EXCERPTS
Myrepublica.com: Why did you abruptly leave for India as your party was heating up the streets in Kathmandu?
Ram Karki: There is a general perception in Nepal that when a political leader leaves for India it is to meet the government officials there. But it is also true that there is a sizable population including civil society and public figures in India, that wants friendly relations with Nepal and respects our independence and sovereignty. There is an organization called Nepal-India Friendship Forum. I went to the southern neighbor upon their invitation to talk about Nepal. Like striking two birds with one stone, there was misinformation and rumor being disseminated about the objectives and nature of our protest programs in Nepal. So I delivered the message to political parties, civil society and public in India that our protest program was democratic and in the interests of the people.
Myrepublica.com: Who did you meet in India?
Karki: There is no restriction for us to meet Indian leaders. What I have been saying since the Chungwang meeting --and even before that-- is that Nepal being a small country should maintain relations with as many countries as possible at different levels to protect our sovereignty. Secondly, there are no political parties in China, but there are many lobbies and sides. So we should develop multidimensional relations in China as well. In India there are numerous political parties, so we should deepen our relations with them. They may not agree with our ideology or maybe they are ultra-rightists, but the relations hold meaning. It is wrong to think that we should have relations with the governing party or the bureaucrats only. I met some leaders of National Democratic Alliance (NDA) and United Progressive Alliance (UPA). But the meetings were largely informal. I also met with the intellectuals, especially the leftist intellectuals. But I did not meet any bureaucrats.
Myrepublica.com: India played an important role in the 12-point pact between the political parties and then underground Maoist party. How do you think the relations between India and Nepali Maoists deteriorate?
Karki: First, there is no fraternal type of relations between any of Nepal’s political parties with any Indian political party. Nepali Congress (NC) had relations with Indian socialists. But they are now split into many factions. Maoists in Nepal want to give importance to party-to-party relations.
So far the question of how the relations deteriorated is concerned, it has especially to do with the new foreign policy our party has propagated. Our view is that we should develop new relations in the changed context. There is a class in India that wants to give continuity to the bilateral relations in which Nepal feels deceived. This is the crux of the matter. But we may have shortcomings while dealing with India because we have developed a culture of appeasement. Instead of openly putting forward our national interests, our leaders want to appease them, and diplomatically that’s wrong. It would be better if the political parties here identify Nepal’s national interests and chart out plans on how to develop relations with our immediate neighbors to promote our interests. But if you just meet a bureaucrat or a leader and try to appease him, it would be bad for the country. It only deteriorates the bilateral relations.
Myrepublica.com: The way your party launched an anti-Indian drive, did not that irritate India?
Karki: Actually we did not want that to happen, but it’s true that India is irritated. They openly say this and have leveled an allegation that we are creating public opinion against India despite the fact that they helped strike the 12-point agreement and democratize Nepal. But what we want to say is that if they are willing to review the bilateral relations vis-à-vis new political development in Nepal, the negative perception of Nepal’s left movement toward India would vanish forever.
Myrepublica.com: What does India expect from Nepal’s Maoists?
Karki: India wants us to be “a democratic, civilian party”, the way the ruling parties here are asking us to be. But the leftist parties worry that we would end up like the NC and UML. In fact, there is no single definition of democracy. It is only natural that there is difference in the definition of democracy between communists and other parties. But it is also true that there is no single model of democracy even among the capitalist parties. So it is puzzling when they ask us to be a democratic party.
Myrepublica.com: Do you find anything wrong in India’s foreign policy toward Nepal?
Karki: India talks about regional security in abstract, but has never explained and analyzed it in concrete terms. This has made the neighboring countries suspicious of India. Now India should understand that Nepal is different than Bhutan. Of course, India has become stronger, but there is no meaning of becoming an island of prosperity with poverty surrounding it. It is also against the Indian interests to have tense relations with countries like Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal and Pakistan.
Myrepublica.com: What is the relations between your party and India’s Maoists and other parliamentary parties?
Karki: All the political parties do have their past, present and future. Many political parties in South Asia have at least once used violence to achieve their political ends. Take, for Instance, Indian National Congress. Despite Gandhi’s opposition, Subhas Chandra Bose was elected president of the party and formed Azad Hind Fauj or Indian National Army and used violence. The CPI also raised arms against Nizam dictators in Telanganga. Today, the Maoists are, in their language, are launching “offensive struggle”. So, it is difficult to maintain similar kind of relations with the parties that are in power and the party that is underground. But the media and people should understand that Nepali Maoists have been maintaining theoretical-ideological relations with Indian Maoists. We have been holding interactions and discussions and nobody should expect us to snap the relations abruptly. Media should not also disseminate news and views in a provocative manner that we have relations with Indian Maoists. We should also understand what Indian Maoists want. They respect Nepal’s sovereignty and independence. Besides, as the largest political party we should also develop relations with those in the government and the opposition.
Myrepublica.com: How do you think the Maoists relations with India evolve in coming days?
Karki: In fact, we don’t have an illusion that another country would come to rescue us at the cost of Nepal’s relations with India. So we must deal with India accordingly. But India should also understand the sensitivities of a small country like Nepal. Not in all but in some cases we have been cheated by India. There are some people who feel discomfiture when we say we want equi-distance foreign policy with India and China. In fact, China is an emerging superpower. Our people along the southern border have relations with the people on Indian side through marriages, and similar is the case on Nepal-China border. In fact, we have to remove misunderstandings with India, if any, through diplomacy.
Myrepublica.com: How about your relations with Indian Maoists?
Karki: There are differences even among the ruling class in India on how to deal with the Maoists there. A sizeable section including the prime minister’s office and the ruling coalition parties is in favor of tackling the problem through dialog. This voice is becoming dominant by the day. And Indian Union Minister for Home Affairs P Chidambaram who took an aggressive approach against the Maoists seems to be in a dilemma. The Maoists are fighting in the hinterlands of India and a sizable portion of the country has come under their control. So, we should naturally take into account regional elements and factors while formulating policies in Nepal.
This is an age of information. We have been connected to the Marxists around the world through internet. We don’t have to meet them in persons. We hold discussion and debate, but the nature of relations is only theoretical-ideological. We all have a wish not to use violence unless it is extremely necessary.
Myrepublica.com: But India is taking more aggressive approach by declaring punishment to Maoist sympathizers and who write to promote the insurgency.
Karki: Now it has already been challenged not only by the leftist intellectuals. For example, Arundhati Roy who is a Gandhian herself, has vociferously opposed it. She doesn’t have anything to do with Marxism. Swami Agnivesh is on a peace march in the insurgency-hit region. Even the liberal bourgeois and those close to establishment have defied the move.
post@myrepublica.com
Related story
Oli on social media ban: ‘Nation being undermined cannot be tol...
-1200x560-1779450784.webp)
