As usual, Prachanda has been quite in the limelight, especially with the deteriorating health of PM Kadga Prasad Oli and also because of his stark comments on many issues. His recent call for unity of all political forces to counter the re-emergence of “regressive elements” is strong overtone to stabilize the political future of Nepal. Many issues are now plaguing Nepal, starting from some dissatisfaction over the 2015 constitution to the formation of a federal state in true spirt of the term.
The changing global scenario of shift in major powers’ position and the gradual shift in the power asymmetry of neighboring countries, places stress on Nepal to rethink of its position, role, and inclinations. In order to sustain as an independent sovereign state, Nepal not only needs a strong ideological foundation with clear foreign policy objectives, but also needs to maintain a solid momentum of growth for the prosperity of its people.
The greatest challenge in the changing world order is for small countries like Nepal to choose an alliance partner with utmost caution. Till now, with utter chaos in internal political stability, Nepal has been a voiceless facilitator to all major and middle powers. However, with the rise of a united communist power (NCP) having two-third of the majority in the Federal Parliament, Nepal has both advantages and disadvantages to weigh the consequences of its decisions. It is here that Prachanda’s recent remarks of calling for united force of political power is crucial for the future of Nepal.
Prachanda Path: The Ideological Battleground
The history of Nepal shows that there have been greater turmoils and clashes of masses. The Monarchy was challenged with the establishment of a republic with multi-party system in 2008 after ten years of civil war and revolution. The core work of overthrowing the 237 years old feudal Monarchy was laid down in the 40 demands that were put forth by Baburam Bhattarai (Chairman of the Central Committee of the then United People’s Front) and Pampha Bhusal (Female member of the Central Committee of the underground Maoist Party led by Prachanda) on February 4, 1996. The demands raised to the tripartite interim government led by PM Sher Bahadur Deuba, a Nepali Congress leader, were at a time when Nepal had already fallen to become the second poorest country in the world and absolute poverty was as high as 71 per cent. The demands were mainly divided under three broad sub-categories: nationalism, democracy, and livelihood.
The idea of the revolution was rooted in the ideological battle between the state powers and the masses. Pushpa Kamal Dahal i.e. Prachanda, who was born in a poor family in Kaski district of West Nepal, was inclined to communist ideology at a very early age. However, it is the vigor to revise the established ideology of Marx, Lenin and Mao according to the social conditions of Nepal, that has led to the rise of ‘Prachanda Path’. A path that was to establish a new kind of democracy to restructure the socio-economic fabric of Nepal being pro-peasants and pro-workers. Today, there are many challenges to this path with internal ideological conflicts based on different interest groups.
The difference between Prachanda and Maoist hardliners like Mohan Vaidya mushroomed as early as 2008 on ‘People’s Republic’. Prachanda had then advocated a path of formation of ‘federal democratic republic’ to be pursued with immediate effect that would march through ‘transitional republic’ and finally attain the goal of forming a ‘people’s republic’. However, other hardlines like Vaidya, Gajurel, Defence Minister Ram Bahadur Thapa and central member Netra Bikram Chand wanted establishment of the ‘People’s Republic’ immediately. The concerns of political observers then was that establishment of ‘People’s Republic’ would have helped regressive forces and undermined the democratic process. Prachanda was supported by Baburam Bhattarai, central members Dinanath Sharma, Top Bahadur Rayamajhi and many other comrades.
China Model of Socialism for Prosperity
Prachanda’s proposition of staged progress to establishing ‘People’s Republic’ reverberates China’s paramount leader Deng Xiaoping’s thoughts, which were a revision of Mao’s revolutionary ideology and resurrection of Chinese economy under the banner of ‘socialism with Chinese characteristics’. Deng had stated that ‘poverty is not socialism, extreme backwardness is also not socialism. China needs to root out abject poverty and develop productive forces’. He proposed a step by step approach to dealing with the issues by ‘seeking truth from facts’ and ‘feeling for the stones, while crossing the river’ on the basis of national conditions. All of which were outlined in his policy propositions for China in three step development strategy: double the GDP in a decade and solve basic poverty; redouble the GDP in another decade and build a well-off society; and raise to the level of moderately developed country and have affluent lifestyle for the masses. Since the 80s, China has walked on this strategy with its ‘reform and open up’ policy to root out poverty and prospering the economy.
Deng’s proposition was to advance the basic essence of socialism through a transitional phase, which will finally lead to common prosperity. Prachanda’s vision of attaining prosperity ideologically correlates to this transition happening in Nepal. Prachanda had envisaged that although Nepal is a poor and backward nation, but it needs to change the structures on which Nepal is established in order to attain prosperity. Some in Nepal criticise Prachanda for being ‘revisionist’, especially now when Prachanda has joined hands with Marxist forces like Unified Marxist Leninist to enter the mainstream politics and form the government with Khadga Prasad Oli as the PM with an understanding to take over the charge after half of the tenure. A recent publication The Safe Landing written by Shubha Shankar Kandel gives a detailed account of the ideological battle and coalition with Oli. The book dwells into various aspects of communist revolution in Nepal; while it posits that Prachanda and Oli’s unification has averted the political crisis in Nepal.
Prachanda following the Chinese footsteps believes that “socialism will not come through the development of capitalism, and neither it can be brought without dismantling the feudal system.” While he has been very critical of the leaders who imitate the habits of the former Monarchs and Royals, he finds that some of the communist leaders of Nepal have changed attitudes and indiscipline in the party is growing. His utterance that Nepal needs to develop nationalist capital and bring movement in ideology and organisation, propels the thought of building a system based on socialist ideology similar to that of China.
The supporter of Prachanda’s viewpoint, senior NCP leader Jhalanath Khanal states that in the changed global politics, it is not possible to have socialism if there is no transformation. He cites the example of China that acts as a model of economic development for Nepal. Hence, it is clear that in order to achieve prosperity, the line of growth Nepal wants to adopt is the Chinese style of socialism, though preserving the uniqueness of Nepal’s social and political conditions.
As Chinese President Xi Jinping just visited Nepal, many of the ideological and economic development paths might cross and overlap. Prachanda has already hugged the Chinese regional ambitions with the signing of the MoU on BRI. It is observed that President Xi’s visit focussed on furthering the alliance relationship, and discussion over Nepal-China Trans-Himalayan multi-dimensional connectivity network, including the cross border railway line. Prachanda has made it clear that the federal democratic republic of the country might collapse without the economic prosperity of Nepal. Hence, the need for Nepal is to advance the private sector to bring in economic transformation, as has China achieved.
(Author Dr. Geeta Kochhar Jaiswal is Assistant Professor at Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India. The view expressed is personal.)
