Ironically, the fresh victims of such acts include the Maoist cadres as well. A Young Communist League (YCL) cadre named Karna Bahadur Budha was found dead under suspicious circumstance in Dashrathpur Village Development Committee of Surkhet. This came close on the heels of another incident about a week earlier when an unidentified gang shot dead Sapatu Yadav in Thakurdwara in Bishnupura of Rupandehi district. Yadav was a member of Maoist-affiliated Avad Madhes Rajya Parishad. Such incidents of Maoists being at the receiving end have now become more frequent recently, contrary to the earlier days when the Maoists were sole perpetrators of such incidents. The Maoists have been victims at the hands of armed groups, particularly in the Madhes region.
MUTILATION ATROCITIES
Maoists must realize that they are now at the receiving end of the very culture of individual killings they promoted in Nepal. In the name of revolution, they started eliminating many innocent people who did not subscribe to their dictate, branding them “class enemies” or “informers”. Most of the victims were not even remotely associated or involved in any side of the insurgency. Particularly, to displace the local leaders of any consequence in rural areas, a reign of terror was unleashed, which saw individualized killings, loot, arson, abductions, physical cruelties and torture. Local leaders were selectively annihilated, creating terror and forcing the local populace either into submission or to flee. The “mutilation atrocities “, as one writer called them, perpetrated by the Maoists, led to large-scale migration of rural people to city centers or district headquarters. The void in the rural leadership, which the exodus created, was to be filled by the Maoists.
This was part of the Maoist strategy. Following the peace negotiations, all police and court cases involving the perpetrators of these crimes were abandoned and withdrawn. The victims did not receive any justice. True, at times the Maoists themselves became the victims of fake encounters and others at the hands of security forces. The proposed Truth and Reconciliation Commission is yet to get off the ground to find the real truth and dispense justice on the matter.
Mohan Bikram Singh, the legendary figure of Nepal’s radical communist movement, says the Maoists are neither bourgeois democrats nor communists, and their movement is drifting toward social fascism.
Maoists have justified such violence as natural in a revolution. It is often said that other political parties also raised arms and resorted to violence at various times in Nepal’s history. Violence against autocratic rule finds justification when peaceful avenues are not available. Nepali Congress (NC) raised arms against Rana autocracy, when even peaceful dissent against the state authority was considered treason. There was no other means available for change. The situation was similar in 1962 and afterwards when NC raised arms unsuccessfully against Panchayat autocracy. But in all these cases there were no individual killings. Security forces were attacked, not individuals. Furthermore, in the post-1990 dispensation when the Maoists raised arms, constitutional avenues were available for political dissent and organization.
TERRORISM & LEGITIMACY
International position on individual acts of terrorism is very clear. Such actions have no legitimacy even for political, ideological or religious objective. UN General Assembly Resolution 51/210 of Dec 17, 1996 calls all criminal acts intended to provoke a state of terror in the general public unjustifiable under any circumstances, irrespective of a political, philosophical, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify it. The Security Council Resolution 1373 also rules out claims of political motivation to condone such acts. Similarly the SAARC Regional Convention on Suppression of Terrorism also strongly denounces such acts as terrorist.
The Maoists certainly had some positive socio-economic agenda with which there was broad agreement among political forces. The Maoist insurgency brought the latent fault lines of the Nepali society, which needed correction. Thanks to their movement, the exclusion issue along gender, regional and ethnic lines came into sharp focus – a fact readily acknowledged by other political parties, which subsequently became a common national agenda. Legislation for affirmative action in education, civil and security services has been enacted by consensus. Despite other deficiencies, Nepal’s present legislature can take pride in having the most inclusive representation of the country’s diversity.
But this change did not come just because of the Maoist insurgency. The historic change in Nepal was the outcome of Janaandolan II, which was started and spearheaded by seven constitutional parties. The Maoists certainly contributed to its success by supporting it, but they were not a formal partner in the movement. They were still in the insurgency mode then. The agenda of the peaceful popular uprising and its timing were defined by the seven parties.
ROMANTIC VIEW
There is a tendency on the part of some intellectuals including the international folks to romanticize violence and acts of individual terrorism as “revolution”. The romanticization and glorification become even stronger from a distance by those who are oblivious of the pain and agony of the people who directly suffered from it and bore the economic and social cost – giving credence to the theory of “concentric circle of reducing empathy”. It is surprising that an enlightened person like Sukhdev Shah betrays utter ignorance of recent Nepali history when he calls the historic transition as the revolution brought about by the Maoist party, terming other parties’ role as miniscule. It should be understood that the very peaceful character of the 19-day popular uprising was the antithesis of the Maoist violence that lasted more than a decade. During the entire agitation, the movement’s leadership carefully maintained a safe distance from the Maoist party. There was no trace of Maoist flag or any symbol. When the seven parties’ leadership called off the agitation following the royal catapulation accepting all their demands, the Maoists were not happy and tried to continue the movement, but failed.
SOCIAL FASCISM
The Maoist had unsuccessfully fought for the God that had failed throughout the world. Compromise was made with the constitutional parties in Nepal to abandon violence and bring about change through peaceful means under a plural framework. Experience worldwide shows this is the only way to ensure peace, democracy and economic prosperity. Nobody has the right to force their agenda through violence. Unfortunately, the Maoists have not yet learnt their lessons. They have neither abandoned their goal, nor accepted the dynamics of plural politics. The legacy of violence continues as a culture now. Extortion and capturing of public procurement tenders have become acceptable ways of enrichment and filling the party coffers. Mohan Bikram Singh, the legendary figure of Nepal’s radical communist movement, laments that even after abandoning the armed struggle, Maoists have not shed their extremist tendencies and anarchist behavior. He must be serious when he says the Maoists are neither bourgeois democrats nor communists, and their movement is drifting toward social fascism.
The real story of Dr Bhaktaman Shrestha’s abduction is yet to come. Until then, no explanation will erase the popular perception about Maoist hand in it. People consider the explanation given so far as “disinformation”. Recent events show that the Maoists are not alone in this game. Groups in the Madhes and eastern hills, and criminal gangs have started emulating their methods, pushing the country toward lawlessness and anarchy – taking away the people’s right to live peacefully, encouraging exodus of bright and best from the country, frightening entrepreneurs and investors, and causing the country’s impoverishment. This must end.
Related story
Social Media Addiction
