I wrote to info@cpnm.org a few days back seeking an eDialogue with Dr. Baburam Bhattarai for this blog. I have not heard from them, and likely will not. So I guess I will go ahead and write an open letter to him and send it to the same email address.
But before I go into that, I would like to quote from Prachanda's second statement after Nepal's "2/1" because I see plenty of room for common ground between the democrats and the Maoists.
".....new life style and banner of liberation for the people of every class, caste, tribe, region and gender who were oppressed in the past by the feudal brahmanical old state ..... This is the time of rigorous birth pang for all of us when the People’s Democratic Republic is taking shape. ..... The dictatorial rule of king was imposed on Nepalese people in 2017 by the feudal elements through military power, hijacking the limited achievements of Nepalese people’s democratic struggle which started in and around 2007 and thereafter as a protest against the then Rana clan’s rule. Because of the plunder, corruption, smuggling, killings and terror unleashed during thirty years long royal family regime in the shape of Panchayat , the country was pushed down to the level of world’s most impoverished and vagabond country. ...... take democratic struggle of Nepali people toward completion, in real sense of the word ..... the monopoly of feudal palace over arms and military force ..... achieved yet another epoch making feat by dismantling the unilateral structure of governance based on feudal Hindu chauvinism by granting the rights of self-determination to the people of oppressed class, caste, region and gender and by forming regional autonomous republican governments that work as a prototype of Union of States and paving the way for the same with Nepalese features and laid the foundation of new national unity...... Now, Nepal is no longer a birth place to mercenary soldiers ..... King Virendra who was comparatively liberal and patriotic ..... Subsequently, a coordinated attempt was made to systematically defame and marginalise parliamentary reformist political parties ..... we had appealed to all the parliamentary forces of country to forge a broad alliance for constituent assembly and republicanism ..... We once again repeat our commitment to jointly move ahead with all the forces, on the basis of common minimum goal of constituent assembly and democratic republic. ..... unconditional constituent assembly in order to complete the democracy and expressed its readiness to talk to the ringleaders of old state ..... the possibility and rationality of talk with Gyanendra Shahi has ended in the aftermath of murdering of achievements of 046 by him ..... we also appeal to the United Nations and international community to halt all kinds of aids ..... we are committed to the democratic values and ready to cooperate with these countries and organizations. ..... No one now can stop the birth of new democratic Nepal."
I observe a few things here:
- The Maoists have long sought common ground with the democrats for a Democratic Republic. It is the democrats who have so far not reciprocated.
- The totality of their ideology can not be used against them. The UML itself continues to be a party with a long term communist dream. But all we have needed to deal with the UML is its short term commitment to the multi-party democratic framework. I think the Maoists have to be given the same option. But for that to happen, the democrats will have to move and agree to the Constituent Assembly idea and the idea of a Democratic Republic.
- Curiously, only such a broad political front of the Maoists and the democrats will bring down the level of violence in the country. Right now, violence is the only option the Maoists have to express their uncompromising vision of a Democratic Republic. But a broad front will give them a purely political outlet and violence will become less necessary.
- I believe in non-violent politics. You can get pretty "militant" within the democratic process, depending on how hard you are willing to work with your message, organization and fund-raising. But then peace-making requires that you deal with hitherto warring parties so as to bring the violence to an end, and to bring the players into the political mainstream where people still compete for influence but now it is a framework of electoral politics, not gunpower anymore. Think Northern Ireland. Think IRA. The Maoists and their violence will have to be given a similar outlet. You address their politics so they have the option to put down their guns.
- I must admit I am a little distrusting of the violent ways of the Maoists. But then I am even more distrusting of King G and his commitment to the democratic ideal. And I am very distrusting of the social agenda of the Nepali Congres, the UML and the RPP. We do not need 100% trust between us to do business with each other. What you seek is a Common Minimum Program.
- It is legitimate for the democrats to fear the Maoists will create a front with them to oust the Monarchists and then turn on them to reach their goal of a communist dictatorship. That fear is legitimate but it does not have to be crippling. Step one, you create a front with the Maoists for a Common Minimum Program of a Constituent Assembly. That front would include democratic parties that are for a Democratic Republic, as well those that are for a Constitutional Monarchy. Once that front gathers steam, step two, the monarch will have two options, to agree to such an Assembly, or be totally washed away. But you ensure mechanisms to guarantee all parties' acceptance of the Assembly's outcome, especially from the Maoists and the Monarchists, step three.
- The king himself offered a Constituent Assembly after taking over. It is sad the likes of Girija and Deuba never came to offering the same when they had the option to. As if the likes of Girija and Deuba are more Monarchists than the monarch himself. That is a sad state of affairs.
- I think the biggest reason the likes of the Nepali Congress and the UML do not want an alliance with the Maosts is that they do not like the Maoists' challenge to the high caste domination of the country that the Congress and the UML symbolize. That is despicable.
- I mean, what I like about Badri Mandal is he is the Sadbhavana's best hope to kick the Koiralas out of Morang. And I would like to see that happen. But for the short term, I am okay with a Sadbhavana-Congress alliance, as long as it is for a Constituent Assembly.
An Open Letter To Dr. Baburam Bhattarai
Dr. Bhattarai, hello. I watched a few video clips of you at your party's website, and there you are with your trademark cap. And I think I have seen you in person once, during the early 1990s. You were walking on your own, near what they now call the Democracy Wall in Kathmandu. I think it was you, I am pretty sure it was you, but I can't be sure. You looked pensive, and had a briefcase in your hand, no cap though, just the beard.
Most politicians, be they in Nepal, India, or the US, spend most of their time talking, no time listening, and even less time reading. But you are an exceptionally smart, well-read person. I respect your intellectual prowess.
Let me first state where I am coming from, ideologically speaking. I am a free marketeer, a one person one vote democrat, and a social progressive. And a Sadbhavana alumn now living in the US.
You and your party envision a federal structure for Nepal. And that speaks to the Sadbhavana alum in me a lot. You have taken the cause of Dalit and Janajati empowerment, something the Monarchists have been against, and the democrats have only paid lip service to. So I see common ground between you and me, the social progressive. I am for a Constituent Assembly, with or without the Maoists. So that is common ground between you and me, the one person one vote democrat. That is a lot of common ground.
As for the free marketeer, let me explain. I hope you will not mind if I said Gorbachev knows more about communit theory than you and Prachanda. After all, he was in a direct line of succession from Lenin himself. And he has said the market is it. The command economy does not deliver the goods.
But I must make it clear that I see a lot of deficiencies in the so-called free market economies of the world. There are basically three components to any economic unit, be it micro or macro. (1) Physical capital. (2) Financial capital. (3) Human capital.
My criticism of the market economies is that it has so far refused to put Human Capital on par with the other two. For example, there should be a creative partnership between the public and the private sectors to ensure lifelong education for everybody on the planet. Without that, there is no free market. Free trade can not be only about goods and services, it also has to apply to movements of labor.
Because of my major emphasis on Human Capital within a market concept, I think you and I can seek common ground there also.
And you will allow for the market. Lenin himself reintroduced limited markets after the 1917 takeover throught the NEP, New Economic Policy, because he immediately realized the command economy did not work. But he died an early death, and someone Lenin would have preferred did not succeed him ended up succeeding him. And out went the market, totally.
And the one person one vote concept can be expanded to have total campaign finance reform in the Nepali context, in a way that perhaps exists nowhere else. How about making it illegal for any politician or party to raise money? Instead, all political work, like party building and elections, are funded publicly through a democratic formula. Say the state gives each party an annual sum that is directly proportional to the number of votes that that party received in the last national elections. That would make multi-party democracy pretty classless, don't you think?
I can imagine collaborating with someone like you on further developing the concepts of Human Capital and Campaign Finance Reform, both in the national and global contexts.
But all that will have to be later.
I believe the need of the hour is for the democrats and the Maoists to forge a common front against the autocracy imposed in the country. For that the Maoists need to reassure the democrats that peaceful co-existence with the non-Maoists within a multi-party framework is something you and your party are capable of. I urge you to take steps to that effect. Please seize the moment.
