Mohan Baidhya, popularly known as Comrade Kiran, is the senior vice chairman of ‘Unified ’ Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) . He has been contributing relentlessly for almost four decades as a professional revolutionary in developing the Maoist movement in Nepal. Since his early political life, he resolutely fought against revisionism, neo-revisionism, and all sorts of deviations within and outside of the Party. He is known as a revolutionary leader, a beloved leader of the oppressed Nepalese people and an outstanding leader of the international proletariat. The Indian expansionist ruling class put Comrade Kiran, in an Indian jail more than two years.
Here is the fresh interview given by Comrade ‘Kiran’ to the ‘The Next Front’. We all know, these days a fierce two line struggle is taking place within the Maoist movement in Nepal. This interview has focused on many burning issues running within UCPN–Maoist.
Question: When is your central committee is going to meet? What was the reason for the delay of the central committee meeting?
Kiran: It would probably be convened soon. The delay was for homework.
Question: Has the issue related to army integration been finalized? It is said that you have also abandoned the earlier stand on army integration. What is the reality?
Kiran: The issue concerning the army integration has not been finalized. On this issue, we had registered our ‘note of dissent’ against the decision taken by majority in the meeting of the Standing Committee of the party. Similarly, we have differences on the decision taken by majority in the party’s central office. We have not given up our position and stance and our position is consistent.
Question: The focal point of the two-line struggle should have basically been on strategic goal. Instead, given its nature, this seems to have been muddled up in the tactical questions and issues. Does it not weaken the struggle to be launched for achieving the main goal?
Kiran: The two-line struggle has basically been concentrated on strategic goal. On this issue, our dissenting opinions have been registered. These dissenting views are based on the issues concerning the use of terminology like ‘Mao Thought’ instead of ‘Maoism’; objection to some key peace accords signed in the past; and issues related to the implementation of people’s federal republic and insurrection. In addition, we have dissenting views on some other issues like the ones concerning the army integration and constitution. All these issues are of strategic importance. The disagreement on these issues cannot be called as mere ‘differences on tactics’. Some of the differences on tactics are also related to strategy.
Question: The present dispute has been called as a two-line struggle but the differences and disputes seem to be on the question of who should be minister or on the issue of ‘inclusiveness’ like representing different ethnicities, regions and sex in the cabinet. Are we not being unnecessarily occupied in the issue like ‘inclusiveness’, which is against the basic Marxist principle, instead of focusing on class issues? What is the ground reality behind this?
Kiran: The dispute concerning ministers is linked with the political line. The dispute concerning inclusiveness and proportionate representation cannot be against Marxism. Marxism has been firmly resisting all kinds of patriarchal repressions on women and the so-called high caste domination on nationalities and has emphasized the necessity of empowering the entire oppressed people including women and nationalities. This struggle is also not outside the parameters of class struggle.
Question: The external and internal situation of the party has demanded a concrete and bold decision. The revolutionary line has not advanced in the way it should have done, which has given rise to impression that the party is going to be entrapped into the politics of compromise and a new type of eclecticism in the name of unity. Do you not think it is necessary to be cautious against the danger of being fallen into the trap of new type of eclecticism?
Kiran: Yes, this is true. The situation has definitely demanded a concrete and bold decision. But like the class struggle, the two-line struggle also does not advance in a straight line but faces many twists and turns. We have to correctly understand the direction of class struggle and the two-line struggle. So far as the question of compromise is concerned, this is not a new phenomenon but has been in practice for a long time. Compromise has to be made on certain occasions and there should not be any reason to doubt the intention. But we should not fall into the trap of politics of compromise. There is also a danger of eclecticism but it should be made clear that we have always been firmly resisting and fighting all kinds of eclecticism and revisionism and will continue to do so until our goal is achieved. We are fully conscious and cautious about this.
Question: Do you not think that the continuity of ‘politics of note of dissent’ for a long period is, in a way, tantamount to get the politics entrapped into compromise and inaction?
Kiran: Its answer has already been given in the previous answer.
Question: The general convention of the party is a good aspect. Does it not create the situation to keep the problem unresolved for a long time and push the politics towards directionless confusion. What do you say?
Kiran: The general convention of the party is a must. But I don’t think that all the questions that have been raised now would be resolved in the general convention. Clarity on some issues of ideological and political importance is necessary prior to the convention.
Question: The world has been keenly and seriously watching the revolutionary line of the Maoist party. Supporters of proletariats all over the world are also watching it and the reactionaries, too, are doing the same. What is your reaction?
Kiran: We have taken optimism and expectations of proletariats in the world very positively while the reactionary outlook is negative in our eyes. I assure you that we will never let down Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, revolution and communism. We will further develop it to a greater height one after another.
Question: Efforts have been made to constitute a new RIM and once again advance the Maoist movement in a new way. What can be and should be the role of revolutionaries in this context?
Kiran: We are positive on the formation of a new RIM.
Question: History has proved that nowhere in the world has the revolution been completed without breaking the relationship with opportunists. A trend has developed in the party to make decisions like the ones made in Kharipati and Palungtar but not to implement them in practice, which has been repeated in series. In such a situation, what are the actions to be taken by the revolutionaries? Can you specify on point wise basis?
Kiran: We are serious on this issue. In this connection, we have to pay special attention to creating appropriate ground in favour of revolutionary ideology and political line, exposing opportunism, properly disseminating information to the people on issues of crucial political importance; and rebelling against the party if it deviates from the basic principles. But, in addition to this, we must seriously give consideration to the issues concerning unity, struggle and transformation.
Question: How can you instill revolutionary optimism in the mind of cadres who have less questions and doubts but more expectations from the party? What are their bases and what is the guarantee that the same old story would not be repeated?
Kiran: What we want to assure the revolutionary cadres and the people is that we in the past had firmly launched ideological struggle against all types of revisionism and have been doing the same even today. We have been expressing our commitment towards the country, people and revolution by our practical activities of class struggle and two-line struggle. Thus, practice is the basis of solution to doubt and trust, for which we must be clear.