People's War in Nepal
Dramatic Advances

As our magazine goes to press in early April 2002, the People’s War in Nepal has been facing a difficult test of strength with the reactionary regime and its Royal Nepal Army. On both sides the level of fighting has increased dramatically, as the newly arising people’s power struggles to be born, while the guardians of the old, decrepit feudal and pro-imperialist order are waging an increasingly desperate and ferocious effort to stamp out the flames of revolution and the aspirations of the masses.

As indicated in the previous issue of AWTW, the revolution in Nepal had already been developing at a dizzying pace in the year 2001. Larger and higher-quality assaults by the people’s armed forces against the authorities of the old state resulted in some major defeats for the enemy, with large numbers killed and wounded and important stocks of weapons and ammunition captured. From its early origins in 1996, when it began with only a few outmoded rifles, the revolutionary armed forces in Nepal have developed into a powerful People’s Liberation Army (PLA) capable of waging not only guerrilla attacks but also, and increasingly, major assaults involving hundreds of combatants using modern weapons seized from the enemy.

The advances in the People’s War have gone hand-in-hand with dramatic shifts in the political landscape in Nepal. The ruling structures, increasingly battered by the forces of revolution, have proved increasingly incapable of serving the interests of the reactionary ruling classes. Even as all the reactionaries huddled together tightly to protect themselves from a more aroused people, their class nature and their fear of looming disaster has led to sharp, bitter and sometimes deadly conflict within their ranks of exploiters and their hangers-on.

Events took a particularly sharp turn after the Royal Palace massacre in May 2001, when King Birenda and most of his family were murdered. Coming right on the heels of the resounding victories of the armed forces under the leadership of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) (CPN(M)) in April and May before the Palace massacre and June and July following it, in late July 2001 a new Prime Minister was appointed, who declared a ceasefire and opened negotiations with the CPN(M). The cease-fire lasted for a period of four months, and was a kind of armed truce during which both sides made preparations for the inevitable renewal of hostilities.

On the reactionary side, the class enemy used the period of the cease-fire to regroup their badly disorganised and demoralised forces in the face of the losses in the People’s War and the crumbling of the monarchy, which has always been the linchpin of the feudal system in Nepal. In particular, it was necessary to try to establish the authority of the new King Gyrendra over the Royal Nepal Army, the pillar of the state apparatus.

The cease-fire corresponded to the wishes of broad sections of people in Nepal, especially in the cities and from the middle and upper classes, who hoped that a peaceful solution could be found to the problems of the country. Both sides to the conflict strove to appeal to this section of people. The CPN(M) also made use of the cease-fire period to consolidate the process of forming a nation-wide people’s government and to further organise the People’s Liberation Army.

Three rounds of negotiations were held. The Maoists, as the CPN(M) is popularly known, called for the establishment of a constituent assembly, formation of an interim government and the abolition of the monarchy. In the course of the negotiations the CPN(M) withdrew its demand for an immediate abolition of the monarchy, saying that this matter could be referred to the constituent assembly.

During the course of the negotiations came 11 September. This important development sharply underlined that events in Nepal, including the unfolding of the struggle for state power, do not take place in a vacuum. The negotiations in Nepal were being closely surveyed by Nepal’s reactionary neighbours (China and, above all, India). For several months, while the maps on the imperialist news broadcasts of the Afghanistan theatre of war clearly showed Nepal, their commentators were strangely silent, despite the drama being played out in the country. The US and Britain were guarded in their comments, basically saying that whether the CPN(M) and the revolution in Nepal were to be considered “terrorist” or not would depend on the outcome of the negotiations. In other words, they held out both a carrot and stick.

At the same time Nepal’s reactionary ruling class, like many of their look-alikes in charge of repressing the people in other Third World countries, felt emboldened by the so-called “war on terrorism” and the hope that in the new international climate they could count on US imperialist guns and money to root out the revolutionary forces. The demands of the CPN(M), representing the felt needs of the great majority of the people of the country, were disregarded and the ruling class essentially demanded what would have been an abject surrender — recognition of Nepal’s reactionary institutions, such as the monarchy, army and parliament. Meanwhile, the Royal Nepal Army was continuing to press ahead with its preparations for an all-out assault on the revolution, a new paramilitary force aimed only at the Maoists was being prepared and terror was unleashed against revolutionary students in the capital, Kathmandu.

The rupture of the negotiations came on 23 November with an announcement by CPN(M) Chairman Prachanda. Two days later massive attacks took place in twelve districts throughout Nepal. The CPN(M) struck especially hard in the Dang valley and its district capital Ghorai. All of the district administrative offices were seized, including the police headquarters and the local prison. Forty-five or more security personnel were killed, including a number of Royal Nepal Army soldiers, and many more were wounded or taken prisoner. The press reported that hundreds of weapons were seized, including automatic rifles and machine guns. In Kalidamara a 46-member patrol of the recently formed paramilitary Armed Police Force Unit was ambushed and 44 were reported missing. According to the January 2002 edition of People’s March, a revolutionary journal from India, for “four days after the Friday attacks battles raged throughout Nepal”.

The military attacks, the cutting edge of the people’s offensive, were accompanied by powerful political blows as well. A central people’s government of 37 members was created, representing a wide section of districts, national minorities and political tendencies in Nepal. The new government is called the United Revolutionary People’s Council and is led by Comrade Baburam Bhatterai, a senior leader of the CPN(M).

The response by the class enemy was swift. On 26 November, King Gyrendra declared a state of emergency throughout the country. The government banned the CPN(M) and any organisation affiliated with it as “terrorist”. The emergency declaration “suspended all constitutional rights, including freedom of speech, the right to assembly, the right to move throughout the kingdom, press and publication rights, the right to information, right to property, right to privacy and the right to constitutional remedy” (People’s March) and granted the government the right to preventive detention. Accompanying this were the typical efforts of the reactionaries to manufacture divisions in the Party, anointing first one and then another leader as “hard-line” or “moderate”. Like previous efforts of this type, these lies were shattered by the solid unity and determination of the Party and its leadership.

The offices of Jandisha and Janadesh, two newspapers that support the positions of the CPN(M), were raided and all the staff present were arrested. Other journalists for left journals were also taken into custody. One issue of Nepal’s leading English language daily, the Kathmandu Post, was banned because it contained pictures of Maoists. Journalists from many political positions complained of arbitrary arrests by the government (one journalist sharply opposed to the People’s War protested that by late March, 75 journalists had been arrested only for exercising their profession).

The Royal Nepal Army (RNA) was ordered to carry out a nation-wide offensive against the Maoists. According to reports from the CPN(M), these operations were taking place using the typical methods of reactionary armies past and present, lashing out viciously, but blindly, and taking revenge on common people by murder, rape, theft and torture. While a number of Maoist fighters have been martyred, it is mainly villagers who have been the focus of the enemy’s fury.

The new laws made parliament more and more irrelevant, exposing it as a meaningless “talk shop”, while the real business of the state is conducted by the executive and especially the military. Even Nepal’s colourful array of revisionists and opportunists were restricted in some of their political ­movements.

Despite the efforts of the class enemy to portray the Maoists as terrorists and responsible for the violence that has resurged throughout the country, reports to AWTW indicate that the great majority of the population, even many of those who had been holding out unrealistic hopes for progress in the negotiations, are clearly seeing through the government’s lies and holding the latter fully responsible for the war.

During this period, the Nepalese ruling class turned to its imperialist backers, as well as to India and China, for support against the Maoists. The CPN(M) Standing Committee of the Political Bureau adopted a resolution noting that, “It is now crystal clear that the brutal aggression in Afghanistan was, objectively and ultimately, a part of the grotesque strategy of US imperialism to establish a strong military base there for carrying out its plunder and hegemony in South Asia. Western imperialism under the cover of war against terrorism is blatantly moving ahead in its ‘master plan’ to ruthlessly crush the right of rebellion practised by the oppressed masses of South Asia. Caught in the quagmire of hatred, anger and rebellion of the masses, the ruling classes of all the countries of this region are playing the dirty game of ensuring their own survival against the masses by dancing to the tunes of imperialism in abject subservience.” (Maoist Information Bulletin, Number 2, an occasional publication of the CPN(M))

It was the reactionary regime of India that took the most aggressive posture in support of the government. It promised to deliver several helicopters to the RNA, as well as all sorts of other military equipment. Jaswant Singh, who at that time was holding both the Foreign Minister and Defence Minister portfolios, was the first international leader to officially label the CPN(M) as terrorist with all that implies in today’s world situation. Even Colin Powell himself did not go that far on his visit to Kathmandu on 18-19 January, carefully avoiding applying the “terrorist” label. While pledging military equipment and help to the Nepalese reactionaries, Powell also clucked his tongue about the government’s need to “eliminate poverty” and for an early end to the State of ­Emergency.

Under the guise of stopping Pakistani infiltrators from using Nepal to enter India, the Indian army began a major build-up along the entire length of the Nepalese border. On 22 March, Prime Minister Deuba went hat-in-hand to India to meet with Prime Minister Vajpayee. All accounts indicate that the main item on the agenda was co-operation against the CPN(M) and, more generally, against the revolutionary forces in the region. Deuba specifically demanded that action be taken against forces in India that support the People’s War in Nepal.¹ 

The war continued to develop in much the same way for several months. Every day was marked by armed clashes between the people’s armed forces and the RNA and by reprisal raids by the enemy forces. Various kinds of illegal political mobilisations took place under the leadership of the CPN(M) in both town and countryside. On 17 February the war leapt to an even higher plane, with a massive battle in the district town of Achham, a few days after the sixth anniversary of the initiation of the People’s War. (It also occurred shortly before the three-month expiration of the State of Emergency had to be submitted to Parliament, where a two-thirds vote would be required for its extension.) The world was astounded when the PLA carried out a massive assault on Achham. During six hours of fierce fighting, 143 soldiers, paramilitaries and government officials were killed. Huge stocks of weapons and ammunitions were carried off by the victorious PLA. A nearby airport was also captured and another 30 enemy security personnel killed. Only a few days later another big victory was won, when on 21 February Maoist rebels stormed a police post at Shitalpati in the Salyan district, killing at least 34 policemen, including two inspectors. These victories made headlines throughout the world.

This blow gave great heart to the masses in Nepal, as well as to their friends all over the world. At the same time it was a profoundly disorienting and panic-inducing blow to Nepal’s reactionary classes. Even though the reactionaries were well aware of the certainty of attacks on the anniversary of the People’s War and even though the district Administrator in Achham had been sending out more and more frantic calls for state protection, the state came face to face with its inability to defend all of its positions, even relatively important ones, at once from the revolutionary forces, which had been showing their capacity to attack suddenly in different parts of the country. As the echoes of the battle were still ringing, the nation-wide bandh (general strike) called for by the newly formed central people’s government, the United Revolutionary People’s Council, took place with resounding success.

Perhaps no forces were more shaken than the opportunists and revisionists. While they had been careful to play their assigned roles of making noises against the government and the State of Emergency, whilst focusing their attacks on the CPN(M), in the aftermath of Achham there was no more room for them to wiggle. In particular, the CPN (United Marxist-Leninists), referred to as “UML”, the largest opposition party in Nepal, was needed to vote for the extension of the State of Emergency. (Originally it had been floated out that perhaps the UML parliamentary members could simply arrange to be outside the hall during the vote and thus allow the State of Emergency to pass using that underhanded method. But in the wake of the CPN(M) victories, it seems that UML’s masters decided that only full and active endorsement of the government’s anti-people onslaught would do.) True to its form, the UML, friend and allied party of the opportunists, revisionists and even some wavering communist forces internationally, in the finest tradition of the traitors of the Second International who voted for war credits in the First World War or revisionists who have been helping reactionaries fight the Maoists in India, Peru, Turkey and elsewhere, voted 100 per cent for the extension of the State of Emergency. The only fig leaf (or was it just pure bribery?) that was accorded them was a promise by the government to carry out “poverty alleviation” schemes!

The badly stung Royal Nepal Army redoubled its efforts to take revenge. In mid-March, they announced with great fanfare that a camp in Rolpa had been raided and 68 “Maoists” killed. At the time of writing, we do not know the actual story of this development but it is important to note the words of Chairman Prachanda from only a few weeks before: “Any Nepalese who writes or speaks even a minimal truth has been branded as a ‘Maoist terrorist’ or his supporter. Whether a cadre of a political party or an anti-autocrat journalist, human rightist, social worker or intellectual of any ideological path; whether innocent, unarmed or common people engaged in small occupation for their livelihood in the rural areas; they are all made victims of the military terror and atrocities of feudal autocrats…. Baseless and false propaganda such as having killed 200 Maoists, though only 14 gallant warriors of the People’s Liberation Army had attained martyrdom while capturing the district headquarter of Solukhumbu, killing innocent peasants in the villages but gabbing falsely about encounters with the Maoists…

“Presently, the basic leadership of highest to lowest level of our Party has been safe and amidst the masses, successfully advancing activities. Of course, the enemy has killed many and revealed some of our good activists in urban areas, and many have been captured. They have captured our alternate Politburo member Comrade Rabindra Shrestha in the capital. Similarly, dozens of our fighters have attained martyrdom in the real and successful war with the enemies, setting historic records of bravery and sacrifice. Having captured thousands of our supporters and well-wishers in bazaars and easy areas, the enemy has been torturing them mentally and physically. All these facts show the losses to the movement. But when we compare this with the sacrifice inevitable in defending and developing the revolution against the ultimate and total force of the enemy, we see that it is, indeed, very minimal. Sacrifice of the part for the defence of the whole is a law of science.” (Interview with Comrade Prachanda made available to AWTW, early February 2002.)

Almost immediately after the PLA victories in Achham and Salyan, the US and the British imperialists began to sing a different tune. According to press accounts, “after a weekend visit to Achham and Salyan, US Ambassador Michael E. Malinowski compared the Maoists with al-Qaeda terrorists led by Osama bin Laden. ‘In democracies, the death of even one police officer or one solider is a community and national tragedy. I salute each and every police officer and soldier who has died at the hands of Maoist ­terrorists.’” (Spotlight, 1 March 2002)

The British imperialists sent the British Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs responsible for South Asia, Ben Bradshaw, to Kathmandu immediately after the attacks. He said, “Britain will certainly help Nepal. We have also experienced in Northern Ireland a similar kind of problem for 35 years. There is a need for a robust attack on this type of terrorism…. The insurgency has been ruthless and relentless. … The government has received greater sympathy from the world community after the latest ruthless assault. Any democratic government has the right to defend its citizens. After the 11 September attacks [in the United States], there has been a greater obligation to stop terrorism in the world. We have already passed legislation to stop terrorist propaganda.” (Spotlight)

Every great revolution, one that has truly aroused the masses in their millions and mobilised them in the fight to take political power, can only advance by confronting new problems and finding new solutions. Protracted people’s war, like all revolutionary processes, is full of sound and fury, sudden twists and turns, periods of rapid breakthrough punctuating periods of quantitative development. The drama of the unexpected creates even more favourable conditions for bringing out the Maoists’ greatest weapon – man’s conscious dynamic role in waging war.

The Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), under the leadership of its Chairman, Comrade Prachanda, has been steering the revolution through the turbulent seas whilst under constant fire from not only the reactionaries in Nepal but increasingly from the world’s leading imperialists, as well as the Indian reactionaries.

It is of the utmost importance that the new upsurge in the People’s War in Nepal is taking place at the very time that, the US imperialists are leading a world-wide “war on terrorism”, now focused a few hundred kilometres to the west of Nepal. The sacrifice and daring of the fighting peasants and workers of Nepal is making the Maoist alternative come alive in splendid colour for all those who care to see. With millions of the poor increasingly mobilised to struggle, with vast and deep support from all sections of society, urban as well as rural, the flimsy, threadbare label of “terrorist” cannot be made to stick at all. A new power, people’s power, is emerging and consolidating in the Himalayas, and it is already influencing the revolutionary situation as a whole in the vital South Asian region, home to one-fourth of humanity.

What frightens the imperialists the most is not just the blows that the reactionary armed forces have received at the hands of the People’s Liberation Army. It is that from the bottom of society, the millions of toiling masses who have been despised by the ruling class of Nepal as little more than “talking tools”, as the ancient Greeks referred to slaves, have shown that they can seize their destiny and challenge the chains of centuries of exploitation and reactionary tradition. They are showing once again that, as Mao put it, “the people and the people alone are the motive force in the making of world history.” In a time when, using the defeats of past socialist states, the imperialists have launched a propaganda onslaught to say that there is no alternative to a world of class division and exploitation, the thunder from the Himalayas fills those who hear its echo with hope and determination.

Endnotes

1 The CPN(M) also made some moves on the diplomatic stage with a letter signed by Comrade Prachanda as Chairman of the Party and Supreme Commander of the People’s Liberation Army and Comrade Bhatterai as convenor of the United Revolutionary People’s Council addressed to the United Nations, Indian, US and Chinese governments and the European Union denouncing the efforts of the Nepalese reactionaries to paint the insurgency as “terrorist” and calling on “all countries, international bodies and particularly the two immediate neighbours, India and China, not to interfere in the internal affairs of Nepal and let the Nepalese people decide their own political future themselves.”