Home >> South Asia >> Nepal & Bhutan

     Email   Print 

The Rise of the Maoists in Nepal

Bhuwan Thapaliya - 2/12/2007

When the muddy seeds of the Maoist movement were dispersed in Nepal , in February 1996, no one expected the Maoists to rule the rooster of Nepalese politics in less than a decade. Informal attitude shown towards the Maoists by the Nepalese administration then was propelled furthermore by the widespread belief that radical communism had become a thing of the past except from a few cloudy facades of the world.

They argued that the Maoists couldn’t hold their stake in Nepal , a country that shares its borders with India- the biggest democracy of the world. But nonetheless, eleven years later, it has become a major political force in Nepal . Although no one overlooks the Maoist’s use of violent means and the way they came into power, solely riding on the barrels of gun, they do however on moral grounds, empathize the sentiments that ignited the revolution – a fight against the system that has overlooked the interests of the masses.

Origin of the Maoist’s conflict

Many observers see the strong correlation between the rise of Nepal ’s Maoists to the demise of the absolute monarchy (in 1990) and the introduction of parliamentary democracy in Nepal thereafter.

According to this school of thought, Democracy failed to live up to the expectations of many Nepalese, especially the rural populations and the opportunity strived unemployed youths.

The fall of an age-old totalitarianism led to rampant corruption followed by social and political instability, and absolute abuse of authority and power. All of these activities fueled the frustration tanks of Nepalese.
.
Their frustration level rose and exploded because even the restoration of democracy in Nepal deceived many as they watched in despair democracy turning into demo- crazy.

“Seventy percent of the country’s wealth is in the hands of the top 12 percent households, and only 3.7% percent of the national income reaches the poorest 20 percent of the country’s families, according to the report published by Nepal South Asia Centre, a Kathmandu – based think tank few years ago.

Not only Nepalese researchers but also many foreign researchers saw Nepal ’s enormous social disparity, rural poverty, and backwardness which acted as a catalyst for the outdated Maoists movement.

There was rampant poverty and it led to the emergence of Maoists movements. But many other scholars, though they find an iota of reality in the argument, don’t agree completely.

“ If social and economic marginalization alone were responsible for the emergence of the communist revolt, the hill districts in the Karnali, Seti and Mahakali zones would be for a more likely candidates,” wrote Saubhagya Shah in the book “ Himalayan people’s War: Nepal’s Maoists rebellion.”

He says the emergence of the Maoist’s is “not only because of their grinding poverty and chronic food shortage but also because of the nature of the terrain and their remoteness from state centers.”

Both of these above arguments are right in their own place and vice versa. But, let us go a step further and relate the view of the expert, who has spent much of his life doing research on poverty and economic inequality.

“The relationship between inequality and rebellion is indeed a close one, and it runs both ways. That a perceived sense of inequity is a common ingredient of rebellion in societies is clear enough, but is also important to recognize that the perception of inequity, and indeed the content of that elusive concept, depends substantially on possibilities of actual rebellion.” wrote Amartya Sen, a Nobel laureate of economics, in his book, “On economic inequality.”

He furthermore stated that the concepts of rebellion and inequality have changed remarkably over history. The very concept of inequality has gone through radical transformation.

So considering this, Maoists movement in Nepal has not arisen only due to the inequality, poverty, and nature of terrain or the remoteness from state centers only. There are various factors behind the Maoists movement as their movement has gone through radical transformation and it is still transforming.

What was termed as unequal by them during the initial days of their conflict may be equal today, and what was termed as equal by them may be unequal for them today. Why? Because the Nepalese society has been changing rapidly and so are its barometers such as equality, opportunity and poverty to name a few.

RIM factor.

There are numerous reasons for the Maoists uprising in Nepal . And despite the argument about the domestic factors, all observers sensed an international connection that has exclusively contributed to the Maoists rebellion in Nepal .

"Nepalese Maoists have openly talked about their RIM (The Revolutionary Internationalist Movement) connection and its influence in their movement. Likewise, RIM saw the Maoists movement in Nepal as one of the most significant developments for the worldwide revolutionary struggle," according to the media reports.

Meanwhile, now observers say that the Nepalese Maoists thundered the RIM’s hope by locking their guns in the UN’s cantonment and by joining the interim government. By doing so they sapped the blood out of the RIM.

“Nepalese Maoists led entire RIM movements suffer a major setback,” some experts are saying.

India, China and America factor.

Maoist’s transformation stunned the world, but what makes the Maoists transformation stunning are these details.

Observers thought that India would never accept Maoists in Nepal as Indian government was deeply worried about the Maoists strong anti India dialects. And moreover, the linkage between the Nepal ’s Maoists and Indian Maoists was also causing a headache for India . But contrary to all the popular beliefs, India changed its gear completely at the prime moment.

Out of the blue, but probably with much homework, India changed its Nepal outlook. India , which was opting for the King and Seven Party alliance to alienate Maoists, upon scrutinizing the people’s movement in Nepal , opted for the Seven Party – Maoists alliance instead.

New Delhi hinted that that the monarchy has derailed the democratic governance and that it has divided the political parties and endorsed bickering. Why India felt that way? Most probably because of the pressure implemented to the government by its own intellectual diplomatic communities who felt that Indian policy toward Nepal has become obsolete.

India ’s Nepal observers like S.D. Muni, sensed that the Nepalese traditional monarchy in itself is a problem and that it cannot be expected to solve the grave crisis engulfing Nepal .

“ India should therefore work with Nepal towards redefining its political order so as to help the rebels shed their arms and violent methods for a respectable and democratic place in the mainstream of Nepali national politics, “he wrote in the Sahara Times in September 2004, before then Prime Minister Deuba’s visit to New Delhi .

Thereafter also, observers gave a slim chance for Maoists rise to fame in Nepal because even China , the land of Mao was against them.

China was worried by the Maoists uprising in Nepal . The Chinese administration saw the Maoists movement as an indirect security threat to their own territorial integrity.

“ China feared that it the movement spills across Nepal ’s southern border, it could provoke Indian intervention. That would be unacceptable to China , which still sees India as its rival and a security threat,” according to the analysts.

Hence, alike India , China too accepted the Maoists peaceful transformation into the Nepalese political mainstream. Analyst cited the following reasons apart from the ones discussed above.

Indian administration sensed that Nepal was slowly inching towards a failed state status. They feared that a failed Nepal poses a serious threat for India , which is affected by Maoist movements of her own, than a stable Nepal with Maoists in the mainstream of Nepalese politics.

And china sensed the similar prospect. “Rather than facing the possible Indian intervention in Nepal , it supported the Maoists transformation,” analysts said.

Meanwhile, the support of India and China to the transformation of the Maoists from rebels to the Nepalese political mainstream left no other option but to support the new political development in Nepal for the United States of America too.

America also feared that if they do not support the new political development in Nepal , Nepal could end up as another failed state. And who more than America knows that in today’s mutually dependent world threatened by terrorism, a failed state is alleged to be more precarious than even an aggressive but secure neighbor. That was the theory of the Europeans too.


Converging world’s view of Maoists.

Meanwhile, politics of Nepal has changed now. Maoists are no longer rebels. They have joined the Nepalese political mainstream and they are in the interim government too. Considering this, people and nation, are shifting their gears. With the exception of those with a conscientious partisan view, neutral observers are both critical and supportive of the Maoists joining the Nepalese political Everest.

However, the success of Maoists in Nepal has opened up a broad range of issues for debates and discussions. The world’s view of Maoists is converging but they are yet to reach a final ruling given the Maoists barbaric past history. Some points are clear. The world welcomes the transformation of Maoists from rebels into the mainstream of Nepali national politics but at the same time it is aware that the Maoists victory in Nepal may bolster revolutionaries all around the world.

The world at this hour is scrutinizing Maoists movement. Let the Maoists keep this in mind and pave their political way forward with peace or else it is not too long before they will be diplomatically jettisoned, slowly but surely.