There cannot be a UCPN (Maoist) without Baburam Bhattarai

JUL 08 -
Amidst disagreements regarding key appointments within the UCPN (Maoist), Vice-Chairman Baburam Bhattarai stepped down from his post. Bhattarai’s announcement comes just as political parties are attempting to bring the dissident Mohan Baidya-led CPN-Maoist into the ongoing Constituent Assembly (CA) election process. In this context, the Post’s Kamal Dev Bhattarai and Darshan Karki spoke to Mumaram Khanal, a former Central Committee of the then CPN (Maoist) turned political analyst, about the reasons behind Bhattarai’s move, the CPN-Maoist’s opposition to polls and the impact current developments in the UCPN (Maoist) could have on national politics.

How do you view Baburam Bhattarai stepping down as vice-chairman of the UCPN (Maoist)?

Going by the norms, procedures and timing he chose to step down, I think it is a publicity stunt. Issues of handing over leadership to the next generation have definitely been raised within the UCPN (Maoist) but they were limited to talk and never practiced. So at a time like this, when the intra-party feud regarding appointments had reached its pinnacle and gone beyond manageable limits, Bhattarai’s resignation to “promote the new generation” does not tally.

Are you implying that this move is a manifestation of disagreements between Bhattarai and Prachanda?

Yes. Bhattarai has repeatedly said that he was in the opposition for 25 years. What he means is “I should lead the party now” or “I should be Chairman”. Party cadres also talk of last August when Prachanda told Bhattarai to get ready to lead the party. As long as Mohan Baidya was in the party, there was a balance. With Baidya quitting the party, Bhattarai felt that his position in the party does not befit him. His resignation is an indication that he was no longer satisfied with the vice-chairman position he shared with Narayan Kaji Shrestha.

How will this affect intra-party dynamics?

There cannot be a UCPN (Maoist) without Bhattarai. It will be divided and disintegrate. Two tendencies have persisted in the party. The first was the somewhat autocratic politics or ideology pursued by Mohan Baidya and the other was the democratic tendencies of Baburam Bhattarai. Prachanda’s role had always been to balance the two. So a UCPN (Maoist) without Bhattarai is unimaginable.

How will it affect national politics and elections?

There are no disagreements on political agendas within the UCPN (Maoist). It is only a struggle for party posts and prestige. And it is a personal struggle, where each person seems to be fighting against everyone else. After adopting parliamentary democracy, all party members have realised that posts within the party result in material benefits. Thereby, internal feuds have centered around those posts. It will definitely affect national politics. First, the party has already been divided once. Second, it projects the UCPN (Maoist) as weak when elections are just around the corner. It only fuels worries that the party is not ready for elections.

Moving on, how do you see the activities of the CPN-Maoist and how will they affect elections?

The CPN-Maoist talks of a 'people’s constitution' but it has not articulated the political steps to achieve this. There is confusion in that regard. But it seems to be clear about wanting to disband the current government and establishing people’s rule. Looking at experiences around the world, such an aim has only yielded two outcomes. Either such forces are vanquished by the state or they have joined politics through peaceful talks. The Baidya faction has not clarified its current stance in that regard. But it has made clear that its next steps will not be a revival of the insurgency.  It instead talks of insurrection. But an insurrection is not possible through the initiative of a single political party.

What is the difference between an insurgency and an insurrection and where is the CPN-Maoist headed?

An insurrection means that the CPN-Maoist will definitely not go for another armed struggle. But as the party was only formed recently, it is clearly afraid of what will happen if it goes to elections. So it might not take part in elections as long as it is afraid of the outcome. However, if other political parties give it space in national politics and admit that it has an important role in the balance of power and if the government shows some flexibility, there is a possibility that the CPN-Maoist will still join national politics.

Does this mean that the Baidya party will agree to go for CA elections and accept the agenda of making a constitution through the CA?

The argument that it is not necessary to hold elections is not just an argument offered only by the Baidya party. Civil society and professional organisations have also made this argument. A constitution can be made through other means. We have already had a CA that could not make a constitution. Now, we are adopting the same procedure and expecting a constitution to be made. Only political decisions remained to be agreed upon in the last days of the erstwhile CA. So these political decisions must be agreed upon first. If we go for another CA election without agreeing on these contentious issues, a constitution will not be made. Issues of federalism and power sharing must be sorted first. As far as ownership is concerned, a powerful commission can be made to look into all the decisions made by the thematic committees in the  former CA. Once this is done, we can hold elections to the parliament and local bodies. Another CA will only prolong the transition. It cannot promulgate a constitution. Therefore, the issue raised by the Baidya party is genuine.

Are you suggesting that elections are not necessary?

Democratic processes are derailed in the absence of elections. They need to be brought back on track. Elections are a must for those who want democratic institutions to function. But holding or not holding elections is not the definition of a democracy. Without an answer to what the elections will do, a political environment for holding elections will not be created. In politics, there is possibility for flexibility no matter how rigid the demands might seem.

Will the CPN-Maoist ever let go of their demands?

The CPN-Maoist may not let go of its demands because its opposition to elections has placed it at the centre of national politics. The party wasn’t very popular before and there was no context for it either. But once the talk of elections began, the popular belief is that it will disrupt elections. So why would it let go? It will use this opportunity in the next three-four months to build its political strength and grow in size. However, its bottom line could be flexible.

As even the UCPN (Maoist) is not certain about elections, is there a possibility of change in government under the pretext of bringing Baidya onboard?

It is possible. If elections are not held on November 19, then this government will not remain. If elections are held on that exact date, then Baidya will not take part in elections, even if purely to save face. But if elections are postponed by five days to a week, this government will remain and even Baidya might take part in elections after a few days of face-saving. If pushed back by three-five months, this government won’t exist.

Do the large parties want the CPN-Maoist to take part in elections?

They are all looking at ways to make the CPN-Maoist a pawn for elections. The Nepali Congress wants the CPN-Maoist to take part in the elections by collaborating with smaller communist parties so that votes between it and the UCPN (Maoist) are divided. The CPN-UML wants the Baidya faction to take part in elections but only as part of an electoral alliance with it. The UCPN (Maoist) wants Baidya to either denounce elections completely or contest elections in an alliance with the mother party.  So other parties are trying to fit the CPN-Maoist into their electoral agenda. All of this has resulted in the recent focus on the Baidya party.

Labels: Interview