These days, CPN (Maoist Center) is doing everything it can to bounce back in Nepali politics—either by training party cadres or by conducting massive membership distribution drives. Are they doing the right things to get back on the political stage? Also, why would the people join the Maoists rather than the Nepali Congress or the CPN-UML? There have also been discussions on finding a successor to even Prachanda, who often expresses his desire to unite all left-wing groups. Pratik Ghimire of ApEx talked to political analyst and Tribhuvan University lecturer Bishnu Dahal on the issue.
Is the revival of Maoists possible?
Politics is a game of possibilities, so we can’t close the door to any event in the future. But it is not a straightforward path for them to reach that destination.
What steps should the Maoists take to ensure their revival?
The progolonged disputes between China and India affect all surrounding nations—which make the Asian geopolitics always volatile. So, firstly, Maoist should clarify their stand in Asian and world politics. Their economic plans, foreign policy, stand on climate and environmental issues, and agenda for the betterment of the livelihood of Nepalis are the things that will matter in the coming days.
If they succeed in convincing the public that they are indeed in favor of progress and that their armed revolution led to the restructuring of the state, they might stand a chance to bounce back.
Are the Maoists different from the Nepali Congress and CPN-UML? How?
If we look at the historical background of the Nepali Congress, it claims to have gradually accustomed the people about democratic practices and developed the nation through an open economic policy.
Similarly, the CPN-UML advocated for a mixed economy with people’s participation in social development. But, the Maoists said the structure of the state was what was keeping us behind in development.
So, the Maoists’ view differed from that of other parties. But as of now, I find that all political parties are the same, it’s just that they have a different name and a logo.
Also read: JSPN fissures will benefit Nepali Congress
The Maoists succeeded in implementing their agenda, but they focused on changing the ruler. They didn’t deal with the lifestyle of the masses—whose condition never changed, even when the state was restructured.
Nepali political parties could not establish a culture of competition. Rather, they opted to share power and resources through consensus.
Who do you think will lead Maoists after Prachanda?
We changed the structure of the country but not economic policy. A party only needs a new leader if it changes its policy. But Maoists have not done that.
So, whoever comes in Prachanda’s place, little will change. Yet, I find a quote from Baburam Bhattarai relatable in this scenario, “We have achieved the agenda set by the Maoist revolution, so there is no option but to dissolve this party and come up with newer progressive agendas.”
There is no place for a new leadership without new agendas. But, if you ask me about Prachanda’s successor, I see Janardan Sharma and a couple of others.
Do Maoists have the strength to unite all the left-wing groups in Nepal?
Prachanda has the potential to either unite or break other communists’ groups, but what matters here is, can he prove the necessity of such unification? I don’t think so.
