap into an insurrection anddefeat the enemy. However, it is fullypossible to finally crush the enemythrough systematic development of thearmed struggle in Nepal. It can beclearly derived from this that the armedstruggle in Nepal must necessarilyadopt a protracted People’s Warstrategy of surrounding the city fromthe countryside.”

But in its second national conferenceheld in 2001, after synthesizing theexperiences of people’s war in Nepal,it brought forth the theory of fusion oftwo different kinds of strategies that areapplicable to countries with differentcharacteristics.

Just after the Second NationalConference of the CPN(M), the presscommuniqué issued in the name ofcomrade Prachanda, stated inunequivocal terms that:

“The rapid development of scienceand technology, especially in the areaof electronic field has brought aboutcompletely new model in regard toforwarding revolution in each countryand in the world in the form of fusionof the strategies of protracted people’swar and general armed insurrectionbased on the above analysis.”

While making clear that now “nomodel based on past proletarianrevolution can be applied as in the pastdue to changes in the world”, it hasbrought forth the concrete methodologyof fusion of general insurrection intothe strategy of PPW in Nepal.

Though the CPN(M) claimed in2001 that this conclusion was drawnfrom a synthesis of the experiences offive years of people’s war in Nepal,there was no experience to prove thisassertion. On the contrary, the successesachieved in the five years of people’swar had only vindicated the correctnessof the strategy of PPW.

The changes that have occurred in

the world situation after the eighties ofthe 20th century do not provide anynew basis to “fuse” the twoqualitatively different strategies into a“new” amalgamated strategy, for thesimple reason that no changes of aqualitative nature have occurred in thesocio-economic systems of countrieslike India and Nepal. In all backwardcountries like Nepal and India, theMaoist strategy of PPW has neverrejected the usage of the tactics ofuprisings in the cities during the courseof the revolution. This was also seenduring the Chinese revolution. In fact,the importance of usage of these tacticshas grown in the context of the changesthat have occurred after WW II,particularly due to the tremendousgrowth of urban populations and thehigh concentration of the working class.The Maoist forces operating in thesecountries should certainly give addedimportance to this question and preparefor uprisings in cities as part of theMaoist strategy of PPW. However, thisdoes not mean that the two strategiesshould be “fused” into one by labelingPPW as an “old” and “conventional”model.

The 2005 CC Plenum “resolved thatthe very strategy of protracted PWneeds to be further developed to caterto the necessities of the 21st century.In particular, several decades on it isseen that the protracted PWs launchedin different countries have facedobstacles or got liquidated afterreaching the state of strategic offensive,as imperialism has attempted to refineits interventionist counter-insurgencywar strategy as a ‘long war.’ In thiscontext, if the revolutionaries domechanistically cling to the ‘protracted’aspect of the PW at any cost, it wouldin essence play into the hands ofimperialism and reaction. Hence thelatest proposition of ‘Prachanda Path’that the proletarian military also needsto be further developed is quite seriousand of long-term significance. It maybe noted that this proposition is firmly


based on the concrete experiences ofthe successfully advancing PW now atthe stage of strategic offensive and isaimed at further advancing anddefending it.” (The Worker#10: Page58)

Thus the question of path ofrevolution has once again come ontothe agenda for discussion after theCPN(M) proposed its “fusion” theoryin 2001. The question had assumedsignificance for the revolutionarieseverywhere not only in the context ofthe people’s war in Nepal but alsobecause the CPN(M) had tried to giveits fusion theory a universal character.It theorized:

“Today, the fusion of the strategiesof armed insurrection and protractedPeople’s War into one another has beenessential. Without doing so, a genuinerevolution seems impossible in anycountry.” (The Great Leap Forward …,p. 20).

It had also argued that “On thetheoretical concept of revolutionarywar, this new theory of fusion of twostrategies has universal significance.”

“The theory developed by fusion ofprotracted People’s War andinsurrection has special significanceand it has become universal.”

In the paper submitted by theCPN(M) at the International seminar onImperialism and Proletarian Revolutionin the 21st century held on December26, 2006, it repeated the 2003 thesis butwith a very important change. It wrote:

“.....we came to a conclusion thatsticking to a particular model, and thetactic based on it, would not addressthe new contradictions created by theaforesaid changes in the society andconfining the path of revolution withinthe framework of a certain modalitywould hold down our hand to resolvethem.

“Taking all these ideological andpolitical factors into account, our partyfrom the very beginning tried to takeup mass mobilization in the cities and

guerrilla warfare in the countryside, i.e.political and military offensives,simultaneously, while making the latteras principal. Everyone can notice eversince the initiation, which was in theform of a kind of rebellion, our partyhas been incorporating some of theinsurrectionary tactics all through thecourse of protracted people’s war. Thatis why the course of revolution we aretraversing resembles neither fully withwhat Mao did in China nor with whatLenin did in Russia. We believe one ofthe reasons behind the development ofpeople’s war in such a short span oftime in our country was our success tokeep ourselves away from theconstraint of any model. In short, ourposition is no revolution can berepeated but developed.

“Almost after five years of theinitiation of people’s war in Nepalsumming up its experiences in theSecond National conference, 2001, ourparty developed a politico-militarystrategy stressing the need to havefusion of some aspects of theinsurrectionary tactics with those ofprotracted people’s war from the verybeginning. Again, while coming atKami Danda meeting, 2006, summingup entire experiences of the ten yearsof people’s war our party furtherdeveloped it and synthesized thatpolitico-military strategy with abalanced sequence of the people’s war,strong mass movement, negotiationsand diplomatic maneuvering only canlead the new democratic revolution inNepal to victory. We think, thissynthesis of a revolutionary detachmentof international proletarian army, theCPN (Maoist), could be useful to othersas well.”

Every country has its ownspecificities and the revolutionariestake these into account while drawingup their strategy and tactics. The worldhas seen two models of successfulrevolutions during the 20th century—the Russian model of armedinsurrection and the Chinese model of

protracted people’s war. It is obviousthat no revolution can be the exactreplica of another. However, basicsimilarities in the objective conditionscan make a particular model morerelevant for a particular country. Norevolutionary would claim that everycountry should inevitably follow thisor that model in toto mechanically.There are bound to be variations in thestrategy and tactics in differentcountries depending on the concreteconditions. But the general principle,of course, is common to all revolutionsas explained so clearly by comradeMao:

“The seizure of power by armedforce, the settlement of the issue by war,is the central task and highest form ofrevolution. But while the principleremains the same (for all countries), itsapplication by the Party of theproletariat finds expression in variousways according to the varyingconditions.”

The politico-military strategy is notanything new as you claim. Norevolutionary party would think that itcan achieve victory in the revolutionthrough military strategy alone.Political strategy and tactics are animportant part of the overall Strategy& Tactics pursued by a Maoist Party.Com Mao had always given importanceto this aspect, and not just to the militaryaspect, in spite of the huge strength ofthe PLA. Isolating the main enemies,building the united front with all anti-imperialist and anti-feudal forces,organising the working class and othertoiling masses in the urban areas andplain areas, have been an indispensablepart of the agenda of the CPC underMao and several Maoist parties today.The documents of these Parties provethis beyond any doubt.

The problem, therefore, does not liein not realizing the importance of thework in the urban areas or in the lackof political strategy but in the nature ofthe politico-military strategy that isbeing implemented and the order of


priority of the rural and urban areas insemi-colonial, semi-feudal countries. Ifthe chief task of smashing the statemachinery, particularly the Army andother armed forces, is relegated to thebackground in the name of politicalstrategy and tactics, if concessions aregiven to the enemy at the cost of theclass interests of the proletariat andoppressed people for the sake ofmaintaining the united front somehowor other, then the actual problem comesto the fore. The CPN(M) had achievedrapid gains in the decade-long people’swar and claimed to have control over80 per cent of the country’s territory by2005. But even this fact does not alteror dilute the strategy of PPW and lendpriority to political strategy.

The foremost task even afterassuming control over 80 per cent ofthe territory would be to consolidate themass base and organs of politicalpower, increase the strength of the PLAand smash the centres of enemy powerin the midst of our base areas. No doubt,the task is quite arduous and requiresgreat determination and patience sincethere will be an overwhelmingexpectation of immediate victoryamong Party ranks and the people atlarge. Serious mistakes are likely to takeplace in the period of strategic offensiveif the protracted nature of the people’swar is not understood properly.

The fusion theory of the CPN(M)had undergone further deviations in thefive years since it was first proposed,and by 2006 it became the theory ofpeaceful competition with thereactionary parties and peacefultransition to people’s democracy andsocialism. From a fusion of people’swar and insurrection Prachanda’seclectic theory had assumed the formof negotiations and diplomaticmanouevring. One of the major reasonsfor this change was the incorrectassessment of the contemporary worldsituation and the conclusion that theneo-colonial form of imperialism isnow taking the form of a globalisedstate.

As mentioned in the seminar paper:“The fundamental character of

imperialism hasn’t been changed inessence but as said in our partydocument the imperialism in its courseof development has been acquiring newforms and shapes. The initial colonialform of imperialism changed its forminto neo-colonialism. Now the neo-colonial form is taking its shape in theform of a globalised state. Naturally thischange in form of imperialism shouldbe taken into account while developingpath of revolution.”

The conclusion regarding globalisedstate goes against dialectics as itrelegates inter-imperialist contra-dictions to the background and attemptsto make imperialism as a whole into ahomogeneous mass. This formulationwas put forth for the first time by yourParty towards the end of December2006 after striking an alliance with theSPA. In fact, we can say that your 12-point agreement with the SPA, yourdecision to become part of the interimgovernment sharing power with thecomprador-feudal reactionary parties inNepal, your participation in theelections to the Constituent Assemblyand forming a government under yourleadership once again with thereactionary forces, and theorizing onpeaceful competition with theseparties—all these had arisen from theabove assessment of your Partyregarding imperialism and theconclusion that it has assumed the formof a globalised state. It is only naturalthat such an assessment, similar to thethesis of ultra-imperialism proposed byKarl Kautsky in 1912 and which waslaid bare by comrade Lenin, cannot butlead to the conclusion of a peaceful pathand peaceful transition to people’sdemocracy and socialism. The fusiontheory had ultimately led to the theoryof peaceful transition! Now there isneither people’s war nor insurrectionbut peaceful competition with otherParliamentary parties for achievingpower through elections!!

The leadership and the entire Partyranks of UCPN(M) should at least nowrealize the reformist and rightopportunist danger inherent in theincorrect eclectic formulation ofcomrade Prachanda regarding the pathof revolution in Nepal. To put forth suchan eclectic fusion theory in anextremely backward semi-feudal semi-colonial country, where almost 90% ofthe people reside in rural areas shackledby semi-feudal social relations, is reallytragic. It makes a mockery of the Maoistconcept of PPW and negates the basicteachings of comrade Mao. Prachanda’sfusion theory is a serious deviation fromMLM, has created only confusion andillusion among Party ranks about quickvictory instead of preparing the entireparty for a protracted people’s war.

On Prachanda PathMuch has been written about

Prachanda Path in your documents,articles and interviews in the past sevenyears. It has also been a topic ofdiscussion during our bilateral meetingsin the initial years of Initiation ofpeople’s war in Nepal.

When specifically asked by yourdelegation, we had reiterated our standin our bilateral meetings that buildinga personality cult will not help the Partyor the revolution in the long run. Wecited our own experiences in India atthe time of comrade Charu Majumdarand advised you not to inculcate blindfaith in individuals. Our firm opinionhad always been that isms, paths,thoughts etc get established over a longprocess after they are vindicated inpractice and have a clear scientificbasis. We advised you that it was toohasty to speak of a new path or thoughtin Nepal just because some significantvictories were achieved in the people’swar. You were not convinced andproceeded with “enriching anddeveloping” MLM in the form ofPrachanda Path and giving it a universalcharacter.

While asserting that it is the creativeapplication of MLM to the concrete


conditions of Nepal and assuring othersthat you do not attribute universalsignificance to it, you had, at the sametime, tried to project it as a furtherdevelopment and enrichment of MLMwith universal significance. Yourdocument had mentioned thus:

“Prachanda Path has been termed inthe historical Second NationalConference of C.P.N. (Maoist) as anideological synthesis of richexperiences of five years of the greatPeople’s War. The Party, in thisconference, has taken up PrachandaPath as an inseparable dialectical unitybetween international content andnational expression, universality andparticularity, whole and part, generaland particular, and has comprehendedthat this synthesis of experiences ofNepalese revolution would serve worldproletarian revolution and proletarianinternationalism. (The Great LeapForward: An Inevitable Need ofHistory).

You had tried to explain thedevelopment of prachanda paththeoretically as follows:

“Development of Prachanda Path isadvancing ahead in its third phase.These phases can be presented as:political and military line of Nepaleserevolution that was adopted in the ThirdExpanded Meeting of C.P.N. (Maoist)held in 1995 — the first phase;ideological synthesis of the richexperiences of five years of greatPeople’s War that took place in thehistorical Second National Conferenceof C.P.N. (Maoist) held in 2001 – thesecond phase and the process ofdevelopment following thisconference—the third phase. Alongwith the grasp of MLM, Prachanda Pathhas been developing in the process ofits defense, application anddevelopment and this concept alsocarries specific internationalsignificance regarding the process ofdevelopment of revolutionary theory.”

Your Party had listed out thecontributions of comrade Prachanda in

the field of ideology, dialecticalmaterialism, political and military line,and so on. But after going through thedocuments and writings of the leadersof UCPN(M), it is still not clear as towhat has been developed anew in thereal sense in the formulations made bycomrade Prachanda in these fields.

In the name of creative applicationof MLM to the concrete conditions inNepal and further development andenrichment of the theory of MLM “inthe conditions of 21st century”, yourParty and its chief, comrade Prachanda,have brought forth several formulationsthat negate the fundamental teachingsof comrades Lenin and Mao. You havejustified this by asserting repeatedlythat dogmatism has become the mainobstacle for advancing the revolutionsin the contemporary world. Forinstance, com Basanta, a CC memberwrites:

“Our Party, under the leadership ofChairman Comrade Prachanda,believes that the analysis of imperialismmade by Lenin and Mao in the 20thcentury cannot scientifically guide theMaoist revolutionaries to developcorrect strategy and tactics to fight inthe 21st century.” (“InternationalDimension of Prachanda Path”, TheWorker #10, pp. Page 84)

Your CC Plenum document ofNovember 2005 goes on to show howglobalised imperialism has causedsome of the analyses of Lenin and Maoto lag behind thereby implying thatthese have become outdated andirrelevant. It says:

“…an important preface that today’sglobalized imperialism has causedsome of the analyses of Lenin and Maoon the strategy of imperialism andproletarian movement to lag behind inthe same manner as to how a numberof Marx’s and Engels’ analysis ofrevolution in Europe, in the period ofcompetitive capitalism, had caused tolag behind in the situation, whenimperialism had developed till the FirstWorld War.”

How the analyses of Lenin and Maoon the strategy of imperialism andproletarian revolution are laggingbehind is not clear. But for somerhetoric, there is no substantialreasoning or analysis on the part of theCPN(M) to show the inadequacy of theanalyses of Lenin and Mao or how theiranalysis of imperialism in the 20thcentury cannot scientifically guide theMaoist revolutionaries to developcorrect strategy and tactics to fight inthe 21st century.

After witnessing the full floweringof the concept of prachanda path onething has now become clear to theMaoist revolutionaries everywhere:Lenin and Mao had indeed become anobstacle to Prachanda and theUCPN(M) for carrying out theirreformist, right opportunistformulations. They needed to discardthe Leninist concept of state andrevolution, and imperialism andproletarian revolution. They needed tothrow overboard Mao’s theory of newdemocracy and two stages of revolutionin semi-colonial semi-feudal countries,and to replace the path of PPW with aneclectic combination or fusion ofpeople’s war and insurrection, andfinally pursue the same old revisionistline put forth by the CPSU underKhrushchov against which comradeMao had fought relentlessly. Prachandapath had finally turned out to be atheory that negates the fundamentalteachings of Lenin and Mao and theessence of prachanda path is seen to beno different from the Khrushchovitethesis of peaceful transition.

Assessment of thecharacter of State in Nepaland prospects ofcompleting the Revolution

Firstly, what is the class characterof the state that the CPNM) had takenover through the process ofparliamentary elections in alliance withother comprador-feudal parties?

How does the UCPN(M) intend to


consummate the revolution that wasstalled half-way?

What is the understanding of theUCPN(M) regarding the nature ofpower that had fallen into their handsthrough elections? Does it think it canutilize this power to bring about a basic,revolutionary change in the socialsystem in Nepal?

How does the UCPN(M) plan tobring about the radical restructuring ofsociety and build a new democraticNepal in alliance with the partiesrepresenting the reactionaryexploitative classes that oppose toothand nail any such radical changes?

Does the UCPN(M) believe that theold state machine—principally with thesame-old bureaucracy and major chunkof the old standing army—can act asan instrument in the hands of theproletariat to bring about radicalchanges in the existing semi-feudalsemi-colonial social system?

And most important what is theattitude of the UCPN(M) to thequestion of establishing a people’sdemocratic dictatorship in the period ofNew Democratic Revolution and itstransition to socialism through theestablishment of the dictatorship of theproletariat? In this context what is itsapproach to the historic GPCR?

What will be the class character ofthe new army that will be formed bythe proposed integration of therevolutionary PLA and the reactionaryNepalese Army? Can the UCPN(M), asa major partner in the ruling coalitionin Nepal, ensure a pro-people characterto the newly integrated Army of Nepal?And now when the Maoists have lostpower due to withdrawal of support bythe other major allies, how could theyensure that a newly integrated army,with the major portion coming from theold reactionary army, will not be usedby the reactionary forces to massacrethe Maoists as we had witnessed inIndonesia or Chile?

We have been continuously raising

these questions, particularly during thepast three years, through bilateralmeetings, letters to your CC, ourstatements, interviews and otherwritings. We had brought to your noticeyour serious deviation from the Leninistconcept of state and revolution andcited the experiences of revolution inseveral countries. In a statement issuedin November 2006, our CC pointed outthat even if the Maoists became part ofthe interim government or came topower through elections they cannotalter the reactionary character of the oldstate or build a new Nepal on the oldbasis.

“The agreement by the Maoists tobecome part of the interim governmentin Nepal cannot transform thereactionary character of the statemachinery that serves the exploitingruling classes and imperialists. The statecan be the instrument in the hands ofeither the exploiting classes or theproletariat but it cannot serve theinterests of both these bitterly-contending classes. It is thefundamental tenet of Marxism that nobasic change in the social system canbe brought about without smashing thestate machine. Reforms from abovecannot bring any qualitative change inthe exploitative social system howeverdemocratic the new Constitution mightseem to be, and even if the Maoistsbecome an important component of thegovernment. It is sheer illusion to thinkthat a new Nepal can be built withoutsmashing the existing state.”

After your Party had emerged as thesingle largest Party in the ConstituentAssembly and was trying to form agovernment in alliance with otherparties representing the old order, weonce again brought to your attention inour statement issued on behalf of ourCC on April 24, 2008 thus: “The oneand only guarantee for carrying throughthe radical revolutionary programme isto raise the political class consciousnessof the vast masses, mobilize them intoclass struggle, arm and train them to

fight the exploiters and all reactionaryforces and defend the gains they hadderived through long period of classand mass struggle......One must keep inmind that the gains that can be achievedthrough a government that has come topower by means of elections are verymuch limited. Survival of such a regimedepends on taking a conciliatory standon several crucial matters. Hence tooverestimate the prospects of radicalrestructuring of the society or economyby a Maoist government would beillusory and will dilute the possibilityas well as the ability of the Party tocontinue the class struggle.”

Again in our letter sent to your CCon the 1st of May 2008, we pointed out:“It is a fundamental tenet of Marxismthat no radical restructuring of thesystem is possible without smashing theexisting state. It is impossible to makegenuine changes in the system onlythrough measures initiated “fromabove”, i.e. through state decrees andlaws. In fact, even drafting Nepal’sConstitution in favour of the poor andoppressed masses is itself going to be avery arduous and bitter struggle.

“Nothing could be more dangerousat the present juncture than to becomecomplacent and underestimate theprospects of a reactionary backlash.One must keep in mind that the gainsthat can be achieved through agovernment that has come to power bymeans of elections are very muchlimited. To overestimate the prospectsof radical restructuring of the societyor economy by a Maoist-ledgovernment would be illusory and willdilute the possibility as well as theability of the Party to continue the classstruggle.”

Our Party’s stand on the struggleagainst monarchy was made clearseveral times in the past. For instance,our Party General Secretary said in hisanswers to questions sent by BBC inApril 2007:

“The real fight is not againstGyanendra and the monarchy which is


but a symbol of the feudal-imperialistoppression and exploitation of the vastmasses of Nepal. Without throwing outthe feudal forces, the imperialists, theIndian big business and the localcompradors, mere ouster of Gyanendrawould not solve any of the problems ofthe Nepali masses. And this can be doneonly by firmly carrying on the people’swar to final victory. No Parliament cantouch the seat of these reactionaryforces who de facto rule the country.”

Thus it should be clear that fightingfeudalism is not synonymous tofighting the monarchy. The monarchyis a part of the semi-feudal, semi-colonial system whose main aspect isin the semi-feudal land relations. InIndia, the rajas and maharaja weredeprived of their power decades back,but that did not destroy the semi-feudalbase in the countryside.

A correct assessment regarding thestate was in fact given by your Partyitself two years before going intoalliance with the SPA. In an articleentitled “UML Government: A NewShield of Feudalism and ImperialismUnder Crisis” written by the thenChairman of CPN(M), comradePrachanda, this was lucidly explainedthus:

“Marxism, on the basis of historicalmaterialist scientific outlook thatseverely attacks upon the entiremysterious and idealist explanations inrelation to state power, declared withundeniable material of experience ofclass struggle that it is nothing but aweapon of one class suppressing theother. A state power that simultaneouslyrepresents classes of two opposinginterests has neither been possible in thehistory nor will be in the future.Marxism hates and rejects the entireprattles of reform and classcollaboration as bourgeois hypocrisy.State power is either the dictatorship ofthe proletariat in different forms or thatof the exploiting class. There can be noother stupidity than to imagine a poweracting in between these two.

Citing comrade Lenin that “TheState is a special organization of force;it is an organization of violence for thesuppression of some class.”, comradePrachanda rightly asks: “Will now thestate power stop becoming anorganization of violence right after theUML has become a part of thegovernment?”

Quoting com Lenin he explainedhow no government can be pro-peopleas long as the two institutions ofbureaucracy and standing army remainintact: “Two institutions are mostcharacteristic of this state machine: thebureaucracy and the standing army”.

Com Prachanda had correctlypointed out: “It is evident that anygovernment, which is compelled tofunction under the direction of thebureaucracy and standing army, themain two components of the statepower, is impossible to become pro-people to the least.”

Explaining the reactionary characterof the UML government, comPrachanda cites the famous propositionof Marxism: “To decide once every fewyears which member of the ruling classis to repress and crush the peoplethrough parliament—such is the realessence of bourgeois parliamentarism,not only in parliamentary-constitutionalmonarchies, but also in the mostdemocratic republics.” (Lenin, TheState and Revolution)

That was six years ago, in 2003,when the people’s war was advancingin rapid strides. But how have thesefundamental theoretical formulationschanged after the CPN(M) emerged asthe single largest party in the April 2008elections?

Now we ask you the same questionthat you had placed when the UMLcame to power claiming that itrepresented the people’s interests: “Isthere any such particularity in Nepalbecause of which the class character ofthe reactionary state power haschanged?”

Can one describe the act of formingthe government in alliance withcomprador-feudal parties andattempting to bring revolutionary socialchange through the basically old statemachine as merely a tactic? With whatlogic can one say it is not a path ofrevolution similar to the ‘peacefultransition to socialism’ put forth byKhrushchov?

The pronouncements by the leadersof the CPN(M) on various occasions,particularly after their electoral victoryin April 2008, remind us of PKI’srevisionist theory of “a state with twoaspects”, i.e., a “pro-people’s aspect”and an “anti-people’s aspect” proposedby its Chairman Aidit.

According to Aidit: “The importantproblem in Indonesia now is not tosmash the state power as in the case inmany other states, but to strengthen andconsolidate the pro-people’saspect…and to eliminate the anti-people’s aspect.”

This peaceful transformation wouldtake place by “revolutionary actionfrom above and below”, i.e., byinitiating revolutionary measures fromabove aimed at changing thecomposition of the various state organson the one hand, and by “arousing,organizing and mobilizing” the massesto achieve these changes.

Then there are several issues wherethe stand of your Party had already ledto the abandoning of the basic requisitesfor bringing about a revolutionarychange in Nepal. The most importantamong these are the virtual decimationof the PLA by limiting it to the UN-supervised barracks for over two years,return of the lands and property seizedby the people in the course of thepeople’s war to the exploiters andoppressors, demobilization of theYoung Communist League,compromising with imperialism, Indianexpansionism and other main enemiesof revolution in Nepal, and so on.

Com Prachanda announced that the


“paramilitary modus operandi of theparty’s youth wing, the YCL, would bescrapped, and public and privatebuildings, factories and other propertiescaptured by the party will be returnedto the owners concerned.” He alsoannounced that all the party unitsestablished as parallel state units [thevarious levels of the formerrevolutionary government establishedduring the people’s war] will likewisebe scrapped, and assured that ‘Theseagreements will be implemented asearly as possible after setting atimeframe’.

The above measures can have oneand only one meaning: abandoningpeople’s revolutionary power and allthe gains accrued in the decade-longpeople’s war at the cost of over 13,000lives of heroic martyrs, the best sonsand daughters of Nepal.

In addition to all this there is alsoone more serious question, as regardsthe understanding of the UCPN(M)towards the fundamental Marxist-Leninist concept on the dictatorship ofthe proletariat. As Com. Lenin said thedistinguishing feature of a genuinecommunist is not merely limited toacceptance of the class struggle but itsextension to the question of theestablishment of the dictatorship of theproletariat. MLM teaches us that thisquestion in backward countries isrelated to the question of theestablishment of the New DemocraticState, i.e. the joint dictatorship of allanti-imperialist and anti-feudal classesunder the leadership of the proletariat,basing on the worker peasant alliance.Nowhere in their documents does theUCPN(M) talk of the question ofexercising dictatorship over theexploiting classes.

On the Stage of Revolutionin Nepal

The CPN(M), in its basicdocuments, had come out correctly withits assessment of the present stage ofthe revolution in Nepal as new

democratic and had declared theprogramme to be implemented in thisstage of revolution.

However, in an article by comradeBaburam Bhattarai in March 2005 andin his 13-point letter in November 2004,the above understanding regarding thenew democratic stage was changed ina drastic manner. It was declared thatthe Nepalese revolution was passingthrough a substage of a democraticrepublic.

“As far as the sincere commitmentof the revolutionary democratic forces,who aspire to reach socialism andcommunism via a new democraticrepublic, towards a bourgeoisdemocratic republic is concerned, theCPN (Maoist) has time and againclarified its principled position towardsthe historical necessity of passingthrough a sub-stage of democraticrepublic in the specificities of Nepal.”(The Royal Regression and theQuestion of the Democratic Republic,March 15, 2005)

Our Party had pointed out in anarticle in our organ People’s war:

“No Maoist would say it is wrongto fight for the demand of a Republicand for the overthrow of the autocraticmonarchy. And likewise, none wouldoppose the forging of a united front ofall those who are opposed to the mainenemy at any given moment. Needlessto say, such a united front would bepurely tactical in nature and cannot, andshould not, under any circumstances,determine the path and direction of therevolution itself. The problem with thetheorization by the CPN(M) lies inmaking the fight against autocracy intoa substage of NDR and, what is evenworse, making the substage overwhelm(dominate and determine) the verydirection and path of the revolution. Theprogramme and strategy of NDRdrawn up by the Party prior to itslaunching of the armed struggle, thetargets to be overthrown and even theconcrete class analysis made earlier

based on which the revolution hadadvanced so far, are now madesubordinate to the needs of the so-calledsubstage of Nepalese revolution. It islike the case of the tail itself waggingthe dog. The substage of bourgeoisdemocratic republic has become the all-determining factor. It has subsumed theclass war, set aside the strategy ofprotracted people’s war, broughtmultiparty democracy or politicalcompetition with the bourgeois-feudalparties as the most important strategy,nay, path, of the Nepalese revolution.”

The fight against monarchy or theKing has become the be-all-and-end-all—the ultimate goal—for theleadership of UCPN(M). The conceptsof NDR, socialism and communismhave become relegated to a secondaryposition and are subsumed by theconcept of a sub-stage for a fight againstthe King.

In fact, such an understanding wasreflected in the statements andinterviews given by comrade Prachandahimself after the people’s war in Nepalconfronted serious difficulties in thephase of strategic offensive and the finalassault did not fetch the anticipatedresults. For instance, in his interviewwith the BBC in 2006, com Prachandaspoke of a new Nepal without the needfor smashing the old state:

“We believe that the Nepali peoplewill go for a republic and in a peacefulway the process of rebuilding Nepalwill go forward.

“In five years’ time Nepal will movetowards being a beautiful, peaceful andprogressive nation.

“In five years’ time the millions ofNepalis will already be moving aheadwith a mission to make a beautifulfuture, and Nepal will truly startbecoming a heaven on earth.”

He further asserted that a democraticrepublic elected in such a way will solvethe problems of Nepalis!!

“We believe that with the electionof a constituent assembly, a democratic


republic will be formed in Nepal. Andthis will solve the problems of Nepalisand lead the country into a moreprogressive path.”

In an Interview to an Italiannewspaper L’espresso in Nov 2006Prachanda further elaborated his visionof a future Nepal as that of transforminginto a bourgeois republic like that ofSwitzerland: “In ten years we’ll changethe whole scenario, rebuilding thiscountry to prosperity. In 20 years wecould be similar to Switzerland. Thisis my goal for Nepal.”

And he intends to use foreigninvestment to achieve the abovetransformation of Nepal: “we willwelcome foreign investors, usingcapital from abroad for the well beingof Nepal.”

The above lines are in no waydifferent from what the Indiancompradors continuously repeat. Howwill Nepal start becoming a “heaven onearth” after becoming a bourgeoisrepublic? How can the formation of aso-called democratic republic “solvethe problems of Nepalis”? Why isPrachanda dreaming of making Nepalinto a bourgeois Switzerland instead ofa socialist paradise? Even whencomrade Prachanda had declared thisto be his goal for Nepal in the next 20years it is a pity that hardly any voicewas raised within the Party. In fact, suchpronouncements by Prachanda andother leaders of your Party have onlyincreased after the elections to the CA.The entire direction and programme ofyour Party is, in essence, nothing but acontinuation of the existing semi-colonial, semi-feudal system, i.e. thedictatorship of the exploiting classes.

Our people’s war article had furtherpointed out:

“Can Nepal free itself from theclutches of imperialism after becominga (bourgeois) democratic republic in thepresent imperialist era? Does theUCPN(M) really think that the “processof rebuilding Nepal will go forward in

a peaceful way”? And is there a singleinstance in world history where such apeaceful process of rebuilding has takenplace? Does not the history of worldrevolution show that bitter classstruggle, bloody and violent at times,continues even after decades followingthe capture of power by the proletariat?Then how could com. Prachanda thinkof such a peaceful process of rebuildingNepal?

“Do the parties belonging to the SPAreally fight imperialism and feudalismin Nepal? Is there a guarantee that theCPN(M) will defeat the bourgeois-feudal parties, with which it wants togo for political competition in theelections, and ensure that Nepal doesnot drift into the clutches of imperialismand Indian expansionism? How couldone be so naive as to believe that oncethe elections to the ConstituentAssembly are over and Nepal becomesa Republic, not under the leadership ofthe working class party but may beunder an alliance of a hotch-potchcombination of Parties i.e., an allianceof ruling class and working class underCPN(M), the country would free itselffrom feudalism and imperialism andbecome a “beautiful, peaceful andprogressive nation” ?

The same understanding of the sub-stage was reflected in the declarationby the Maoist spokesperson KrishnaBahadur Mahara in November 2006that the pact between the Seven-PartyAlliance and the Maoists shouldcontinue until the end of feudalism inthe country, or at least for ten years.

Thus from the various interviews ofcomrade Prachanda and other leadersof the UCPN(M) we can clearly see abasic shift in the Maoist position fromthe immediate aim of accomplishingthe new democratic revolution with thegoal of fighting for socialism andcommunism, to the establishment of a“multi-party democratic republic”through elections and bringing socialtransformation through peaceful meanswithin the framework of the old state

structure. This goes against the MarxistLeninist understanding on state as wellas the stage of revolution.

The non-proletarian class stand ofthe UCPN(M) and the confusion anddeviation that had arisen concerning thepeople’s democratic republic arisesfrom the above theory of sub-stagewhich is being presented, not merelyas a tactics but as a strategic concept.

On Coalition Government

The proposal to form an interimcoalition government with the arch-reactionary parties that represent theclass interests of the feudal, compradorruling classes in Nepal and serveimperialism and Indian expansionism,was defended by your Party citing somehistorical experiences such as theproposal of a coalition government withthe enemy of the Chinese people,Chiang Kai-Shek, made by the CPCunder com Mao in China during theanti-Japan War of Resistance. However,the understanding and practice of theUCPN(M) under com Prachanda isdiametrically opposite to that pursuedby the CPC under com Mao at that time.

Com Prachanda himself exposed theanti-people character of the coalitiongovernments formed in alliance withthe bourgeois, feudal parties such as theUML-led coalition government formedin Nepal after the mid-term electionsin 1991. He draws a parallel with thebourgeois democratic governmentformed after the 1917 Februaryrevolution following the fall of Czarismin Russia with the participation of theMensheviks. Citing com Lenin, hewrote in the article “UML Government:A New Shield of Feudalism andImperialism Under Crisis”: “Thecapitalists, better organized and moreexperienced than anybody else inmatters of class struggle and politics,learnt their lesson quicker than theothers. Realizing that the government’sposition was hopeless, they resorted toa method which for many decades, eversince 1848, has been practiced by the


capitalists of other countries in orderto fool, divide and weaken the workers.This method is known as a “coalition”government, i.e., a joint cabinet formedof members of the bourgeoisie andturncoats from socialism.” (Lenin,From the Lesson of Revolution).

It is also interesting to note that yourParty had castigated the reactionarygovernment of the UML coalition byinvoking the historical experience inRussia, where, in fact, com Lenin hadcastigated the bourgeois democraticgovernment even after the fall ofCzarist autocracy in the followingwords: “He who says that the workersmust support the new government inthe interests of the struggle againsttsarist reaction (and apparently this isbeing said by the Potresovs,Gvozdyovs. Chkhenkelis and also, allevasiveness notwithstanding, byChkheidze) is a traitor to the workers,a traitor to the cause of the proletariat,to the cause of peace and freedom. Foractually, precisely this new governmentis already bound hand and foot byimperialist capital, by the imperialistpolicy”. (Lenin: Letters From Afar).

What is wrong in applying theabove-mentioned observation of comLenin which was made in the contextof a victorious bourgeois democraticrevolution and the fall of Czaristautocracy in Russia. Firstly, the two arein no way comparable as what tookplace in Russia was a bourgeoisdemocratic revolution, while what tookplace in Nepal merely dislodged theKing but did not change the semi-colonial, semi-feudal socio-economicbase. Besides, the main point here isnot whether a coalition governmentshould or should not have been formedin Nepal by the CPN(M) with the otherruling class parties, but that it shouldnot be at the cost of the demobilizationof the PLA and abandonment of thebase areas as done by the CPN(M). Letus examine this most important and keyissue.

On the Abandonment ofthe Base Areas anddisarming the PLA

The central question of anyrevolution is the seizure of power byarmed force. In semi-colonial, semi-feudal countries power is seized firstin the backward areas of the countrysideby establishing base areas, thenencircling the urban areas, organizinguprisings in the cities and finallyachieving countrywide victory. Hencethe importance of base areas and thepeople’s army needs no mention. Thesetwo aspects are crucial for victory inany revolution and these are non-negotiable under whatever pretext.

Our CC had been discussing thisquestion with you in our high-levelbilateral meetings right from the timeyou were working out plans for aninterim government, elections to the CAand an end to monarchy. You hadassured us that base areas would neverbe given up and PLA would not bedisarmed. But eventually it turned outthat you had done both and had eveninvited the imperialist agency—theUnited Nations—to supervise thedisarming of the PLA.

In November 2006 our CC hadissued a statement on the proposal ofthe CPN(M) to disarm the PLA andconfine the fighters to the barracks.Entitled “A New Nepal can emergeonly by smashing the reactionary state!Depositing arms of the PLA under UNsupervision would lead to the disarmingof the masses!!”, the CPI(Maoist)statement stated:

“The agreement to deposit the armsof the people’s army in designatedcantonments is fraught with dangerousimplications. This act could lead to thedisarming of the oppressed masses ofNepal and to a reversal of the gainsmade by the people of Nepal in thedecade-long people’s war at the cost ofimmense sacrifices……

“Entire experiences of the worldrevolution had demonstrated time and

again that without the people’s army itis impossible for the people to exercisetheir power. Nothing is more dreadfulto imperialism and the reactionariesthan armed masses and hence theywould gladly enter into any agreementto disarm them. In fact, disarming themasses has been the constant refrain ofall the reactionary ruling classes eversince the emergence of class-dividedsociety. Unarmed masses are easy preyfor the reactionary classes andimperialists who even enact massacresas proved by history. The CC,CPI(Maoist), as one of the detachmentsof the world proletariat, warns theCPN(Maoist) and the people of Nepalof the grave danger inherent in theagreement to deposit the arms and callsupon them to reconsider their tactics inthe light of bitter historicalexperiences…..

“We also appeal to the CPN(Maoist)once again to rethink about their currenttactics which are actually changing thevery strategic direction of therevolution in Nepal and to withdrawfrom their agreement with thegovernment of Nepal on depositing thearms of the PLA as this would makethe people defenceless in face of attacksby the reactionaries.”

In his answer to the questions sentby the media, mainly by the BBC, inApril 2007, our General Secretary,comrade Ganapathy, pointed out:

“The most dangerous part of the dealis the disarming of the PLA bydepositing the arms and placing thefighters in cantonments. This will dono good except disarming the massesand throwing them to the mercy of theoppressors. Neither the imperialists norbig neighbours like India and Chinawould allow any fundamental changein the socio-economic system in Nepal.They cannot remain passive spectatorsif their interests are undermined by theMaoists whether through a people’s waror through the parliament. Hence theMaoists can never achieve their aim of


putting an end to feudal and imperialistexploitation by entering the parliamentin the name of multi-party democracy.They will have to either get co-optedinto the system or abandon the presentpolicy of power-sharing with the ruingclasses and continue the armedrevolution to seize power. There is noBuddhist middle way. They cannot setthe rules for a game the bourgeoisie hadinvented.”

The move to deposit arms andconfine the PLA fighters to UN-supervised cantonments, in practice,was tantamount to abandoning PPWand class struggle in the name of multi-Party democracy and endangering thegains made during the decade-longPeople’s War. The first big deviationoccurred when the CPN(M) decided tosail with the SPA by agreeing toabandon the Base Areas, demobilize itsPLA, and participate in the elections inthe name of fighting against themonarchy. This line is a total deviationfrom MLM and the concept of PPW.To justify this, the CPN(M) had citedthe example of the CPC under Maowhich had gone for a united front withChiang Kai-shek’s KMT and had givena call for a coalition government. It is afact that CPC had given the call for sucha united front. However, it is also a factthat it had never proposed giving up theBase Areas or disarming the PLA. Andit was precisely this which had madethe CPC’s position stronger by the endof the anti-Japanese War. It was able todictate terms to others mainly based onits independent strength in the baseareas and its PLA. And when Chiangrefused to act in the interests of Chinaand continued his offensive against theCommunists in collusion with theimperialists, CPC was able to isolatethe KMT, expand the base areas andPLA rapidly, and achieve victory in therevolution in a short period after the endof anti-Japanese War of Resistance. Asa result, CPC gained enormously fromits proposal of UF with the KMT.

But in the case of the UCPN(M),although it achieved a big electoralgain, it had suffered a big strategic lossas it had disbanded the people’sgovernments at the local level,abandoned the base areas and disarmedthe people’s army. One clause in theagreement to deposit arms by the PLAeven sounds ridiculous. It says thatwhile the PLA deposits its arms andconfines itself to barracks, the NepalArmy too should deposit an equalnumber of arms! With this clause whilethe PLA as a whole becomes disarmedthe reactionary army remains intact!!All that it has do is to deposit somearms. Why did the leadership of theCPN(M) agree to such a ridiculous, andmore important, such a dangerous,condition? Is it so naïve that it is notaware of the consequences? We canonly say this has been done deliberatelyas the central leadership of the Partyhad chosen to stay away from people’swar and to pursue the peaceful path ofmulti-Party democracy to build asupposedly new Nepal. ComradePrachanda had unequivocally assertedthis in his interviews, speeches and onvarious occasions.

Now Prachanda’s path had placedthe CPN(M) or what is now called,UCPN(M), the PLA and therevolutionary people’s power in thecountryside in great peril and at themercy of reactionary parties, Indianexpansionists and imperialists. It is nowpowerless to defend itself or theinterests of the vast masses in face ofattacks by the reactionary classes andimperialists. It has no base areas to bankupon and no army to fight against thereactionary coups and plots.

Moreover, after the formation of theMaoist-led government, the PLA is nomore under the UCPN(M). Thechanged role and responsibility of thePLA were pointed out in clear terms ina speech delivered by com Prachandaon the occasion of the 14th Anniversaryof PW and 8th PLA Day at Hattikhor

PLA Cantonment and published onFebruary 26:

The most important question is thataccording to the spirit of interimconstitution and the agreements heldbefore between the political parties,PLA will not be directly under theUnified CPN (Maoist). PLA will bedirectly under the leadership of AISC.Theoretically PLA is already under it.We will be connected for a long timecontemplatively, that is another thing.However, PLA will not be under unifiedCPN-Maoist anymore, morally andtheoretically. In the situation of a legalstate power and the transitional period,PLA will accept the leadership of AISCand follow its directives. PLA has beena part of the state legally since the dayAISC has been made.

Today, there is a peculiar situationin Nepal. The old Royal Nepal Armycontinues to be the bulwark of thepresent state structure in Nepal whilethe PLA is a passive onlooker. Whatwould the Maoists do if a coup is stagedby the Army with the instigation of thereactionary comprador-feudal partieswith the backing of Indianexpansionists and US imperialists? Orif an Indonesia-type blood-bath of theCommunists is organised by thereactionaries? How do the Maoistsdefend themselves when they havedemobilised and disarmed the PLA?We had raised the question in ourbilateral meetings right from the timewhen such a proposal of integration ofthe two armies was put forth bycomrade Prachanda. There has neverbeen an answer to this crucial,fundamental question of revolution. Byevading an answer and displayingeclecticism, your Party has actuallyplaced the future of the oppressedpeople of Nepal in grave danger.

On UCPN(M)’sunderstanding of IndianExpansionism

During Prachanda’s official visit toIndia, he also used the occasion to


hobnob with comprador-feudal partieslike JD(U), Nationalist Congress,Samajwadi Party, RJD, LJP etc.,besides informal meetings with SoniaGandhi, Digvijay Singh, and some BJPleaders like LK Advani, Rajnath Singhand Murali Manohar Joshi. Perhaps hisstrategy was to cultivate good relationswith the fascist BJP in case it wins inthe next Parliamentary elections. Hisremarks during his India visit reflected,at best, his underassessment about thedanger posed by Indian expansionismto Nepal and illusions regarding thecharacter of the Indian state. And, atworse, it shows his opportunism inmaking a complete turn-about withregard to his assessment of India afterwinning the elections.

This attitude can be seen in hislauding the role of India in achievingthe “smooth and peaceful” transition inNepal and also praising India for itshelp in arranging the meeting betweenCPN(M) and SPA in Delhi and inforging a common front of the eightparties against the King. While talkingto Rajnath Singh whose Hindu fascistparty was responsible for thedestruction of Babari Masjid and forinciting communal attacks againstMuslims and Christians and genocidein Gujarat, Prachanda spoke of thecommon cultural heritage of the twocountries and about Ayodhya. HuggingManmohan Singh he even requestedthat India should assist Nepal indrafting the new Constitution! It is agreat insult to the people of both Nepaland India and amounts to surrenderingthe sovereignty of Nepal to IndianExpansionist rulers. He knows ourparty’s stand regarding the drafting ofthe Indian Constitution and its anti-people, pro-imperialist class content.Yet, he chose to seek the help of theIndian rulers in drafting theConstitution of Nepal!! This is not justpragmatism but a clean and cleardeviation from the ML standpoint andeven goes against the spirit ofnationalism that he had been speakingof.

Failure to arrive at a correctobjective assessment and understan-ding of Indian expansionism and its rolein South Asia would have far-reachingconsequences on revolutions in thecountries of the region. The CPN(M)had, by and large, a correctunderstanding regarding Indianexpansionism until it went intoagreement with the major comprador-feudal parties constituting the SPA in2006. There were, of course, someproblems such as an over-assessmentof the contradiction between India andUS imperialism and the eagerness ofthe CPN(M) to utilize the supposedcontradiction. Our Party delegation hadbrought to your attention the danger offalling into the trap set by the Indianexpansionist ruling classes andcautioned you against hob-nobbingwith the leaders of the variousreactionary ruling class parties in India,particularly the BJP and the Congress,but you continued to maintain relationsin the name of utilizing thecontradictions in the interest of therevolution in Nepal. We alerted you thatthe opposite would happen, and thateventually, it is not you but the Indianruling classes who would utilize yoursoft approach and influence your ranks,including the leadership. The counter-revolutionary intelligence wing ofIndia, RAW (Research & AnalysisWing), and the leaders of the variousreactionary political parties in India hadbeen very active in sowing illusions andideological confusion among the rankand file of the CPN(M) but your Partyleadership continued to cultivate andmaintain intimate relations with thesereactionary forces. The extent of theinfluence of these forces and thedamage caused to the revolution couldbe gauged by the fact that several timesyour leadership had pleaded that strongwords against Indian expansionism bedropped in the statements issued by ourtwo Parties as well as in the statementsissued by CCOMPOSA.

However, in spite of these

deviations, overall, until 2005, therehad been a collective struggle by ourtwo Parties and by other Maoist Partiesin South Asia against Indianexpansionism. The CCOMPOSA toowas formed with the aim of fightingagainst Indian expansionism andachieving unity and collective effort foradvancing the revolutions in SouthAsia. But, after your 12-pointagreement with the SPA, this struggleagainst Indian expansionism began tobe blunted over time finally reaching astage where your leadership even wentto the extent of showering praise on theIndian ruling classes and taking theirguidance.

We appeal to the leadership and theentire rank and file of the UCPN(M) toreconsider their stand towards Indianexpansionism and to adopt a firmstance. Diplomatic relations betweenstates should not run counter to theprinciple of proletarian internatio-nalism.

On ProletarianInternationalism

Another serious deviation in theleadership of the UCPN(M) lies in itsabandoning the principle of proletarianinternationalism, shelving theCCOMPOSA and the fight againstIndian expansionism and USimperialism, adopting a narrownationalistic approach and sheerpragmatism in dealing with othercountries and Parties. We can describethis trend as nothing but the approachof compradors taking a nationalisticgarb. Comrade Prachanda obliteratesclass content and class perspective,mixes up bourgeois democracy withpeople’s democracy and justifies allopportunist alliances as being in theinterests of Nepal, without mentioningthe class divisions and class rule withinthe country. When any tactic is divorcedfrom our strategic goal of NewDemocratic Revolution it ends inopportunism.

This is contrary to the principle of


proletarian internationalism asenvisaged by our great Marxist teachersand is opposed to MLM ideology. Thisstand will not promote, but rather harm,the interests of the Nepalese masses,undermine Nepal’s sovereignty in thelong run, creates illusions on thereactionary parties in Nepal, and Indianexpansionists outside. It undermines theneed for a united struggle by ML partiesworld-wide against imperialism,particularly US imperialism.

It is a great paradox that asupposedly Maoist-led government hasnot even ventured to severe its ties withthe Zionist Israeli terrorist stateparticularly after its brutal blatantaggression of Gaza and the massacreof hundreds of Palestinians whengovernments such as those in Venezuelaand Bolivia had dared to do so. Evenmore disgustful is the manner in whichthe UCPN(M) leadership has beentrying to get into the good books of theAmerican imperialists. To curry favourwith the American imperialists, asection of the UCPN(M) leadership hadeven assured that it would remove theMaoist “tail” from its Party name. Yourentire Party should think that this is theproper time for you to take aconsistently anti-imperialist, anti-Indian expansionist approach and workto forge close, working relations withother revolutionary and progressiveforces worldwide to weakenimperialism and the reactionary forces.

Only through resolute struggleagainst the Revisionist Line pursued bythe leadership of the UCPN(M) can arevolutionary line be re-established andbring the Nepalese revolution to itsconsummation

Lack of conviction in the ideologyof MLM, concept of quick victory andeclecticism with regard to the path ofrevolution in Nepal arising out of theseries of successes in the people’s war,a wrong assessment of the impact ofchanges in the contemporary worldleading to the conclusion that a

qualitative change had occurred in thenature of the era of imperialism andproletarian revolution, and a lack of astrategic outlook to transformtemporary defeats in a few battles intovictories in the overall war, had led toa drastic drift in the stand of theCPN(M) and its slide into Rightopportunism. The turning point in thepeople’s war in Nepal occurred whenthe PLA led by the CPN(M) failed tosmash enemy fortifications and sufferedserious losses in the second half of2005.

The 2005 CC Plenum had “resolvedthat the very strategy of protracted PWneeds to be further developed to caterto the necessities of the 21st century.In particular, several decades on it isseen that the protracted PWs launchedin different countries have facedobstacles or got liquidated afterreaching the state of strategic offensive,as imperialism has attempted to refineits interventionist counter-insurgencywar strategy as a ‘long war.’ In thiscontext, if the revolutionaries domechanistically cling to the ‘protracted’aspect of the PW at any cost, it wouldin essence play into the hands ofimperialism and reaction.” (TheWorker#10: Page 58)

Thus the reason for the presentpredicament of the UCPN(M) and itschange of strategy and path of therevolution lies in its inconsistency inadhering to the political line and thepath of PPW enunciated in its own basicdocuments. While it correctlyformulated the present stage ofrevolution in Nepal and the strategy andpath of revolution in its foundingdocuments, it landed into confusionregarding the strategy within five yearsof initiation of people’s war.

The series of victories in the first fewyears of people’s war were beyond theexpectations of even the Partyleadership. These victories also createda wrong thinking in the Party leadershipthat final victory could be quickly

achieved, and instead of firmlyadhering to the strategy of PPW whichhad brought about these successes, itbegan to develop new theories like thefusion theory and began to develop newstrategies not only for the revolution inNepal but also for the world revolution.Initially it expected to captureKathmandu in a short period without asober assessment of the support whichthe Nepalese ruling classes led by theKing could get from the imperialistsand Indian expansionists and also over-assessing the contradictions betweenthe imperialists and big countries likeChina and India.

The document entitled “PresentSituation and Our Tasks”, presented bycomrade Prachanda and adopted by theCC, CPN(M) in May 2003, made thefollowing assessment:

“Had world imperialism,particularly American imperialism intoday’s context, not helped the old statedirectly, the Nepalese revolution wouldhave by today developed further aheadwith relative ease and somewhatdifferently through the use of thethought, strategy and tacticssynthesized in the Party’s historicSecond National Conference. TheNepalese revolution has been affectedby the activities of Americanimperialism, like bringing the mostbrutal and fascist feudal elementsthrough the infamous palace massacreto take on the Nepalese People’s Warto intensifying its interventionistactivities in Nepal with the declarationof the so-called war against terrorismafter the September 11 event. We canclearly and with experience say that hadthe old feudal state and its royal armynot had direct involvement of Americanmilitary advisors in planning,construction, training and direction inthe post “emergency” period and thathad it not received financial andmilitary assistance from foreignreactionary forces including America,the old rotten feudal state in Nepal hadno chance of surviving in the face ofPeople’s War till today.”


In an interview to The Times ofIndia in September 2005 comradePrachanda said that his party wouldhave “captured Kathmandu by now ifcountries like the US, India and the UKhad not extended military support toNepal’s ‘tottering’ feudal rulers.”

Is it not wishful thinking on the partof the UCPN(M) and com Prachandato expect that revolution in Nepal canbecome victorious without fightingimperialist intervention? Intervention inthe internal affairs of every country isthe very essence and nature ofimperialism. Even to imagine that theycould have rapidly achieved victory ifother countries had not extendedmilitary support to the tottering feudalrulers of Nepal smacks of romanticism.

Thus, due to all these factors, whichare but natural in the course of anyrevolution, the people’s war in Nepalhad become stuck up in the stage ofstrategic stalemate or equilibrium inspite of tremendous victories andformation of the revolutionary organsof power in the vast countryside.Although it had declared that it hadentered the stage of strategic counter-offensive by August 2004 and had evensuccessfully implemented the first planof the counter-offensive, which itsummed up a year later, it realized thatit is not possible to capture the urbancentres and Kathmandu in theimmediate future. Its assessment of aquick victory did not seem feasible.While it has control over the vastcountryside it is unable to stage ageneral armed insurrection or toimplement its theory of fusing thestrategies of the Russian model ofarmed insurrection and the Chinesemodel of protracted people’s war or theso-called fusion theory. The UnitedRevolutionary People’s Council(URPC), which the CPN(M) hadformed as early as September 2001, hadnot been able to establish itself as anorgan of new democratic people’spower at the central level nor is it likely

to do so in the immediate future.CPN(M)’s deviation from the

concept of PPW and its longing for aquick victory did not allow it to thinkof tiring out the enemy in incessant war,accumulating its own strength further,and making long-term preparations fordefeating the enemy and smashing thestate machine at the opportune time. Iterroneously thought that the longer thewar dragged on the more difficult andunfavourable will the situation be forthe revolutionary forces as thereactionary forces and the armies ofimperialist powers and India are boundto intervene militarily.

The CPN(M) began to be skepticalabout the prospects of victory in a smallcountry like Nepal when it is confrontedby imperialism and there is noadvancement of any strongrevolutionary movement in other partsof the world.

“In the present context, when alongwith the restoration of capitalism inChina there is no other socialist stateexisting, when despite objectivecondition turning favorable currentlythere is no advancement in any strongrevolutionary movement under theleadership of the proletariat, and whenworld imperialism is pouncing onpeople everywhere like an injured tiger,is it possible for a small country with aspecific geo-political compulsion likeNepal to gain victory to the point ofcapturing central state throughrevolution? This is the most significantquestion being put before the Partytoday. The answer to this question canonly be found in Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and on this depends the futureof the Nepalese revolution.”

If the CPN(M) had a deep andthorough understanding of the strategyof PPW it would have had adequateclarity on how to grapple with thesituation in the event of externalmilitary intervention and transform thewar into a national war and capture statepower in the course of the war. But its

lack of such understanding of PPW andits desire for quick victory led it to thehighly dangerous short cut method ofcoming to power through an interimgovernment and participating in theelections in a so-called multipartydemocratic republic following theelections to the Constituent Assembly.Thus, instead of adhering to the MarxistLeninist understanding on theimperative need to smash the old stateand establish the proletarian state (thepeople’s democratic state in theconcrete conditions of semi-feudalsemi-colonial Nepal) and advancetowards the goal of socialism throughthe radical transformation of the societyand all oppressive class relations, itchose to reform the existing statethrough an elected constituent assemblyand a bourgeois democratic republic.It is indeed a great tragedy that it hascome to this position in spite of havinghad de facto power in most of thecountryside.

The conclusion regarding theimpossibility of achieving victory in therevolution through armed struggle isreflected clearly in Prachanda’s answerto a question by a correspondent of TheHindu in his Interview with comradePrachanda in February 2006. Whenasked whether the decision was arecognition by he CPN(M) of the“impossibility of seizing power througharmed struggle” and that “because ofthe strength of the RNA and theopposition of the internationalcommunity, a new form of struggle isneeded in order to overthrow themonarchy”, comrade Prachanda hadreplied that his Party had taken threethings into consideration for arriving atthe conclusion: the specificity of thepolitical and military balance in today’sworld; the experience of the 20thcentury; and the particular situation inthe country - the class, political andpower balance.

In an article you had rightly pointedout the reformist thinking in the


Nepalese communist movement in thefollowing words:

“In the Nepalese communistmovement a rightist thinking has beendominant that accepts New Democracyas a strategy but follows reformism andparliamentarism as the tactics, thatsacrifices the totality of strategy for thepractical tactical gain and that regardsstrategy and tactics as mutuallyexclusive. Against such thinking weshould pay special attention tounderstand the relations betweenstrategy and tactics in a dialecticalmanner and to adopt such tactics as tohelp the strategy.”

Now your Party itself has become avictim of such Rightist thinking byaccepting New Democracy in nameonly, but following reformism andparliamentarism in your concretetactics.

Whatever be the tactics adopted bythe UCPN(M) the most objectionablepart is your projection of these tacticsas a theoretically developed positionwhich you think should be the modelfor the revolutions in the 21st century.You consider the ideologies developedby Lenin and Mao at the initial phaseof international imperialism andproletarian revolution as havingbecome inadequate and lagging behindat the present imperialistic phase. And,therefore, you claim that ‘the main issueis to develop MLM in the 21st centuryand to determine a new proletarianstrategy.”

But what is new in the so-called newtactics proposed by the UCPN(M)?How is it different from the argumentsput forth by the Khrushchovite cliquein the Soviet Union after the death ofcom Stalin? In the name of fightingagainst dogmatism or orthodoxcommunism the leadership of CPN(M)had landed into a Right opportunist line.

Comrades!Today the entire world is going

through the worst ever economic crisissince the Great Depression of the

1930s. With American imperialism asthe focus every country in the world isengulfed in the crisis which isthreatening to erupt into social andpolitical explosions. In such anexcellent situation the Maoistrevolutionary forces in every countrycan grow in strength by properlyutilizing the favourable objectivesituation created by the crisis andachieve great advances in therevolutions in their respectivecountries. But unfortunately theleadership of the Maoist Party in Nepalhas chosen to strike a deal with thereactionary anti-people forces in thecountry and form a government that canin no way address any of the basicproblems facing the Nepalese people orachieve the Basic programme of NewDemocracy and socialism. Thispeaceful path of com Prachanda hasalready led the Party and the PLA intoa dark tunnel.

Our CC appeals to the leadershipand ranks of the UCPN(M) to undertakea deep review of the wrong reformistline that the Party has been pursuingever since it has struck an alliance withthe SPA, became part of the interimgovernment, participated in theelections to the CA, formed agovernment with the comprador-feudalparties, abandoned the base areas anddemobilized the PLA and the YCL,deviated from the principle ofproletarian internationalism andadopted a policy of appeasementtowards imperialism, particularlyAmerican imperialism, and Indianexpansionism. All these are a seriousdeviation from MLM and only worktowards the strengthening of the statusquoist forces and help imperialism inits hour of crisis. These have alsocreated confusion among therevolutionary masses, weakened therevolutionary camp and given thereactionary forces and imperialism abaton to attack the Maoistrevolutionaries and communismideologically.

A Maoist victory in Nepal, or at leastthe further consolidation of the vastBase Areas in that country, would havegiven rise to a new situation in SouthAsia, and a new democratic Nepaladvancing towards socialism wouldhave become a focal point, a rallyingpoint, for the revolutionary forces in theregion as well as all anti-imperialist,genuinely nationalist and democraticforces. It would have also played asignificant role in the world-wide frontagainst imperialism and assisted thenational liberation struggles andrevolutionary struggles therebystrengthening the cause of worldsocialist revolution.

Our CC has followed thedeliberations at the national conventionof CPN(M) in November 2008, gonethrough the two documents placed bycomrade Prachanda and Mohan Baidyaand the various writings by your Partyleaders in the magazines and newspapers. While the inner-Party struggleis an encouraging sign and a positivedevelopment in the life of the Party, itis very important and vital to ensure thatit is carried out in a more thoroughgoing, fearless and frank manner so asthe initiative of the entire Party cadreis released and a correct revolutionaryline is re-established through collectiveparticipation of the entire Party.

Now that the government headed bycomrade Prachanda has collapsed afterthe withdrawal of support by the UMLand others at the behest of the Indianruling classes, American imperialistsand the local reactionaries, the Partyleadership should be better placed tounderstand how the reactionaries canmanage the show from the sidelines oroutside and obstruct even moves suchas sacking of the Army chief by a PrimeMinister. This is a clear warning to theMaoists in Nepal that they cannot dowhatever they like through their electedgovernment against the wishes of theimperialists and Indian expansionists.

At least now they should realize thefutility of going into the electoral game


and, instead, should concentrate onbuilding class struggle and advancingthe people’s war in the countryside.They should pull out the PLA from theUN-supervised barracks which arevirtually like prisons for the fighters,reconstruct the organs of people’srevolutionary power at various levels,retake and consolidate the base areas,and expand the guerrilla war, and classand mass struggles throughout thecountry. There is no short cut to achievereal power to the people. If the Partyleadership hesitates to continue thepeople’s war at this critical juncture ofhistory and persists in the present rightopportunist line then history will holdthe present leadership responsible forthe abortion of revolution in Nepal.

In conclusion our Party opines thatalthough the UCPN(Maoist) has aglorious revolutionary tradition, butnow by abandoning the Base Areas,disarming the people’s Army,discarding the path of ppw and adoptingthe parliamentary path, the leadershipof this glorious party is pursuing apolitical line that is against the basictenets of M-L-M and is in essencenothing but a right opportunist andrevisionist line.

Comrades,Your Party has a great and glorious

revolutionary tradition. The oppressedmasses of India and entire South Asiawere greatly inspired by the historicleaps took in the People’s War and theestablishment of Base Areas in vast

parts of your country. When yourrevolutionary movement reached thestage of the strategic offensive the entirerevolutionary camp keenly awaitedfurther gigantic strides towards theseizure of power and the establishmentof a truly New Democratic State. But,unfortunately at this crucial juncture,the leadership of your Party began todivert from the principles of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and enter the pathof compromise with the ruling classesof your country and the Indianexpansionists. Slowly the leadership ofyour Party began to traverse nothing buta revisionist and class collaborationistpath throwing to the winds the historicadvances in your protracted people’swar and betraying the great sacrificesmade by the 13,000 heroic martyrs wholaid down their precious lives for therevolution in Nepal.

Given the great revolutionarytraditions of your Party, we areconfident that you will come out of thisabyss that the leadership of your Partyhas pushed you into; that you will comeout of the revisionist stands and practiceand once again grasp firmly principlesof M-L-M and apply them creativelyto the concrete conditions of yourcountry, rebuild your People’sLiberation Army and re-establish yourBase Areas and the organs ofrevolutionary power. Thus getting ridof these wrong lines and practices weare confident you will re-build thefraternal relations with the genuine

M-L-M forces around the world,particularly in India, and advance in bigstrides forward towards theestablishment of a New DemocraticState as the first step toward socialismand communism. In this historicadvance our Party and its CC assuresyou of all assistance in the true spirit ofproletarian internationalism. In thiscontext we feel the great need toadvance the main slogans of the GreatProletarian Cultural Revolution: neverforget class struggle; fight self, refuterevisionism; practice Marxism, notrevisionism.

Our two countries and peoples haveclose historical and cultural ties; weboth have a common enemy in IndianExpansionism. Our two Parties,through many ups and downs, have hadclose relations for decades and haveeven built joint fronts like theCCOMPOSA. We are confident thatthese will help bind our two Parties ona principled basis. The advance ofrevolution in your country has animportant bearing on the advance ofrevolution in India. We are confidentyou will learn from your pastexperiences and take great leapsforward.

With Revolutionary Greetings,Central Committee,CPI(Maoist)

July20, 2009

Annual subscription rates (POSTAGE 20/-)India & South Asia Rs. 180/-Rest of the 3rd World countries $ 24.00Rest of the World $ 36.00

Read and Subscribe to PEOPLE’S MARCH (Monthly)

Single copyIndia & South Asia Rs. 15/-Rest of the 3rd World countries $2.00Rest of the World $3.00

For Copies and Subscriptions, ContactP. Govindan Kutty, Peroor House, North Fort, Tripunithura P.O. Box 56, Ernakulam District, Kerala - 682 301

(Money orders, cheques, bank drafts to be made in the name of P. Govindan Kutty. Foreign & Indian bulk subscribers candeposit payments in any ICICI Bank in my name in SB A/c No. 629401125513 and inform by E-mail or by post.)

PM


TALKS ONLY ON THE ISSUE OF SOVEREIGNTY OF MANIPUR

[Manipur’s powerful insurgent group Revolutionary People’s Front (RPF) has reaffirmed its stand not to have apolitical dialogue with the Government of India (GOI) except on the issue of independence and sovereignty of Manipur.]

V ICE President of RPFManoharmayum Ngouba in

his official interaction with a group ofvisiting media persons at the trainingcommand headquarter of the outfitlocated in the interior jungle of Ukhruldistrict near Indo-Myanmar border onMay 5 reiterated that they would notcome to the negotiation table with GOIexcept on the issue of independence andsovereignty of Manipur.

In his first press conference in thelast three decades, vice presidentNgouba, who is also the chief of armystaff of the People’s Liberation Army(PLA), the armed wing of the outfit,founded on 25 September 1978 withthe aim of restoring Manipur’ssovereignty said, “We are very clearabout this” adding that the party wouldnot say, “yes or no” to any proposedpolitical dialogue with theGovernment of India. “It does notmean that the party will not at all gofor a political dialogue,” the vicepresident said adding that no proposalfor a political dialogue from thegovernment of India has come and nosuch proposal was also given from theside of the RPF. Apart from the vicepresident, Takhellambam Leishemba,secretary, publicity, PukhrambamChaoyai, secretary bureau-III andThounaojam Robin Luwang, chief ofadministration and operations werealso present during the pressconference.

The Insurgent leader explaining thereasons for organizing the official pressconference to the visiting journalistssaid that the 2nd Party Congress washeld after a long period from July 14 toDecember 4 last year. “The firstcongress of the outfit was held in 1990.The party wants 35 general policies andprogrammes out of the resolutions

adopted at the party congress to bewidely publicized to the people ofManipur,” he said.

The second congress of the outfit,participated by 86 central cadres, alsore-elected/elected Irengbam Chaorenas president, Manoharmayum Ngoubaas vice president, Sanasam Gunen assecretary general, Wangkhem Ibohalas secretary health and family welfare,Nongmeikappam Honda as secretaryfinance, Laitonjam Chanu Yang assecretary organization, TakhellambamLeishemba as secretary publicity,Moirangthem Suresh as secretarybureau I, mayengbam Gibon Luwangas secretary external affairs,Pukhrambam Chouyai as secretarybureau III and Jackie Samper Chiru assecretary minority affairs.

Replying to a question on thebanning of Hindi movies and otherHindi related entertainmentprogrammes in Manipur, the vicepresident said, “It is very sensitive tous because it relates with the culturaldomination.” RPF had imposed acomplete ban on transmission,screening and viewing of Hindi moviesand entertainment programmes whichare being used as a primary means of“Indianisation” since September 12,2000.

Responding to a question on Nagaissues, VP Ngouba said, “Naga causecannot be said to be detrimental toManipur’s cause.” The leader said thatthere had been times when Naga causeturned out to be quite helpful toManipur’s cause and it is believed thatit will be helpful in the future as well.Because, Nagaland is not a fewthousand kilometers away fromManipur but an immediate neighbor.Thus it will be wrong to think all Nagasas anti-Manipuris and it will also be

wrong to tale all Manipuris as anti-Nagas, the RPF leader opined. Hefurther admitted that both groups of theNSCN are having ceasefire agreementwith the Government of India. One isin the so-called peace process while theother one has been trying for a longtime to take part in it.

On the alleged involvement of theNSCS-IM in the election held underthe Constitution of India by fieldingcandidates who would lobby in theparliamentary for the Naga cause whilethe RPF has been boycotting allelections held under the IndianConstitution and banning anyone whois a former cadre of the outfit fromcontesting in the elections as acandidate, Ngouba said, “The politicaland social reality of the Nagas is a littledifferent from the political and socialreality of Manipur.” “That too, thepolitical and social reality that existedin the 80s and the political and socialreality of the 90s are also different fromthat of the present,” he felt.

The leader reacting to a questionon the decrease of its strike againstthe security forces said, “We have adifferent war dynamics, our successis not dependent on head count.”Though he reserved his comment oncertain policies of the party, the leadersaid his organization is planning tomobilize people residing in other partsof India as well to achieve their goal.He also admitted that his organizationhas established close link with CPI(Maoist) groups in the country sincethe last few years. “We need to unitewith like minded parties to strengthenour struggle. We sometime take helpform them, they also take help fromus too,” Ngouba added.

On the outfit’s relation withforeign countr ies , the leader


recalled, “Former prime minister ofBangladesh Khaleda Zia had onceacknowledged our struggle as al iberat ion struggle in theparliament.” “Many internationalNGOs are also extending support toour struggle,” he claimed and addedthe China which once providedsupport to the outfit in the past haschanged their policies. He howeverstated that the immediate neighourMyanmar which has much similarityin terms of cultural and traditionalvalues, historical perspectives etcwith Manipur will certainly lendsupport. On the outfit’s declarationof ratifying a few protocols of theGeneva Convention in 1997, Ngoubasaid that the party declaration is stillbinding and abides by the protocols.

On another question whether theRPF believes in the United Nationshelping Manipur regain in its localindependence and sovereignty, Ngoubasaid that it is a historical process. Theparty would find means to do what itcan within the international parametersand there will be many things thatothers can do as well. There arechanges in what India could do in thepast, what it can do now to influencethe international community, the RPFleaders said and added that there arenow changes in the present role of Indiacompared to its past role.

Even in the international arena, thenations irrespective of big or small havethe power to influence others, which arechangeable, Ngouba pointed out. The

general suspicion is that whether themilitary and economic clout of Indiawill be able to change the mindset ofthe country and its people of whose helpthe party wants to seek, he added. Butit is not believable that only thosecountries which have money and powercan influence the existing determinedpolicies and judgments of the rest ofthe countries, he said.

On India’s influence over the UNand other countries regarding notextending support to the insurgentgroups of Manipur, the RPF leaderreplied that it is not always true thatonly the rich and powerful countries caninfluence the relationship among thenations and change the prevailing order.He said, “It’s quite natural for India totry to do the same. India will doanything to protect its interest. For ustoo, we, as a nation - big or small - shalldo what ought to be done. We arecarrying on with our liberationmovement with the conviction that it’snot the rich and powerful countriesalone that shape the internationalrelations.”

Ngouba further pointed out that theparties involved in the war seem toforget that there are two sides in the job.It’s not a war that is played on the scriptof drama. There are two opposing sidesin a war. It’s the people that either ofthe two sides tries to bring to its side.People are kind of a trophy - a prize ofwar. He said since people are thedecisive factor in the principles of arevolutionary war, it’s the side on which

the people stand the unfailingly wins.Its significance is known to allconcerned. However, the means totranslate this significance into realityseems somewhat difficult on the sideof the revolutionary groups. But itdoesn’t happen to be all that difficulton the part of the enemy since, apartfrom having one point somethingbillion people, its economy is includedin the one to ten ranks in the world.Moreover it’s a country rising inmilitary and technology.

“However if they are asked, doesthis make them believe that they willwin the fight, they say no,” says theRPF leader referring to newspaperreports in which army commanders andgenerals during their visit in the regionhad said that the military can not solvethe issue. He also admitted that theinsurgent groups lacked means andresources for taking forward andworking harder on the situation, notonly in terms of materials but also inmoral and other issues.

There will be no question of theenemy winning as it has larger numberof population and is bigger or we willbe defeated since ours is a small nationwith lesser population. It’s just that theyare taking a little more advantages, hefelt. Regarding the mass mobilizationby the RPF/PLA for its movement, hesaid that all the (revolutionary) partiesfelt the necessity of mass participationin the liberation movement.[Courtesy: The North East Sun, May 31, 2009.]

Comrade Kobad Ghandy is a role model to be emulated by the new generation of youth that is being estranged from itsown people by the elitist, slavish, anti-people colonial education system and selfish values promoted by the pro-imperialistrulers. Let us unite to fight against the attempts by the Indian state to persecute revolutionary intellectuals, Maoist leadersand fighters like comrade Kobad Ghandy who had dedicated their entire lives for the liberation of the people from theclutches of imperialist, feudal and comprador capitalist exploitation and oppression. Maoists are servants of the peoplewhile Manmohans, Chidambarams and Raman Singhs are servants of the imperialists, feudal forces and the lumpen,parasitic, mafia capitalist class. Maoists are fighting selflessly for the liberation of the oppressed while ManmohanSinghs Chidambarams, Raman Singhs and Co are the oppressors spreading terror among the people.

Azad,

Spokesperson,Central Committee, CPI(Maoist)

PM


COMMUNIST PARTY OF INDIA (MAOIST)CENTRAL COMMITTEE

Press Release: September 29, 2009

Fight for the unconditional release of Maoist leader comrade Kobad Ghandy! Maoists arechampions of people’s cause; Expose the reactionary propaganda that Maoists are terrorists!!

As part of their all-round brutal offensive against the CPI(Maoist) and the ongoing people’s war in India, the Sonia-Manmohan-Chidambaram fascist clique at the Centre and the various exploiting class parties in the states, irrespective oftheir colour, have engaged their lawless repressive state apparatus to eliminate the central and state leadership of our Party.Exactly a month after the arrest of a Polit Bureau member of our Party, comrade Sumit, from Ranchi on August 19, andfour months after the abduction and brutal murder of our Central Committee member com Patel Sudhakar, another PolitBureau member and a senior leader of the CPI(Maoist), comrade Kobad Ghandy, was arrested from Delhi. ComradeKobad Ghandy had just returned from a trip to the guerrilla zone. The arrest of comrade Kobad Ghandy is being touted asa big success of the Intelligence officials while it was actually a result of the betrayal by a weak element in the Party whowas acting as his courier. He was betrayed by his courier who led the SIB from AP and the Intelligence wing in Delhi to theappointment spot in Bhikaji Cama Place in South Delhi. The police claimed that he was arrested on the night of 20th

September, but the actual arrest was made on 17th. The prompt reaction from various democratic and civil rights organizationsfoiled the plan of the Intelligence agencies and the police officials to torture and murder him as is their usual norm. TheCC, CPI(Maoist) hails the efforts made by the various democratic forces in defending the life of comrade Kobad Ghandyand appeals to them to fight against the heinous attempts of the reactionary rulers to implicate him in false cases, toconduct Narco tests and to mentally harass him.

Comrade Kobad Ghandy, who hails from a rich, elitist background, had abandoned everything and mingled with theoppressed masses serving them selflessly for almost four decades. He lived with the unorganized workers, adivasi peasants,and the urban poor and became popular among the oppressed sections of the Indian people. He organized revolutionaryactivity in Maharashtra during the 1970s and became a member of the Central Committee of erstwhile CPI(ML)[PW] in1981. He continued as a member of the CC of the merged CPI(Maoist) in 2004 and was elected to the Polit Bureau afterthe Unity Congress—9th Congress in February 2007. He played a crucial role in bringing out the Party publications inEnglish and was also looking after the subcommittee on Mass Organisations set up by the CC besides other works. Thearrest of comrade Kobad Ghandy is a great loss to the CPI(Maoist) and the Indian revolution.

The reactionary rulers were elated by this temporary success and the wily Chidambaram had congratulated the Intelligenceagencies for the ‘prize catch’. Like true heirs to George Bush these state terrorists have stepped up their propaganda thatthe Maoists and the Maoist leader comrade Kobad Ghandy are terrorists. They churn out numbers to show how thousandshave become victims of Maoist violence. But the fact is: while the Maoists had punished only the repressive forces of thestate, the anti-people feudal forces and the police agents, it is the police, para-military forces and the armed vigilante gangslike the salwa judum that are continuously carrying out a mass murder campaign completely destroying over 800 tribalvillages, murdering over 500 adivasis and raping over a hundred adivasi women in Dantewada and Bijapur districts alone.Same is the story in Bihar, Jharkhand, Andhra Pradesh, West Bengal’s Lalgarh and other areas, Orissa, Maharashtra, andso on. This 21st century breed of Goebbels can never fool the people through their outright lies about the Maoists who liveamong the people, who live for the people, and who have no other interests than those of the oppressed people. Nonewould believe that the freedom-loving Maoists who are fighting for the oppressed people undergoing countless sacrificesand facing tremendous hardships and brutal repression by the police would terrorise the very same people for whoseliberation they have been waging a bitter war against the Indian state. It is a Tata, a Mittal, a Jindal, a Vedanta, a Ruia andtheir loyal representatives like Manmohan, Chidambaram, Raman Singh that are terrified by the Maoists who are challengingtheir exploitation and oppression of the adivasis and the abundant wealth in the vast adivasi belt.


STOP THIS MASS MURDER IN THE INTERESTS OF IMPERIALIST MNCS AND COMPRADOR BUSINESS HOUSES!

PEOPLE OF THE ENTIRE COUNTRY! UNITE TO WAGE A DETERMINED WAR AGAINST STATE TERROR!!The Sonia-Manmohan-Chidambaram (SMC) fascist clique has stepped up its cruel war against the people in the areas of

armed struggle led by the Maoists. It launched its biggest-ever armed onslaught on the adivasis and the CPI(Maoist) leadingthem from the second half of September this year. Having turned mad and desperate after the dismal failure of their four-year-long state-sponsored counter-revolutionary terrorist campaign of mass murder of adivasis, mass rapes of adivasi women, anddestruction of adivasi villages and property in the name of salwa judum, the Congress-BJP fascist combine had begun thebiggest-ever state terrorist offensive in the vast adivasi-inhabited hinterland in order to pave way for the unbridled plunder ofthe region by imperialist MNCs and comprador big business houses.

The SMC fascist clique had drawn up an elaborate conspiratorial plan under the guidance of the US imperialists to carry outmass extermination of the adivasis so as to loot the enormous mineral and forest wealth in the region. Several thousand croresof rupees are paid to the faithful brokers like Chidambaram, Raman Singh, Naveen Patnaik and others by the MNCs and theIndian big business houses to suppress the armed uprisings of the adivasi masses in the region stretching from PaschimiMidnapur-Purulia-Bankura to North Andhra and North Telengana. Chidambaram, the Indian avatar of Adolf Hitler had finalizedthe plan during his trip to Washington last fortnight.

The hideous plan includes aerial bombardment of some Maoist-held areas even at the cost of heavy civilian casualties,destruction of several clusters of villages and resettling the inhabitants in Vietnam-type “strategic hamlets” which they hadalready tried through the salwa judum with limited success, setting up permanent heavily-fortified police camps in the interiorregions after clearing up the region of Maoists and adivasi peasantry, and carrying out propaganda campaign against theMaoists through cultural performances, media ads, and so on. On September 25th at least a dozen adivasis were murdered bythe CRPF and other repressive forces of the state in the district of Bijapur. A week prior to this at least 30 adivasis weremurdered in Singanamadugu in the Palachalma forest in Dantewada district by Chidambaram’s Cobras after they were beatenback by the Maoist guerrillas and losing six of their men.

In a move that reminds us of the desperate morale-boosting trips to Iraq and Afghanistan by Donald Rumsfeld, GeorgeBush and Co, the US imperialist agent Chidambaram too rushed to Raipur and Ranchi on September 25 to boost up the moraleof the central forces deployed in these states and assured the state governments of all assistance in suppressing the Maoists. Itis clear that the SMC clique is all set to carry out a blood-bath in vast parts of the country where the people’s war is surgingahead. And to justify this hideous plan these Indian offspring of Goebbels have intensified the psychological war throughmedia ads against the Maoists. The photos of police agents and Special Police Officers punished by the Maoists are prominentlypublished in the ads in a vain attempt to prove that revolutionary violence by the Maoists is senseless. This cheap trick cannotfool the people who are witness to the daily violence perpetrated by the reactionary rulers and their lawless armed gangs calledthe security forces. Thousands of Maoist revolutionaries and even a greater number of innocent civilians were murdered bythese repressive forces in the past four decades. In just four years of the bloody salwa judum campaign since June 2005, over500 adivasis were brutally murdered by the combined forces of salwa judumn goondas, police and central forces in twodistricts of Chhattisgarh alone. Can Chidambaram succeed in fooling the people through his Goebbels’ propaganda? Suchcheap propaganda is certain to ultimately back-fire on his face.

The CC, CPI(Maoist) appeals to all revolutionary, democratic and peace-loving forces to unite to resist this fascist country-wide offensive by the Central and state governments, build a mass movement to force the reactionary rulers to stop this massmurder of the adivasi people, and extend solidarity and all kinds of help to the victims of this bloody state terrorist violence. Itcalls upon the entire rank and file of the Party, the brave PLGA fighters, and the revolutionary masses to rise up courageouslyto confront the brutal offensive unleashed by the imperialist agents ruling our country, to prepare for immense sacrifices in thiswar of resistance, and by displaying exemplary steadfastness and courage to inflict severe blows on the mercenary CoBRAsand other state-hired forces that are causing havoc in the areas of armed struggle.



Azad,Spokesperson,Central Committee, CPI(Maoist)



Azad,Spokesperson,Central Committee, CPI(Maoist)

Hail the Heroic Resistance of Maoist PLGA against the CoBRA-led massive brutal offensive in Dandakaranya!

Condemn the mass murder of unarmed adivasis by the Chidambaram-Raman Singh’s armed goons!!

On 18 September 2009, Chidambaram-Raman Singh’s central para-military and state police mercenaries led by the specially-trained CoBRA commandos began their blood-bath in the forests of Dandakaranya to establish the ‘rule of law’ of the imperialistMNCs, comprador big business houses and unscrupulous contractors. Code-named ‘Operation Green Hunt’, the biggest-everoffensive till date, mobilized around 4000 CRPF and BSF troops of the Centre, STF and other special police forces fromChhattisgarh, and the Grey Hounds from Andhra Pradesh. Around 600 commandos of the CoBRA force led the anti-Maoist,anti-adivasi operation. The Operation Green Hunt which was unleashed in Kishtaram-Gollapalli area in Dantewada district, isitself a part of the larger ‘Operation Godavari’ encompassing the states of Chhattisgarh, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra andOrissa which is meant to turn Godavari into a river of blood of innocent adivasis. All these brutal so-called mopping-upoperations are planned and executed by a unified command set up to co-ordinate the police forces of seven states besides thecentral forces. Simultaneous operations are launched in Jharkhand, Bihar and West Bengal so as to cover the entire adivasi-inhabited region stretching from Paschimi Midnapur-Bankura-Purulia in West Bengal to Srikakulam-Vishakhapatnam-Vizianagaram in North Andhra Pradesh and Khammam in North Telengana.

The Maoist PLGA guerrillas beat back the massive brutal offensive most courageously and wiped out at least six CoBRAmercenaries including two assistant commandants, one SI, and three other CoBRAs. At least 20 more Cobra personnel are saidto be missing after the operation. This is the biggest ever loss suffered by the CoBRA commandos. Demoralised by the seriouslosses, these mercenaries pounced on the surrounding adivasi villages, caught several unarmed adivasis and murdered them incold blood. After this ghastly massacre, these ‘brave’ commandos claimed that 30 Maoists were killed in a series of encounters.Thus the ‘rule of jungle law’ of Manmohan Singh-Chidambaram-Raman Singh was implemented.

The brutal onslaught launched by central and state forces in the forests of Dandakaranya reveals the extreme demoralizationand utter desperation of the imperialist-backed Sonia-Manmohan-Chidambaram clique at the Centre, and Raman Singh’ssaffron regime in Chhattisgarh, whose plans to isolate the Maoists and to lay their dirty hands on the vast mineral wealth in theadivasi-inhabited regions in Eastern and Central India or the so-called Red Corridor, have come to a nought. Chidambaram andhis bunch of Washington-trained gangsters in the Home Ministry first outlawed the CPI(Maoist) and declared it as a terroristorganization. Then they stepped up their savage state terror and state-sponsored terror in the name of establishing the ‘rule oflaw’. It is the massive participation of the adivasi masses, led by the CPI(Maoist), into militant struggles against the anti-people policies of the government that has rattled the rulers and prompted them to unleash a brutal reign of state terror in thename of countering the so-called terrorism of the Maoists. However, with the staunch support of the adivasis masses, the PLGAled by the CPI(Maoist) had heroically confronted and defeated several police offensives causing considerable losses to thesecurity forces. Neither the CoBRAs nor other commando forces trained in jungle warfare, nor the Rashtriya Rifles of theIndian Army which the desperate rulers want to deploy, can suppress the just movement led by the Maoists whose roots arefirmly entrenched among the vast oppressed masses of India.

We call upon the entire Party ranks, the heroic fighters of PLGA, and the members of all revolutionary mass organizationsto mobilise the masses all over the country into militant movements against the brutal onslaught by the Congress-led UPAgovernment and the BJP’s Raman Singh government in Dandakaranya. We call upon all democratic-minded organizations andindividuals, and the entire people of the country to condemn with one voice the fascist onslaught unleashed by the Central andstate governments on the adivasi peasant masses and the Maoists who are leading them in their struggle against displacement,exploitation and oppression by the imperialist MNCs, comprador big business houses and the parasitic Indian state.

Owned, Edited, Printed & Published by P. Govindan Kutty, Peroor house, Tripunithura, N.F. Ernakulam, Kerala - 682 301,Printed at Anugraha Printers, Perumbavoor for Cherry Printers, Mannoor, Keezhillam - 683 541

Regd. with the RNI No.: KER ENG/2000/2051 Rs. 15/=

Date post:	27-Jan-2015
Category:	News & Politics
Upload:	guestbcb97f
View:	113 times
Download:	3 times

Peoplesmarch November 2009

News & Politics