जलजला टाइम्स

विचारधारा र अन्तिम लक्ष्य ः

नेपाली र्सवहारावर्गको राजनैतिक प्रतिनिधि, ने.क.पा.-माओवादी) को निर्देशक सिद्धान्त मा.ले.मा. र यसको अन्तिम लक्ष्य समाजवाद र साम्यवाद रहेको कुरा र्सवविदीतै छ । सिद्धान्त र लक्ष्यप्रति दृढ रह“दै पार्टर्ीी ठोस परिस्थितिको ठोस विश्लेषणका आधारमा लचिलो ढंगले आफ्ना नीतिहरुको विकास गर्दै आएको छ । विचारधाराको क्षेत्रमा जडसूत्रवाद र अनुभववादका विरुद्ध निरन्तर संर्घष्ा गर्दै सिद्धान्तको सिर्जनशील प्रयोग र विकासमा पार्टर्ीी विशेष जोड दिंदै आएको छ । यही वैज्ञानिक मान्यता अनुसार, नेपाली जनताको सामन्तवाद र सामाज्यवादविरोधी जनवादी क्रान्तिको नेतृत्व गर्ने क्रममा पार्टर्ीी आफ्नो विशिष्ट विचारश्रृंखलाका रुपमा 'प्रचण्डपथ' को संश्लेषण गरेको छ । '२१ औं शताब्दीमा जनवादको विकासबारे' प्रस्तावित नवीन विचारसम्म आउ“दा, प्रचण्डपथले कम्युनिष्ट आन्दोलनमा मौलिकता र सिर्जनशीलताको नया“ आयाम प्रस्तुत गरेको छ । विचारको यो मौलिकता र सिर्जनशीलतालाई गम्भीरतापर्ूवक बुझ्न प्रयत्न नगरी पुरानो चस्माले हर्ेर्नेहरुका लागि ने.क.पा.-माओवादी) बोधगम्य हुन सम्भव छैन ।

राजनैतिक रणनीतिबारे ः

नेपाली समाजको इतिहास एवम् यसका आर्थिक, राजनैतिक र सा“स्कृतिक विशेषताहरुको अध्ययनका आधारमा पार्टर्ीीो निष्कर्षा रहेको छ कि सामन्ती उत्पादन सम्बन्ध र साम्राज्यवादी शोषण, हस्तक्षेप नै नेपालको प्रगतिको प्रमुख बाधक हो । सामन्ती उत्पादन सम्बन्धबाट मुक्त भएपछि मात्र उत्पादक शक्तिको विकासको प्रक्रियाले अग्रगति लिनेछ र नेपाली समाजको प्रगति सुनिश्चित हुनेछ भन्ने कुरामा पार्टर्ीीृढ रह“दै आएको छ । अतः पु“जीवादी जनवादी क्रान्तिमार्फ् सामन्तवाद र साम्राज्यवादबाट नेपाली समाजलाई मुक्त गर्नु नै पार्टर्ीीे आधारभूत राजनैतिक रणनीति हो । जनयुद्धको फौजी रणनीति वस्तुतः यही राजनैतिक रणनीति हासिल गर्ने उद्देश्यमा आधारित रहेको छ ।

राजनैतिक कार्यनीति अर्थात तात्कालिक नीतिबारे ः

आजको समग्र अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय परिस्थिति एवम् देशभित्र विद्यमान शक्ति सन्तुलनको विशिष्ट स्थितिका आधारमा पार्टर्ीी अत्यन्त लचिलो कार्यनीति अपनाउ“दै आएको छ । गोलमेच सम्मेलन, अन्तरिम सरकार र संविधान-सभाको निर्वाचन यस सर्न्दर्भमा पार्टर्ीी प्रस्तुत गरेको न्यूनतम राजनैतिक कार्यनीति हो । संविधान-सभामार्फ् बन्ने नया“ संविधानले मात्र नेपाली जनताको र्सार्वभौम अधिकारलाई वास्तविक रुपमा संस्थागत गर्न सक्नेछ । जनवादको यो सर्वोत्तम विधिद्वारा नेपाली जनतालाई आफ्नो भाग्य र भविष्यको फैसला आफै गर्न दिने कुरामा कसैले असहमत हुनु पर्ने कारण नै छैन ।

यही लचिलो कार्यनीतिका आधारमा पार्टर्ीी पुरानो सामन्ती सत्तास“ग दर्ुइ पटक वार्ता समेत गरिसकेको छ । तर, दुबै पटकको वार्तामा पुरानो सत्ता राजनैतिक निकासको पक्षमा होइन षडयन्त्र र प्रतिगमनको पक्षमा रहेको कुरामात्र प्रमाणित भयो । संविधान-सभामार्फ् नया“ संविधान निर्माण गर्ने जस्तो र्सवमान्य विधिमा समेत असहमत हुनुले पुरानो सत्ता जनतामा होइन हतियार, सेना र आतंकमा मात्र विश्वास गर्दछ भन्ने तथ्यलाई नै पुष्टि गर्दछ ।

नेपालमा विगत ५३ वर्षो राजनैतिक घटनाक्रमले पटक-पटक पुष्टि गरेको छ कि जनताको जनवादी अधिकारका निमित्त सामन्ती राजतन्त्र नै प्रमुख बाधक रह“दै आएको छ । आठ वर्षो जनयुद्ध, कुख्यात नारायणहिटी हत्याकाण्ड एवम् गत असोज १८ को प्रतिगामी कदमसम्म आइपुग्दा नेपाली जनताको मनमस्तिष्कमा राजा र राजतन्त्रप्रति घृणा र आक्रोश चुलिंदै गएको छ । गणतन्त्रको चेतना आम नेपाली जनताको चेतना बनिसकेको यथार्थबाट भयभीत भएर नै दरबार हत्याकाण्ड पछिको नक्कली राजतन्त्रले संविधान-सभाको विरोध गरिरहेको छ । अहिले मुख्यतः अमेरिकी साम्राज्यवादको चाकडी र दलाली गरेर उसले नेपाल र नेपाली जनतामाथि हत्या र आतंकको राज्य कायम गर्ने दुष्प्रयास गरिरहेको छ ।

अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय समुदायलाई भ्रमित पार्ने तथा आफ्नो सामन्ती सैनिक अधिनायकवादलाई टिकाइराख्ने षडयन्त्र अर्न्तर्गत पुरानो सत्ताले नेपाली जनताको महान् र ऐतिहासिक जनवादी आन्दोलनलाई "आतंकवाद" को संज्ञा दिइरहेको छ । दक्षिण एशियामा अमेरिकी साम्राज्यवादको प्रभुत्वका लागि एउटा गोटीको भूमिकामा पतन भएको नेपालको पुरानो सामन्ती सत्ताको भ्रामक र षडयन्त्रमूलक प्रचारबाजीप्रति अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय समुदायलाई सजग गराउन पार्टर्ीी जोड दिंदै आएको छ । यस सर्न्दर्भमा पार्टर्ीी निम्न न्यूनतम नीति तथा कार्यक्रमप्रतिको प्रतिबद्धता पुनः स्पष्ट गरिन्छ ः

· पार्टर्ीीेशमा विद्यमान संकटको अग्रगामी राजनैतिक निकासका निमित्त गोलमेच सम्मेलन, अन्तरिम सरकार र संविधान-सभाको निर्वाचनमार्फ् नया“ संविधान निर्माण गर्ने प्रश्नलाई अहिले पनि आफ्नो तात्कालिक न्यूनतम राजनैतिक प्रस्ताव मान्दछ ।

· पार्टर्ीींविधान-सभामार्फ् गणतन्त्रात्मक राज्यसत्तालाई संस्थागत गर्न चाहन्छ र स्वतन्त्र एवम् निष्पक्ष निर्वाचनको स्थितिमा नेपाली जनताको अभिमत गणतन्त्रको पक्षमा व्यक्त हुने कुरामा विश्वास राख्दछ ।

· देशमा दर्ुइ विचार, दर्ुइ सेना र दर्ुइ सत्ता विद्यमान रहेको वर्तमान स्थितिमा पार्टर्ीीुवै सेनालाई निष्त्रिmय राखी संयुक्त राष्ट्र संघ एवम् अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय मानव अधिकारवादी संस्थाहरुको पर्यवेक्षणमा संविधान-सभाको निर्वाचन गर्न तयार छ ।

नया“ संविधानको अर्न्तर्वस्तुमा ः

-क) राजनैतिक ः

जनताको पर्ूण्ा र्सार्वभौमिकता, धर्मनिरपेक्ष राज्य, जनताको सर्वोच्च प्रतिनिधि संस्थाका रुपमा निर्वाचित जनप्रतिनिधि सभा, एकीकृत राष्ट्रिय सेनाको पर्ुनसंगठन, आत्मनिर्ण्र्ााो अधिकारसहित जातीय र क्षेत्रीय स्वशासनको व्यवस्था, जनइच्छाअनुसार संविधानमा परिवर्तन वा परिमार्जनको व्यवस्था, बहुदलीय प्रतिस्पर्धा, आवधिक निर्वाचन, बालिग मताधिकार, विधिको शासन, वाक तथा प्रेस स्वतन्त्रता लगायतका मौलिक अधिकारको व्यवस्था, महिला र दलितहरुका लागि विशेषाधिकारको व्यवस्था आदि रहने छन् ।

ख) आर्थिक ः

जमिन जोत्नेको सिद्धान्तअनुसार जमिनको न्यायपर्ूण्ा वितरणका निमित्त क्रान्तिकारी भूमिसुधार, आत्मनिर्भर र राष्ट्रिय औधोगिक नीति, राष्ट्रिय पु“जीको संरक्षण र विकास, प्राकृतिक साधनश्रोतको समुचित सदुपयोगका निमित्त एकीकृत राष्ट्रिय नीतिको विकास आदि रहनेछन् ।

ग) सामाजिक ः

भ्रष्टाचारी, कमिसनखोर, तष्कर र नाफाखोरहरुमाथि कडा कार्यवाही गर्ने संयन्त्रको विकास, रोजगारमूलक राष्ट्रिय र वैज्ञानिक शिक्षा प्रणालीको विकास, र्सवसुलभ स्वास्थ्य, असहाय वृद्ध र बालबालिकाहरुका लागि हेरचाहको व्यवस्था, महिला र दलितहरुमाथि भइरहेका सबै प्रकारका शोषण, भेदभाव र अपमानको अन्त्य, न्यूनतम ज्याला निर्धारणसहित औद्यौगिक व्यवस्थापनमा मजदूर सहभागिताको ग्यारेण्टी, बौद्धिक र प्राज्ञिक स्वतन्त्रता एवम् पेशागत संरक्षणको ग्यारेण्टी, सामन्तवादी र साम्राज्यवादी प्र्रतिगामी स“स्कृतिका विरुद्व जनवादी र वैज्ञानिक स“स्कृतिको विकास, एकीकृत राष्ट्रिय पर्ूवाधार विकासको योजनासहित रोजगारको व्यवस्था, जनताका वर्गीय हितहरुको संरक्षण आदि रहनेछन् ।

घ) विदेश नीति ः

· पञ्चशील र असंलग्नताका आधारमा मैत्री सम्बन्ध कायम गर्ने स्वतन्त्र विदेश नीति अवलम्बन गर्ने,

· विगतमा भए-गरेका सबै असमान सन्धिहरुको खारेजी र नया“ आधारमा नया“ सन्धि, सम्झौता गर्ने

· आर्थिक, राजनैतिक, सा“स्कृतिक, ऐतिहासिक र भौगोलिक सम्बन्धको विशिष्टताका आधारमा छिमेकी भारत र चीनस“ग आपसी हितको पहिचान गरी प्राकृतिक स्रोतसाधनको सदुपयोग, वाणिज्य, पारवाहन लगायतका विषयमा सहमति कायम गर्दै राम्रो छिमेकी सम्बन्धको विकास गर्ने ।

पार्टर्ीी उपरोक्त तात्कालिक नीतिहरुले देशमा विद्यमान गृहयुद्धको शान्तिपर्ूण्ा र अग्रगामी राजनैतिक निकासका लागि अत्यन्त लचिलो र जनवादी विधिलाई व्यक्त गरेको कुरा स्वतः स्पष्ट छ । तर, जनआधार र विश्वास पूरै गुमाइसकेको सामन्ती पुरानो सत्ताले साम्राज्यवादको सैन्य सहयोगका आडमा नेपाली जनतामाथि विशुद्ध फौजी आतंक लाद्ने अपराध गरिरहेको छ । यो स्थितिमा देशभित्र र बाहिरका सम्पर्ूण्ा जनवादी शक्तिहरुले सामन्ती निरंकुश राजतन्त्रका विरुद्ध र जनताको गणतान्त्रिक आन्दोलनका पक्षमा ऐक्यबद्धता जाहेर गर्ने कुराको महत्वलाई पार्टर्ीी गम्भीरतापर्ूवक लिइरहेको छ । अतः पार्टर्ीी नेपाली जनताको जनवादी आन्दोलनको पक्षमा आवाज बुलन्द गर्न सम्बन्धित सबैस“ग अपील गर्दै आएको छ ।

विचारधारा र अन्तिम लक्ष्य ः

नेपाली र्सवहारावर्गको राजनैतिक प्रतिनिधि, ने.क.पा.-माओवादी) को निर्देशक सिद्धान्त मा.ले.मा. र यसको अन्तिम लक्ष्य समाजवाद र साम्यवाद रहेको कुरा र्सवविदीतै छ । सिद्धान्त र लक्ष्यप्रति दृढ रह“दै पार्टर्ीी ठोस परिस्थितिको ठोस विश्लेषणका आधारमा लचिलो ढंगले आफ्ना नीतिहरुको विकास गर्दै आएको छ । विचारधाराको क्षेत्रमा जडसूत्रवाद र अनुभववादका विरुद्ध निरन्तर संर्घष्ा गर्दै सिद्धान्तको सिर्जनशील प्रयोग र विकासमा पार्टर्ीी विशेष जोड दिंदै आएको छ । यही वैज्ञानिक मान्यता अनुसार, नेपाली जनताको सामन्तवाद र सामाज्यवादविरोधी जनवादी क्रान्तिको नेतृत्व गर्ने क्रममा पार्टर्ीी आफ्नो विशिष्ट विचारश्रृंखलाका रुपमा 'प्रचण्डपथ' को संश्लेषण गरेको छ । '२१ औं शताब्दीमा जनवादको विकासबारे' प्रस्तावित नवीन विचारसम्म आउ“दा, प्रचण्डपथले कम्युनिष्ट आन्दोलनमा मौलिकता र सिर्जनशीलताको नया“ आयाम प्रस्तुत गरेको छ । विचारको यो मौलिकता र सिर्जनशीलतालाई गम्भीरतापर्ूवक बुझ्न प्रयत्न नगरी पुरानो चस्माले हर्ेर्नेहरुका लागि ने.क.पा.
-माओवादी) बोधगम्य हुन सम्भव छैन ।

राजनैतिक रणनीतिबारे ः

नेपाली समाजको इतिहास एवम् यसका आर्थिक, राजनैतिक र सा“स्कृतिक विशेषताहरुको अध्ययनका आधारमा पार्टर्ीीो निष्कर्षा रहेको छ कि सामन्ती उत्पादन सम्बन्ध र साम्राज्यवादी शोषण, हस्तक्षेप नै नेपालको प्रगतिको प्रमुख बाधक हो । सामन्ती उत्पादन सम्बन्धबाट मुक्त भएपछि मात्र उत्पादक शक्तिको विकासको प्रक्रियाले अग्रगति लिनेछ र नेपाली समाजको प्रगति सुनिश्चित हुनेछ भन्ने कुरामा पार्टर्ीीृढ रह“दै आएको छ । अतः पु“जीवादी जनवादी क्रान्तिमार्फ् सामन्तवाद र साम्राज्यवादबाट नेपाली समाजलाई मुक्त गर्नु नै पार्टर्ीीे आधारभूत राजनैतिक रणनीति हो । जनयुद्धको फौजी रणनीति वस्तुतः यही राजनैतिक रणनीति हासिल गर्ने उद्देश्यमा आधारित रहेको छ ।

राजनैतिक कार्यनीति अर्थात तात्कालिक नीतिबारे ः

आजको समग्र अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय परिस्थिति एवम् देशभित्र विद्यमान शक्ति सन्तुलनको विशिष्ट स्थितिका आधारमा पार्टर्ीी अत्यन्त लचिलो कार्यनीति अपनाउ“दै आएको छ । गोलमेच सम्मेलन, अन्तरिम सरकार र संविधान-सभाको निर्वाचन यस सर्न्दर्भमा पार्टर्ीी प्रस्तुत गरेको न्यूनतम राजनैतिक कार्यनीति हो । संविधान-सभामार्फ् बन्ने नया“ संविधानले मात्र नेपाली जनताको र्सार्वभौम अधिकारलाई वास्तविक रुपमा संस्थागत गर्न सक्नेछ । जनवादको यो सर्वोत्तम विधिद्वारा नेपाली जनतालाई आफ्नो भाग्य र भविष्यको फैसला आफै गर्न दिने कुरामा कसैले असहमत हुनु पर्ने कारण नै छैन ।

यही लचिलो कार्यनीतिका आधारमा पार्टर्ीी पुरानो सामन्ती सत्तास“ग दर्ुइ पटक वार्ता समेत गरिसकेको छ । तर, दुबै पटकको वार्तामा पुरानो सत्ता राजनैतिक निकासको पक्षमा होइन षडयन्त्र र प्रतिगमनको पक्षमा रहेको कुरामात्र प्रमाणित भयो । संविधान-सभामार्फ् नया“ संविधान निर्माण गर्ने जस्तो र्सवमान्य विधिमा समेत असहमत हुनुले पुरानो सत्ता जनतामा होइन हतियार, सेना र आतंकमा मात्र विश्वास गर्दछ भन्ने तथ्यलाई नै पुष्टि गर्दछ ।

नेपालमा विगत ५३ वर्षो राजनैतिक घटनाक्रमले पटक-पटक पुष्टि गरेको छ कि जनताको जनवादी अधिकारका निमित्त सामन्ती राजतन्त्र नै प्रमुख बाधक रह“दै आएको छ । आठ वर्षो जनयुद्ध, कुख्यात नारायणहिटी हत्याकाण्ड एवम् गत असोज १८ को प्रतिगामी कदमसम्म आइपुग्दा नेपाली जनताको मनमस्तिष्कमा राजा र राजतन्त्रप्रति घृणा र आक्रोश चुलिंदै गएको छ । गणतन्त्रको चेतना आम नेपाली जनताको चेतना बनिसकेको यथार्थबाट भयभीत भएर नै दरबार हत्याकाण्ड पछिको नक्कली राजतन्त्रले संविधान-सभाको विरोध गरिरहेको छ । अहिले मुख्यतः अमेरिकी साम्राज्यवादको चाकडी र दलाली गरेर उसले नेपाल र नेपाली जनतामाथि हत्या र आतंकको राज्य कायम गर्ने दुष्प्रयास गरिरहेको छ ।

अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय समुदायलाई भ्रमित पार्ने तथा आफ्नो सामन्ती सैनिक अधिनायकवादलाई टिकाइराख्ने षडयन्त्र अर्न्तर्गत पुरानो सत्ताले नेपाली जनताको महान् र ऐतिहासिक जनवादी आन्दोलनलाई "आतंकवाद" को संज्ञा दिइरहेको छ । दक्षिण एशियामा अमेरिकी साम्राज्यवादको प्रभुत्वका लागि एउटा गोटीको भूमिकामा पतन भएको नेपालको पुरानो सामन्ती सत्ताको भ्रामक र षडयन्त्रमूलक प्रचारबाजीप्रति अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय समुदायलाई सजग गराउन पार्टर्ीी जोड दिंदै आएको छ । यस सर्न्दर्भमा पार्टर्ीी निम्न न्यूनतम नीति तथा कार्यक्रमप्रतिको प्रतिबद्धता पुनः स्पष्ट गरिन्छ ः

· पार्टर्ीीेशमा विद्यमान संकटको अग्रगामी राजनैतिक निकासका निमित्त गोलमेच सम्मेलन, अन्तरिम सरकार र संविधान-सभाको निर्वाचनमार्फ् नया“ संविधान निर्माण गर्ने प्रश्नलाई अहिले पनि आफ्नो तात्कालिक न्यूनतम राजनैतिक प्रस्ताव मान्दछ ।

· पार्टर्ीींविधान-सभामार्फ् गणतन्त्रात्मक राज्यसत्तालाई संस्थागत गर्न चाहन्छ र स्वतन्त्र एवम् निष्पक्ष निर्वाचनको स्थितिमा नेपाली जनताको अभिमत गणतन्त्रको पक्षमा व्यक्त हुने कुरामा विश्वास राख्दछ ।

· देशमा दर्ुइ विचार, दर्ुइ सेना र दर्ुइ सत्ता विद्यमान रहेको वर्तमान स्थितिमा पार्टर्ीीुवै सेनालाई निष्त्रिmय राखी संयुक्त राष्ट्र संघ एवम् अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय मानव अधिकारवादी संस्थाहरुको पर्यवेक्षणमा संविधान-सभाको निर्वाचन गर्न तयार छ ।

नया“ संविधानको अर्न्तर्वस्तुमा ः

-क) राजनैतिक ः

जनताको पर्ूण्ा र्सार्वभौमिकता, धर्मनिरपेक्ष राज्य, जनताको सर्वोच्च प्रतिनिधि संस्थाका रुपमा निर्वाचित जनप्रतिनिधि सभा, एकीकृत राष्ट्रिय सेनाको पर्ुनसंगठन, आत्मनिर्ण्र्ााो अधिकारसहित जातीय र क्षेत्रीय स्वशासनको व्यवस्था, जनइच्छाअनुसार संविधानमा परिवर्तन वा परिमार्जनको व्यवस्था, बहुदलीय प्रतिस्पर्धा, आवधिक निर्वाचन, बालिग मताधिकार, विधिको शासन, वाक तथा प्रेस स्वतन्त्रता लगायतका मौलिक अधिकारको व्यवस्था, महिला र दलितहरुका लागि विशेषाधिकारको व्यवस्था आदि रहने छन् ।

ख) आर्थिक ः

जमिन जोत्नेको सिद्धान्तअनुसार जमिनको न्यायपर्ूण्ा वितरणका निमित्त क्रान्तिकारी भूमिसुधार, आत्मनिर्भर र राष्ट्रिय औधोगिक नीति, राष्ट्रिय पु“जीको संरक्षण र विकास, प्राकृतिक साधनश्रोतको समुचित सदुपयोगका निमित्त एकीकृत राष्ट्रिय नीतिको विकास आदि रहनेछन् ।

ग) सामाजिक ः

भ्रष्टाचारी, कमिसनखोर, तष्कर र नाफाखोरहरुमाथि कडा कार्यवाही गर्ने संयन्त्रको विकास, रोजगारमूलक राष्ट्रिय र वैज्ञानिक शिक्षा प्रणालीको विकास, र्सवसुलभ स्वास्थ्य, असहाय वृद्ध र बालबालिकाहरुका लागि हेरचाहको व्यवस्था, महिला र दलितहरुमाथि भइरहेका सबै प्रकारका शोषण, भेदभाव र अपमानको अन्त्य, न्यूनतम ज्याला निर्धारणसहित औद्यौगिक व्यवस्थापनमा मजदूर सहभागिताको ग्यारेण्टी, बौद्धिक र प्राज्ञिक स्वतन्त्रता एवम् पेशागत संरक्षणको ग्यारेण्टी, सामन्तवादी र साम्राज्यवादी प्र्रतिगामी स“स्कृतिका विरुद्व जनवादी र वैज्ञानिक स“स्कृतिको विकास, एकीकृत राष्ट्रिय पर्ूवाधार विकासको योजनासहित रोजगारको व्यवस्था, जनताका वर्गीय हितहरुको संरक्षण आदि रहनेछन् ।

घ) विदेश नीति ः

· पञ्चशील र असंलग्नताका आधारमा मैत्री सम्बन्ध कायम गर्ने स्वतन्त्र विदेश नीति अवलम्बन गर्ने,

· विगतमा भए-गरेका सबै असमान सन्धिहरुको खारेजी र नया“ आधारमा नया“ सन्धि, सम्झौता गर्ने

· आर्थिक, राजनैतिक, सा“स्कृतिक, ऐतिहासिक र भौगोलिक सम्बन्धको विशिष्टताका आधारमा छिमेकी भारत र चीनस“ग आपसी हितको पहिचान गरी प्राकृतिक स्रोतसाधनको सदुपयोग, वाणिज्य, पारवाहन लगायतका विषयमा सहमति कायम गर्दै राम्रो छिमेकी सम्बन्धको विकास गर्ने ।

पार्टर्ीी उपरोक्त तात्कालिक नीतिहरुले देशमा विद्यमान गृहयुद्धको शान्तिपर्ूण्ा र अग्रगामी राजनैतिक निकासका लागि अत्यन्त लचिलो र जनवादी विधिलाई व्यक्त गरेको कुरा स्वतः स्पष्ट छ । तर, जनआधार र विश्वास पूरै गुमाइसकेको सामन्ती पुरानो सत्ताले साम्राज्यवादको सैन्य सहयोगका आडमा नेपाली जनतामाथि विशुद्ध फौजी आतंक लाद्ने अपराध गरिरहेको छ । यो स्थितिमा देशभित्र र बाहिरका सम्पर्ूण्ा जनवादी शक्तिहरुले सामन्ती निरंकुश राजतन्त्रका विरुद्ध र जनताको गणतान्त्रिक आन्दोलनका पक्षमा ऐक्यबद्धता जाहेर गर्ने कुराको महत्वलाई पार्टर्ीी गम्भीरतापर्ूवक लिइरहेको छ । अतः पार्टर्ीी नेपाली जनताको जनवादी आन्दोलनको पक्षमा आवाज बुलन्द गर्न सम्बन्धित सबैस“ग अपील गर्दै आएको छ ।

विचारधारा र अन्तिम लक्ष्य ः

नेपाली र्सवहारावर्गको राजनैतिक प्रतिनिधि, ने.क.पा.-माओवादी) को निर्देशक सिद्धान्त मा.ले.मा. र यसको अन्तिम लक्ष्य समाजवाद र साम्यवाद रहेको कुरा र्सवविदीतै छ । सिद्धान्त र लक्ष्यप्रति दृढ रह“दै पार्टर्ीी ठोस परिस्थितिको ठोस विश्लेषणका आधारमा लचिलो ढंगले आफ्ना नीतिहरुको विकास गर्दै आएको छ । विचारधाराको क्षेत्रमा जडसूत्रवाद र अनुभववादका विरुद्ध निरन्तर संर्घष्ा गर्दै सिद्धान्तको सिर्जनशील प्रयोग र विकासमा पार्टर्ीी विशेष जोड दिंदै आएको छ । यही वैज्ञानिक मान्यता अनुसार, नेपाली जनताको सामन्तवाद र सामाज्यवादविरोधी जनवादी क्रान्तिको नेतृत्व गर्ने क्रममा पार्टर्ीी आफ्नो विशिष्ट विचारश्रृंखलाका रुपमा 'प्रचण्डपथ' को संश्लेषण गरेको छ । '२१ औं शताब्दीमा जनवादको विकासबारे' प्रस्तावित नवीन विचारसम्म आउ“दा, प्रचण्डपथले कम्युनिष्ट आन्दोलनमा मौलिकता र सिर्जनशीलताको नया“ आयाम प्रस्तुत गरेको छ । विचारको यो मौलिकता र सिर्जनशीलतालाई गम्भीरतापर्ूवक बुझ्न प्रयत्न नगरी पुरानो चस्माले हर्ेर्नेहरुका लागि ने.क.पा.-माओवादी) बोधगम्य हुन सम्भव छैन ।

राजनैतिक रणनीतिबारे ः

नेपाली समाजको इतिहास एवम् यसका आर्थिक, राजनैतिक र सा“स्कृतिक विशेषताहरुको अध्ययनका आधारमा पार्टर्ीीो निष्कर्षा रहेको छ कि सामन्ती उत्पादन सम्बन्ध र साम्राज्यवादी शोषण, हस्तक्षेप नै नेपालको प्रगतिको प्रमुख बाधक हो । सामन्ती उत्पादन सम्बन्धबाट मुक्त भएपछि मात्र उत्पादक शक्तिको विकासको प्रक्रियाले अग्रगति लिनेछ र नेपाली समाजको प्रगति सुनिश्चित हुनेछ भन्ने कुरामा पार्टर्ीीृढ रह“दै आएको छ । अतः पु“जीवादी जनवादी क्रान्तिमार्फ् सामन्तवाद र साम्राज्यवादबाट नेपाली समाजलाई मुक्त गर्नु नै पार्टर्ीीे आधारभूत राजनैतिक रणनीति हो । जनयुद्धको फौजी रणनीति वस्तुतः यही राजनैतिक रणनीति हासिल गर्ने उद्देश्यमा आधारित रहेको छ ।

राजनैतिक कार्यनीति अर्थात तात्कालिक नीतिबारे ः

आजको समग्र अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय परिस्थिति एवम् देशभित्र विद्यमान शक्ति सन्तुलनको विशिष्ट स्थितिका आधारमा पार्टर्ीी अत्यन्त लचिलो कार्यनीति अपनाउ“दै आएको छ । गोलमेच सम्मेलन, अन्तरिम सरकार र संविधान-सभाको निर्वाचन यस सर्न्दर्भमा पार्टर्ीी प्रस्तुत गरेको न्यूनतम राजनैतिक कार्यनीति हो । संविधान-सभामार्फ् बन्ने नया“ संविधानले मात्र नेपाली जनताको र्सार्वभौम अधिकारलाई वास्तविक रुपमा संस्थागत गर्न सक्नेछ । जनवादको यो सर्वोत्तम विधिद्वारा नेपाली जनतालाई आफ्नो भाग्य र भविष्यको फैसला आफै गर्न दिने कुरामा कसैले असहमत हुनु पर्ने कारण नै छैन ।

यही लचिलो कार्यनीतिका आधारमा पार्टर्ीी पुरानो सामन्ती सत्तास“ग दर्ुइ पटक वार्ता समेत गरिसकेको छ । तर, दुबै पटकको वार्तामा पुरानो सत्ता राजनैतिक निकासको पक्षमा होइन षडयन्त्र र प्रतिगमनको पक्षमा रहेको कुरामात्र प्रमाणित भयो । संविधान-सभामार्फ् नया“ संविधान निर्माण गर्ने जस्तो र्सवमान्य विधिमा समेत असहमत हुनुले पुरानो सत्ता जनतामा होइन हतियार, सेना र आतंकमा मात्र विश्वास गर्दछ भन्ने तथ्यलाई नै पुष्टि गर्दछ ।

नेपालमा विगत ५३ वर्षो राजनैतिक घटनाक्रमले पटक-पटक पुष्टि गरेको छ कि जनताको जनवादी अधिकारका निमित्त सामन्ती राजतन्त्र नै प्रमुख बाधक रह“दै आएको छ । आठ वर्षो जनयुद्ध, कुख्यात नारायणहिटी हत्याकाण्ड एवम् गत असोज १८ को प्रतिगामी कदमसम्म आइपुग्दा नेपाली जनताको मनमस्तिष्कमा राजा र राजतन्त्रप्रति घृणा र आक्रोश चुलिंदै गएको छ । गणतन्त्रको चेतना आम नेपाली जनताको चेतना बनिसकेको यथार्थबाट भयभीत भएर नै दरबार हत्याकाण्ड पछिको नक्कली राजतन्त्रले संविधान-सभाको विरोध गरिरहेको छ । अहिले मुख्यतः अमेरिकी साम्राज्यवादको चाकडी र दलाली गरेर उसले नेपाल र नेपाली जनतामाथि हत्या र आतंकको राज्य कायम गर्ने दुष्प्रयास गरिरहेको छ ।

अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय समुदायलाई भ्रमित पार्ने तथा आफ्नो सामन्ती सैनिक अधिनायकवादलाई टिकाइराख्ने षडयन्त्र अर्न्तर्गत पुरानो सत्ताले नेपाली जनताको महान् र ऐतिहासिक जनवादी आन्दोलनलाई "आतंकवाद" को संज्ञा दिइरहेको छ । दक्षिण एशियामा अमेरिकी साम्राज्यवादको प्रभुत्वका लागि एउटा गोटीको भूमिकामा पतन भएको नेपालको पुरानो सामन्ती सत्ताको भ्रामक र षडयन्त्रमूलक प्रचारबाजीप्रति अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय समुदायलाई सजग गराउन पार्टर्ीी जोड दिंदै आएको छ । यस सर्न्दर्भमा पार्टर्ीी निम्न न्यूनतम नीति तथा कार्यक्रमप्रतिको प्रतिबद्धता पुनः स्पष्ट गरिन्छ ः

· पार्टर्ीीेशमा विद्यमान संकटको अग्रगामी राजनैतिक निकासका निमित्त गोलमेच सम्मेलन, अन्तरिम सरकार र संविधान-सभाको निर्वाचनमार्फ् नया“ संविधान निर्माण गर्ने प्रश्नलाई अहिले पनि आफ्नो तात्कालिक न्यूनतम राजनैतिक प्रस्ताव मान्दछ ।

· पार्टर्ीींविधान-सभामार्फ् गणतन्त्रात्मक राज्यसत्तालाई संस्थागत गर्न चाहन्छ र स्वतन्त्र एवम् निष्पक्ष निर्वाचनको स्थितिमा नेपाली जनताको अभिमत गणतन्त्रको पक्षमा व्यक्त हुने कुरामा विश्वास राख्दछ ।

· देशमा दर्ुइ विचार, दर्ुइ सेना र दर्ुइ सत्ता विद्यमान रहेको वर्तमान स्थितिमा पार्टर्ीीुवै सेनालाई निष्त्रिmय राखी संयुक्त राष्ट्र संघ एवम् अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय मानव अधिकारवादी संस्थाहरुको पर्यवेक्षणमा संविधान-सभाको निर्वाचन गर्न तयार छ ।

नया“ संविधानको अर्न्तर्वस्तुमा ः

-क) राजनैतिक ः

जनताको पर्ूण्ा र्सार्वभौमिकता, धर्मनिरपेक्ष राज्य, जनताको सर्वोच्च प्रतिनिधि संस्थाका रुपमा निर्वाचित जनप्रतिनिधि सभा, एकीकृत राष्ट्रिय सेनाको पर्ुनसंगठन, आत्मनिर्ण्र्ााो अधिकारसहित जातीय र क्षेत्रीय स्वशासनको व्यवस्था, जनइच्छाअनुसार संविधानमा परिवर्तन वा परिमार्जनको व्यवस्था, बहुदलीय प्रतिस्पर्धा, आवधिक निर्वाचन, बालिग मताधिकार, विधिको शासन, वाक तथा प्रेस स्वतन्त्रता लगायतका मौलिक अधिकारको व्यवस्था, महिला र दलितहरुका लागि विशेषाधिकारको व्यवस्था आदि रहने छन् ।

ख) आर्थिक ः

जमिन जोत्नेको सिद्धान्तअनुसार जमिनको न्यायपर्ूण्ा वितरणका निमित्त क्रान्तिकारी भूमिसुधार, आत्मनिर्भर र राष्ट्रिय औधोगिक नीति, राष्ट्रिय पु“जीको संरक्षण र विकास, प्राकृतिक साधनश्रोतको समुचित सदुपयोगका निमित्त एकीकृत राष्ट्रिय नीतिको विकास आदि रहनेछन् ।

ग) सामाजिक ः

भ्रष्टाचारी, कमिसनखोर, तष्कर र नाफाखोरहरुमाथि कडा कार्यवाही गर्ने संयन्त्रको विकास, रोजगारमूलक राष्ट्रिय र वैज्ञानिक शिक्षा प्रणालीको विकास, र्सवसुलभ स्वास्थ्य, असहाय वृद्ध र बालबालिकाहरुका लागि हेरचाहको व्यवस्था, महिला र दलितहरुमाथि भइरहेका सबै प्रकारका शोषण, भेदभाव र अपमानको अन्त्य, न्यूनतम ज्याला निर्धारणसहित औद्यौगिक व्यवस्थापनमा मजदूर सहभागिताको ग्यारेण्टी, बौद्धिक र प्राज्ञिक स्वतन्त्रता एवम् पेशागत संरक्षणको ग्यारेण्टी, सामन्तवादी र साम्राज्यवादी प्र्रतिगामी स“स्कृतिका विरुद्व जनवादी र वैज्ञानिक स“स्कृतिको विकास, एकीकृत राष्ट्रिय पर्ूवाधार विकासको योजनासहित रोजगारको व्यवस्था, जनताका वर्गीय हितहरुको संरक्षण आदि रहनेछन् ।

घ) विदेश नीति ः

· पञ्चशील र असंलग्नताका आधारमा मैत्री सम्बन्ध कायम गर्ने स्वतन्त्र विदेश नीति अवलम्बन गर्ने,

· विगतमा भए-गरेका सबै असमान सन्धिहरुको खारेजी र नया“ आधारमा नया“ सन्धि, सम्झौता गर्ने

· आर्थिक, राजनैतिक, सा“स्कृतिक, ऐतिहासिक र भौगोलिक सम्बन्धको विशिष्टताका आधारमा छिमेकी भारत र चीनस“ग आपसी हितको पहिचान गरी प्राकृतिक स्रोतसाधनको सदुपयोग, वाणिज्य, पारवाहन लगायतका विषयमा सहमति कायम गर्दै राम्रो छिमेकी सम्बन्धको विकास गर्ने ।

पार्टर्ीी उपरोक्त तात्कालिक नीतिहरुले देशमा विद्यमान गृहयुद्धको शान्तिपर्ूण्ा र अग्रगामी राजनैतिक निकासका लागि अत्यन्त लचिलो र जनवादी विधिलाई व्यक्त गरेको कुरा स्वतः स्पष्ट छ । तर, जनआधार र विश्वास पूरै गुमाइसकेको सामन्ती पुरानो सत्ताले साम्राज्यवादको सैन्य सहयोगका आडमा नेपाली जनतामाथि विशुद्ध फौजी आतंक लाद्ने अपराध गरिरहेको छ । यो स्थितिमा देशभित्र र बाहिरका सम्पर्ूण्ा जनवादी शक्तिहरुले सामन्ती निरंकुश राजतन्त्रका विरुद्ध र जनताको गणतान्त्रिक आन्दोलनका पक्षमा ऐक्यबद्धता जाहेर गर्ने कुराको महत्वलाई पार्टर्ीी गम्भीरतापर्ूवक लिइरहेको छ । अतः पार्टर्ीी नेपाली जनताको जनवादी आन्दोलनको पक्षमा आवाज बुलन्द गर्न सम्बन्धित सबैस“ग अपील गर्दै आएको छ ।

विचारधारा र अन्तिम लक्ष्य ः

नेपाली र्सवहारावर्गको राजनैतिक प्रतिनिधि, ने.क.पा.-माओवादी) को निर्देशक सिद्धान्त मा.ले.मा. र यसको अन्तिम लक्ष्य समाजवाद र साम्यवाद रहेको कुरा र्सवविदीतै छ । सिद्धान्त र लक्ष्यप्रति दृढ रह“दै पार्टर्ीी ठोस परिस्थितिको ठोस विश्लेषणका आधारमा लचिलो ढंगले आफ्ना नीतिहरुको विकास गर्दै आएको छ । विचारधाराको क्षेत्रमा जडसूत्रवाद र अनुभववादका विरुद्ध निरन्तर संर्घष्ा गर्दै सिद्धान्तको सिर्जनशील प्रयोग र विकासमा पार्टर्ीी विशेष जोड दिंदै आएको छ । यही वैज्ञानिक मान्यता अनुसार, नेपाली जनताको सामन्तवाद र सामाज्यवादविरोधी जनवादी क्रान्तिको नेतृत्व गर्ने क्रममा पार्टर्ीी आफ्नो विशिष्ट विचारश्रृंखलाका रुपमा 'प्रचण्डपथ' को संश्लेषण गरेको छ । '२१ औं शताब्दीमा जनवादको विकासबारे' प्रस्तावित नवीन विचारसम्म आउ“दा, प्रचण्डपथले कम्युनिष्ट आन्दोलनमा मौलिकता र सिर्जनशीलताको नया“ आयाम प्रस्तुत गरेको छ । विचारको यो मौलिकता र सिर्जनशीलतालाई गम्भीरतापर्ूवक बुझ्न प्रयत्न नगरी पुरानो चस्माले हर्ेर्नेहरुका लागि ने.क.पा.
-माओवादी) बोधगम्य हुन सम्भव छैन ।

राजनैतिक रणनीतिबारे ः

नेपाली समाजको इतिहास एवम् यसका आर्थिक, राजनैतिक र सा“स्कृतिक विशेषताहरुको अध्ययनका आधारमा पार्टर्ीीो निष्कर्षा रहेको छ कि सामन्ती उत्पादन सम्बन्ध र साम्राज्यवादी शोषण, हस्तक्षेप नै नेपालको प्रगतिको प्रमुख बाधक हो । सामन्ती उत्पादन सम्बन्धबाट मुक्त भएपछि मात्र उत्पादक शक्तिको विकासको प्रक्रियाले अग्रगति लिनेछ र नेपाली समाजको प्रगति सुनिश्चित हुनेछ भन्ने कुरामा पार्टर्ीीृढ रह“दै आएको छ । अतः पु“जीवादी जनवादी क्रान्तिमार्फ् सामन्तवाद र साम्राज्यवादबाट नेपाली समाजलाई मुक्त गर्नु नै पार्टर्ीीे आधारभूत राजनैतिक रणनीति हो । जनयुद्धको फौजी रणनीति वस्तुतः यही राजनैतिक रणनीति हासिल गर्ने उद्देश्यमा आधारित रहेको छ ।

राजनैतिक कार्यनीति अर्थात तात्कालिक नीतिबारे ः

आजको समग्र अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय परिस्थिति एवम् देशभित्र विद्यमान शक्ति सन्तुलनको विशिष्ट स्थितिका आधारमा पार्टर्ीी अत्यन्त लचिलो कार्यनीति अपनाउ“दै आएको छ । गोलमेच सम्मेलन, अन्तरिम सरकार र संविधान-सभाको निर्वाचन यस सर्न्दर्भमा पार्टर्ीी प्रस्तुत गरेको न्यूनतम राजनैतिक कार्यनीति हो । संविधान-सभामार्फ् बन्ने नया“ संविधानले मात्र नेपाली जनताको र्सार्वभौम अधिकारलाई वास्तविक रुपमा संस्थागत गर्न सक्नेछ । जनवादको यो सर्वोत्तम विधिद्वारा नेपाली जनतालाई आफ्नो भाग्य र भविष्यको फैसला आफै गर्न दिने कुरामा कसैले असहमत हुनु पर्ने कारण नै छैन ।

यही लचिलो कार्यनीतिका आधारमा पार्टर्ीी पुरानो सामन्ती सत्तास“ग दर्ुइ पटक वार्ता समेत गरिसकेको छ । तर, दुबै पटकको वार्तामा पुरानो सत्ता राजनैतिक निकासको पक्षमा होइन षडयन्त्र र प्रतिगमनको पक्षमा रहेको कुरामात्र प्रमाणित भयो । संविधान-सभामार्फ् नया“ संविधान निर्माण गर्ने जस्तो र्सवमान्य विधिमा समेत असहमत हुनुले पुरानो सत्ता जनतामा होइन हतियार, सेना र आतंकमा मात्र विश्वास गर्दछ भन्ने तथ्यलाई नै पुष्टि गर्दछ ।

नेपालमा विगत ५३ वर्षो राजनैतिक घटनाक्रमले पटक-पटक पुष्टि गरेको छ कि जनताको जनवादी अधिकारका निमित्त सामन्ती राजतन्त्र नै प्रमुख बाधक रह“दै आएको छ । आठ वर्षो जनयुद्ध, कुख्यात नारायणहिटी हत्याकाण्ड एवम् गत असोज १८ को प्रतिगामी कदमसम्म आइपुग्दा नेपाली जनताको मनमस्तिष्कमा राजा र राजतन्त्रप्रति घृणा र आक्रोश चुलिंदै गएको छ । गणतन्त्रको चेतना आम नेपाली जनताको चेतना बनिसकेको यथार्थबाट भयभीत भएर नै दरबार हत्याकाण्ड पछिको नक्कली राजतन्त्रले संविधान-सभाको विरोध गरिरहेको छ । अहिले मुख्यतः अमेरिकी साम्राज्यवादको चाकडी र दलाली गरेर उसले नेपाल र नेपाली जनतामाथि हत्या र आतंकको राज्य कायम गर्ने दुष्प्रयास गरिरहेको छ ।

अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय समुदायलाई भ्रमित पार्ने तथा आफ्नो सामन्ती सैनिक अधिनायकवादलाई टिकाइराख्ने षडयन्त्र अर्न्तर्गत पुरानो सत्ताले नेपाली जनताको महान् र ऐतिहासिक जनवादी आन्दोलनलाई "आतंकवाद" को संज्ञा दिइरहेको छ । दक्षिण एशियामा अमेरिकी साम्राज्यवादको प्रभुत्वका लागि एउटा गोटीको भूमिकामा पतन भएको नेपालको पुरानो सामन्ती सत्ताको भ्रामक र षडयन्त्रमूलक प्रचारबाजीप्रति अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय समुदायलाई सजग गराउन पार्टर्ीी जोड दिंदै आएको छ । यस सर्न्दर्भमा पार्टर्ीी निम्न न्यूनतम नीति तथा कार्यक्रमप्रतिको प्रतिबद्धता पुनः स्पष्ट गरिन्छ ः

· पार्टर्ीीेशमा विद्यमान संकटको अग्रगामी राजनैतिक निकासका निमित्त गोलमेच सम्मेलन, अन्तरिम सरकार र संविधान-सभाको निर्वाचनमार्फ् नया“ संविधान निर्माण गर्ने प्रश्नलाई अहिले पनि आफ्नो तात्कालिक न्यूनतम राजनैतिक प्रस्ताव मान्दछ ।

· पार्टर्ीींविधान-सभामार्फ् गणतन्त्रात्मक राज्यसत्तालाई संस्थागत गर्न चाहन्छ र स्वतन्त्र एवम् निष्पक्ष निर्वाचनको स्थितिमा नेपाली जनताको अभिमत गणतन्त्रको पक्षमा व्यक्त हुने कुरामा विश्वास राख्दछ ।

· देशमा दर्ुइ विचार, दर्ुइ सेना र दर्ुइ सत्ता विद्यमान रहेको वर्तमान स्थितिमा पार्टर्ीीुवै सेनालाई निष्त्रिmय राखी संयुक्त राष्ट्र संघ एवम् अन्तर्रर्ााट्रय मानव अधिकारवादी संस्थाहरुको पर्यवेक्षणमा संविधान-सभाको निर्वाचन गर्न तयार छ ।

नया“ संविधानको अर्न्तर्वस्तुमा ः

-क) राजनैतिक ः

जनताको पर्ूण्ा र्सार्वभौमिकता, धर्मनिरपेक्ष राज्य, जनताको सर्वोच्च प्रतिनिधि संस्थाका रुपमा निर्वाचित जनप्रतिनिधि सभा, एकीकृत राष्ट्रिय सेनाको पर्ुनसंगठन, आत्मनिर्ण्र्ााो अधिकारसहित जातीय र क्षेत्रीय स्वशासनको व्यवस्था, जनइच्छाअनुसार संविधानमा परिवर्तन वा परिमार्जनको व्यवस्था, बहुदलीय प्रतिस्पर्धा, आवधिक निर्वाचन, बालिग मताधिकार, विधिको शासन, वाक तथा प्रेस स्वतन्त्रता लगायतका मौलिक अधिकारको व्यवस्था, महिला र दलितहरुका लागि विशेषाधिकारको व्यवस्था आदि रहने छन् ।

ख) आर्थिक ः

जमिन जोत्नेको सिद्धान्तअनुसार जमिनको न्यायपर्ूण्ा वितरणका निमित्त क्रान्तिकारी भूमिसुधार, आत्मनिर्भर र राष्ट्रिय औधोगिक नीति, राष्ट्रिय पु“जीको संरक्षण र विकास, प्राकृतिक साधनश्रोतको समुचित सदुपयोगका निमित्त एकीकृत राष्ट्रिय नीतिको विकास आदि रहनेछन् ।

ग) सामाजिक ः

भ्रष्टाचारी, कमिसनखोर, तष्कर र नाफाखोरहरुमाथि कडा कार्यवाही गर्ने संयन्त्रको विकास, रोजगारमूलक राष्ट्रिय र वैज्ञानिक शिक्षा प्रणालीको विकास, र्सवसुलभ स्वास्थ्य, असहाय वृद्ध र बालबालिकाहरुका लागि हेरचाहको व्यवस्था, महिला र दलितहरुमाथि भइरहेका सबै प्रकारका शोषण, भेदभाव र अपमानको अन्त्य, न्यूनतम ज्याला निर्धारणसहित औद्यौगिक व्यवस्थापनमा मजदूर सहभागिताको ग्यारेण्टी, बौद्धिक र प्राज्ञिक स्वतन्त्रता एवम् पेशागत संरक्षणको ग्यारेण्टी, सामन्तवादी र साम्राज्यवादी प्र्रतिगामी स“स्कृतिका विरुद्व जनवादी र वैज्ञानिक स“स्कृतिको विकास, एकीकृत राष्ट्रिय पर्ूवाधार विकासको योजनासहित रोजगारको व्यवस्था, जनताका वर्गीय हितहरुको संरक्षण आदि रहनेछन् ।

घ) विदेश नीति ः

· पञ्चशील र असंलग्नताका आधारमा मैत्री सम्बन्ध कायम गर्ने स्वतन्त्र विदेश नीति अवलम्बन गर्ने,

· विगतमा भए-गरेका सबै असमान सन्धिहरुको खारेजी र नया“ आधारमा नया“ सन्धि, सम्झौता गर्ने

· आर्थिक, राजनैतिक, सा“स्कृतिक, ऐतिहासिक र भौगोलिक सम्बन्धको विशिष्टताका आधारमा छिमेकी भारत र चीनस“ग आपसी हितको पहिचान गरी प्राकृतिक स्रोतसाधनको सदुपयोग, वाणिज्य, पारवाहन लगायतका विषयमा सहमति कायम गर्दै राम्रो छिमेकी सम्बन्धको विकास गर्ने ।

पार्टर्ीी उपरोक्त तात्कालिक नीतिहरुले देशमा विद्यमान गृहयुद्धको शान्तिपर्ूण्ा र अग्रगामी राजनैतिक निकासका लागि अत्यन्त लचिलो र जनवादी विधिलाई व्यक्त गरेको कुरा स्वतः स्पष्ट छ । तर, जनआधार र विश्वास पूरै गुमाइसकेको सामन्ती पुरानो सत्ताले साम्राज्यवादको सैन्य सहयोगका आडमा नेपाली जनतामाथि विशुद्ध फौजी आतंक लाद्ने अपराध गरिरहेको छ । यो स्थितिमा देशभित्र र बाहिरका सम्पर्ूण्ा जनवादी शक्तिहरुले सामन्ती निरंकुश राजतन्त्रका विरुद्ध र जनताको गणतान्त्रिक आन्दोलनका पक्षमा ऐक्यबद्धता जाहेर गर्ने कुराको महत्वलाई पार्टर्ीी गम्भीरतापर्ूवक लिइरहेको छ । अतः पार्टर्ीी नेपाली जनताको जनवादी आन्दोलनको पक्षमा आवाज बुलन्द गर्न सम्बन्धित सबैस“ग अपील गर्दै आएको छ ।

Shobhakar Budhathoki*
Nepal’s peaceful demonstrations have been opening the path for sustainable peace and ending the autocratic monarchy in the country. The historic 19-day-long peoples’ movement that began on April 6, 2006 has forced King Gyanendra to withdraw from his position as absolute monarch. The forceful reinstatement of the June 2002 dissolved parliament and handover of executive powers, ended, to some extent, the King’s illegitimate and authoritarian regime. However, the struggle goes on to achieve absolute democracy and eliminate the remaining autocratic elements in the government and throughout the country, while King Gyanendra continues to defend his February 1^st, 2005 autocratic move and position the Shah Dynasty as the patron of the country, atrocities continue to be carried out by the security forces, and human rights abuses and the use of excessive force against peaceful demonstrators goes on. The royal address that reinstated parliament completely disregards the people’s aspirations and the minimum demand of the Seven Political Party Alliance (SPA) that include the declaration of an unconditional constituent assembly election to lay the foundation for an absolute democracy and sustainable peace.

Although the royal address theoretically accepts the SPA’s roadmap, the potential for disrupting the process of state restructuring and moving forward with the roadmap remains considerable. Despite the vagueness and obvious insincerity of the monarch’s statement, the SPA welcomed the reinstatement of parliament and recommended Nepali Congress President Girija Prasad Koirala for the post of Prime Minister, which was announced as such by the King on April 27, 2006. The SPA further decided to declare the constituent assembly election; hold dialogue with the Maoists; constitute an inquiry commission to investigate the atrocities carried out during peaceful demonstrations; annul all “regressive” decisions taken and ordinances made by the King’s regime after October 2002; and compensate the martyrs’ kin and those seriously injured persons during the democratic movement.

The Maoists rejected the King’s reinstatement of parliament stating that the royal address did not address the minimum demand of the people’s movement and that they will continue the peace and democratic movement until the declaration of an unconditional constituent assembly election. They also expressed their disappointment in the SPA immediately accepting the King’s “deal” and potentially undermining the SPA – Maoist 12-point understanding that was formed in a November 2005 dialogue session. However, the Maoists have decided to withdraw their indefinite blockade of Kathmandu and District Headquarters until the first parliamentary session to be held on April 28, 2006 and have declared a three-month ceasefire, demonstrating their commitment to the 12-point understanding and in a step that seems to be giving the SPA this time to at least make significant progress in fulfilling the demands of the people.

The most recent and largest demonstrations that led to the current political situation were comprised of professionals, laborers, peasants, women, various religious and ethnic groups, etc…; generally ordinary Nepalese came out in droves to protest the King and ensure that they have a democratic and free future. Hundreds of thousands of ordinary people have joined in peaceful demonstrations against the King’s authoritarian regime and now to lobby the SPA to ensure their role in determining the future political system of the country. The consensus of ending the King’s authoritarian regime through peaceful movement was decided after continuous dialogue between the SPA and the CPN-Maoists as put forth in the 12-point understanding. The understanding provides opportunities to bring the Maoists into mainstream politics and lays out their commitment to a multiparty system, human rights, rule of law, press freedom, etc.

In response to the large peaceful demonstrations, the King’s security forces have used excessive force against the demonstrators. The army as well as the armed police and Nepal police were mobilized against the demonstrators. Protesters and bystanders alike were badly beaten, resulting in serious head wounds, broken bones, neck and back injuries and loss of sight. Tear gas was used in excess resulting in respiratory problems and a few cases of individuals who remain unconscious today due to the tear gas. The firing of tear gas was also carried out at small groups at close range. While rubber bullets were used the security forces also used live ammunition, resulting in a minimum of 15 deaths. The exact number of deaths cannot be confirmed because the security forces were seen taking away bodies from the scene of demonstrations and also have taken away the corpses of martyrs from hospitals resulting in at least one cremation without consent from the family. They had also taken injured persons who have not yet been located. The security forces also prevented ambulances, medical teams, and hospitals from carrying out medical services to injured persons on numerous occasions. The actual number of injured persons also remains unclear, but the political parties and human rights organizations have statement that more than 5,000 people were injured in 19 days of demonstrations.

The regime, including the security forces who are directly under the command of the King, must be held accountable for their actions. They have worked and continue to work with full impunity. The Royal Nepal Army, the Armed Police Force, and the Nepal Police have been given excessive powers by the King to carry out repressive measures against peaceful demonstrators, impose unnecessary prohibitory orders and curfews, and restrict the movement of ambulances, medical teams, human rights defenders and media during curfew hours, illegally detain leaders and cadres of political parties, the human rights community, journalists, etc. The regime has also used the National Intelligence Bureau, plain-clothed security forces and vigilantes to disrupt peaceful demonstrations. Some of these have been placed in crowds with weapons (grenades, pistols, etc…) to accuse the Maoists of infiltration and as an excuse to use force. Some have physically attacked leaders of the SPA and leaders of the student associations, and some have been planted among the demonstrators and have instigated violence against the security forces, human rights defenders, and medical teams.

While the King retains a significant amount of power, the reinstatement of parliament must now be considered the beginning of establishing an absolute democracy and sustainable peace in the country. The restored parliament should operate as the means of achieving the goals of the 12- point understanding, which includes the aspirations of the Nepalese people. However, parliament may not be enough and the peaceful democratic movement should and will continue to lobby leaders, and also to continue voicing Nepalese sovereignty and what that will mean for the future of the monarchy and structure of the state.

Therefore, national actors (political parties, civil society, professionals, trade unions, women and minority groups, human rights community, students, media, etc) and the international community (UN, EU, residential diplomatic offices, donors, friendly countries, etc.) must continue to support the SPA’s attempt to establish absolute democracy and sustainable peace through holding the unconditional constituent assembly election and initiating political dialogue with the Maoists. In the mean time, the international community should not blindly give funding and aid to a government that is still ultimately controlled by the monarch; a monarch that has taken power and wealth from the people and suppressed the rights of that people, nor to his security forces who have committed grievous human rights violations, particularly since February 1, 2005. The international community must play a proactive role in ensuring that the commitment made by the monarch, to give sovereignty to the people of Nepal, is upheld and fulfilled.

Q. How do you expect next week's movement to go? Girija Prasad Koirala: The outline for the movement has already been drawn. Accordingly, all the seven parties have vowed to take the movement to its climax. This movement is going to be different from all the ones before. Our movement will be certainly peaceful. There have been attempts to link our movement with the Maoists' strike but it is the continuation of our three-year-long agitation. I take no notice of how others link the continuation of our movement. It is clear that we are not going with the Maoists. We are prepared to lead the movement peacefully on our own. We will take this movement as the people's movement. This movement is neither for an individual nor for a party; it is for the welfare of all Nepalese, to restore their rights that have been snatched from them. Therefore, all the people, whether from villages or from cities, they are agitated. We need to coordinate it and move ahead united. Q: Your movement has been patchy, often slumping and losing momentum over the last three years. How will it differ this time? Koirala: I have always told the leaders of all parties that our main focus should be on giving continuity to the movement. There have been highs and lows. But now we have concluded not to stop the movement under any circumstances. Q: First you decided for a showdown in the capital but immediately you changed the decision to make a nationwide movement. Why? Koirala: It is difficult to understand the movement and this is our strategy as well. The movement will take place in the districts too, but will be focussed in the capital. Because the international community's eyes are on the capital, everyone's attention is drawn here. We have decided to carry out a decentralized movement nationwide with the main focus in the capital. Q: But dispersing it to the districts will have no effect in Kathmandu, right? Koirala: People who can make it (to Kathmandu) will join the movement here and the rest will continue their movements in their respective districts. Q: When you planned for the capital-centric movement, why did you announce the nationwide strike? Will this not make it difficult for the people planning to come to Kathmandu? Koirala: It is not that there will be no showdown during the strike. The strike will rather include all the people in the movement. It will be a genuine "people's movement" then. Q: How can people come to Kathmandu with a three-day-long bandh? Koirala: The cadres will have already arrived by then. Many others will still be coming and some of them can come even after the strike is over. There will be no shortage of people. Q: How many cadres do you expect to bring in? Koirala: That cannot be counted. But it will be massive. With all the professional organizations joining in, its scope will be huge. Q: You reached yet another agreement with the Maoists prior to the movement. How are your relations with them now? Koirala: Many people have had a lot to say about the 12-point seven parties-Maoist pact. Some had reservations too. But we held talks with the Maoists, and the international community, adhering to our basic ideals. Our basic ideal is to put an end to the authoritarian rule, restore peace and complete democracy for a free, sovereign and prosperous Nepal. I have made these points clear to the Chinese, Americans and others. The 12-point pact is included within this ideal of ours. They even asked me if I was leaving behind BP's policy of national reconciliation. If you study (the understanding) well, even that policy is included in it. BP's reconciliation was between the King and the people as there was no third party like today's Maoists involved. But we have a third power now. That’s why my concern is reconciliation between all the three sides.

Another personal view of mine is that we should not distort history's continuity, be it individual or institutional. If I have a bad name but my work is good, then it is the work and not the name that is evaluated. It is history which identifies characters. If history is erased so are our identities. Nepali congress has a history and it is from that history we have our identity. That’s why we should keep the history, and with it identity, intact.

Q: Does protecting history mean protecting the monarchy as well? Koirala: We have not jumped to republicanism as yet. We have reached as far as ceremonial monarchy. That is complete democracy. The Nepali Congress has not reached republicanism but the general mood in the nation definitely has. The BBC once asked me what 'complete democracy' meant. I told them that the Queen (UK) neither intervenes in the parliament nor in the daily state affairs. I told them that that was the status of a ceremonial monarch. Continuity of history means moving on by the current constitution. Even if we go to a constituent assembly, we have to move through this constitution. It will give continuity to both history and identity. Our movement will be complete and the king, too, will not be left with any rights. Q: Even with the king's autocratic modus operandi and the persistent threats from some ministers, your views haven't changed? Koirala: This is not a one-day affair. I may not be alive till then, but that day is bound to come. Everybody talks about (keeping) the king now, I might do it too. But such an environment has already been created that even if I am not there, nobody can stop it. The seed for complete democracy has already been sown. It's a different thing if the king changes everything in time, otherwise history will be made this way. Q. You face two different schools of thought within your own party- one is against the understanding with the Maoists, the other advocates republicanism, right? Koirala: The international community including America, too, says we should not move ahead with the Maoists, saying the Maoists cannot be trusted. We are democratic parties. Democratic parties have responsibilities. That responsibility is to bring the undemocratic forces into the democratic-constitutional fold. It is our responsibility and duty. Ok, let's assume for a while that I will fail; I may be unsuccessful but the country will not, only Girija Prasad will fail. But if I become successful, a small underdeveloped country that perhaps doesn't enjoy much importance in the world map will set an example for the international community. And an example for the terrorists across the world that the problem can be resolved only through dialogue. Consider this as my political gamble. Q: Incidentally, the US ambassador has been warning that the Maoists might take total control with the aid of the movement. What do you say? Koirala: In order to prevent that from happening, I have always wanted to bring them into the democratic framework. America and all the others have their contradictions here. They say that there is no military solution and we need to find a political solution but why do they fear when we try to bring the Maoists closer to the political solution? I may fail when a responsible political party attempts to bring the Maoists in the political mainstream but the nation will definitely not fail. Q: You might have talked about abandoning and managing the arms with Prachanda. Did you have any agreements? Koirala: We need a third party to assist in this regard. I do not agree that there should be a tri-polar talk (seven parties, Maoists and the king) regarding the management of the arms. I have always told the Maoists that I never can trust guns; whether they belong to the Maoists or the king. Many incidents have occurred recently. I warned (the rebel leaders), "Did not the King tell you to rule jointly saying that he will jail all others. That brought a divide between you two (Prachanda and Baburam). Prachanda accused Baburam of being pro-Indian while the Baburam blamed Prachanda of being pro-palace. So how can I trust your gun? That’s why I have always told that I can never trust both guns. If you and the king joined hands what will be the condition of the democratic forces? That’s why we need a third party. You might have fears about we joining hands with the king too." Q. At what stage will that third party arrive? Koirala: In the situation of talks. It will not come in this situation. The third party will come once they (Maoists) are brought to the negotiating table. Negotiation with the Maoists will be held in the presence of the third party. What we have done so far with the Maoists is just an understanding. They should be brought into this process gradually. (Laughs) Not like the way I light my cigarette with the flash of a matchstick. Q. What will be the king's role in the negotiation to be held in the presence of a third party? Koirala: The king himself should think about his role, not me. I can talk about my role; the king must relinquish his rights. He should be ready to become a ceremonial king. Q. The Maoists are ready to keep a ceremonial king? Koirala: Look, I don’t want to say everything. It may spoil the broth. You don’t ask me more than this. I am not speaking just like that (but) with self-confidence. I am speaking with the confidence which I developed after meeting them. After (Prachanda’s interview in) Kantipur, Indian (newspaper) Hindu and BBC TV, (people?) came to me saying (Prachanda) spoke in this way. I don’t want to comment on what Prachanda said in those interviews. I told them to look at what I speak outside and what I say here and now. We speak outside to encourage our cadres. Their (Maoists') cadres have guns in their hands; therefore they speak to encourage their cadres. Q. Why did you refuse to issue a joint press statement when the seven parties reached the second understanding with the Maoists? Koirala: It was me who did not agree to issue a joint statement. I had told them that I would not do this in any case. I told Prachanda that I could not sign a joint statement when I do not trust both guns. On the last day as we were having a discussion with Sher Bahadur Deubas (other SPA leaders) we received a phone call from them (Maoists). I said this (joint statement) is not possible. They said OK. They know why I said so. We should not pick at this anymore; what is in the forming will be spoilt. Q. CPN-UML General Secretary Madhav Kumar Nepal has been detained and shifted from house arrest to police custody. It is said, the government is attempting to bring a split in the SPA. What is your opinion? Koirala: Say the king, why do you say the government? I don’t accept that this is a government. The king has been trying (to cause a divide) from the beginning. He has been doing this. But the SPA won’t be deterred. We should move based on trust. They said many things to me about Sher Bahadur Deuba. That doesn't work; we have to trust. If you do not trust (me) and think that this cup of tea is poisoned, you will not drink it. If you walk around with such suspicion in mind, you cannot drink even water anywhere. Our society works on the basis of trust. Everyone makes a mistake once; once he confesses that he will not repeat it, we should believe him. It's not that we did not make mistakes; we have conceded our mistakes. Others too have conceded their mistakes. Therefore, we are not going to repeat those mistakes, nor will others. Q. What kind of mistakes do you think did the Nepali Congress make? Koirala: It’s after we formed the government. Democracy had just arrived. I also didn’t know what democracy was. I did not know how the parliamentary system works under a constitutional monarchy. I became the Prime Minister in an unexpected manner. I look at the secretaries, and they think new people are in the government. I doubt them and they doubt me. I thought an interaction might help. For that, I thought it would be better to begin from the top level. I called the king from my office; he said "ok." I went (to the palace) said to the King, “Your Majesty, I don’t know how both the constitutional monarchy and parliamentary system work together. Your Majesty has to point out when I make a mistake.” The King said, “I also don’t know how a constitutional monarchy and parliamentary system work out, you point out when I make a mistake.” Thus began the interaction at the top level. Confidence-building began from there. Based on that confidence, things started moving with the secretaries too. You make many mistakes even while running the house. But we keep on learning. BP Koirala used to say that one couldn't learn swimming without diving into the river. Mistakes do take place, but we move forward by correcting them. This forms the very basis of democracy. Q. They say the people do believe in the multi-party system but one reason why they haven't participated in the seven-party movement is because of the nepotism, favouritism and corruption by the Congress and other parties? Koirala: This question has now become old. Look at the king (King's rule)- isn't there nepotism and favouritism? Isn't there corruption? Nothing is in order, (but) who is saying anything? Q. Will the Congress do the same after forming the government again? Koirala: The Nepali Congress has made some mistakes. I won't say only the Congress; all (parties) have done. Maybe you too have kept your near and dear ones in your newspaper! Q. We haven't. Koirala: I know; everybody does that. That is a mistake. Once this is accepted, it is not repeated. All political parties have conceded this. Q. How was the role of the palace? Koirala: The former king knew something about statesmanship; the way he spoke and his behaviour were different. This king is very ambitious. I have told him- "Your Majesty's ambition is high, credibility is low. The ambition should be lowered and the credibility raised." The country is in such a situation because the king tried to make a fast jump. The economy has weakened to the extent that the Nepal Rastra Bank Governor has started saying that the revenue collected is not enough even to meet the general expenditure. Whether it was while appointing members to the National Assembly or forming the Armed Police Force (the king's role was not satisfactory). The king also hesitated to mobilise the army (against the Maoists); the army too didn't like it. All this became clearer after this king came. Actually I should have made it public from the Tudikhel that the army did not oblige when I wanted to mobilise it. But I didn't do so. This was a great mistake on my part, a blunder. Q. Talking about the international community, how have you taken China's State Councillor's visit? Koirala: There has been a change in China's (Nepal) policy. The earlier policy that this is Nepal's internal matter no more exists. I used to tell them (Chinese authorities) that you are our neighbours and cannot shy away by saying so. I had told them that a neighbour has to say something at such times, has to raise the issue of reconciliation. I told them about my personal opinion that this very constitution should be reactivated for national reconciliation. He (Chinese State Councillor) said the same thing. I even told him that it was BP (Koirala) who laid the foundations of China-Nepal friendship. Q. How do you see the American role? Koirala: What should I say about America's stance? I had told the Ambassador (Moriarty) that you are trying to give the king a safety valve. Q. You keep saying informally that we are about to fall in the global strategy. Won't you make it clear? Koirala: If you look at the international situation, there is polarisation taking place. Polarisation for international power balance. If that polarisation takes place successfully, the world will be balanced, if not there will be instability. If you talk about nature, Tsunami and earthquakes came for natural balance. A similar polarisation does take place in politics too. And if we are to become part of world politics while such a polarisation is taking place, it will dump us in chaos. I told this to the Americans and others. I have been telling them not to make us a part (of polarisation) and that we are a small country. Q. Do you mean that America is trying to use Nepal, situated between two powerful countries India and China? Koirala: I cannot say that. What I feel is Nepal will not exist should it become a part of that strategy. We should be careful about that; the king, too, should think about it. Q. The king is expected to announce the general elections on the occasion of the Nepali New Year 2063 BS. What will be your reaction? Koirala: For now, I can only put forward my personal opinion. (Such an announcement) will be a big accident. We have to boycott it. If we accept the elections, it will be like giving legitimacy to the king's rule. We will have to boycott (the general elections) the way we boycotted the municipal polls. What our party and the seven-party alliance say may be different; this is my personal thinking. Q. You always say "my party", "the seven parties". Aren't you under pressure from the polarisation within your own party? Koirala: Maybe a polarisation is taking place even among the journalists. This happens in the parties as well. It is natural in democracy. It happens in the seven parties too, but it's my job not to let it happen in the seven parties. So that the international community's support is not disturbed. This effort of mine will continue. People come to me and tell me different things; I don't go by them. Q. Some leaders within your own party are in favour of unity with the king, not with the Maoists, right? Koirala: I don't see any room for reconciliation with the king. At least talks are going on to bring the Maoists (to the mainstream). They at least declared a unilateral ceasefire for four months. I don't understand why everybody is taking the 12-point understanding in such a big manner. This is just a beginning. We should move ahead slowly. Q. Is that easy? The international community led by America pressured you not to move ahead, no? Koirala: It is difficult. I am not discouraged. I don't want to get stuck because someone made it difficult for me. I want to tread along my path. I won't be deviated. It's not that the problem will be solved if you minus the Maoists and hold talks with the king; lasting peace is possible only by bringing them (Maoists) to the mainstream. Q. What about your party's future leadership? Koirala: We should move ahead united. I cannot make somebody the leader. Such a difficult time is the right time to become a leader. But only this difficult situation will tell as to who emerges as the leader. Q. Many have pinned their hopes on you for the unity between the two Congress parties. What will you do? Koirala: I talked about the unification. I haven't said I won't do this. Sher Bahadur ji (Sher Bahadur Deuba) had come. What we considered was that both our parties have concluded their general conventions. Our job is to ease the difficulties. Lets move ahead completely united for the movement. Hearts will meet; unification will be easier for both.

Dear Nepali citizens and foreign lovers of Nepal, You might be wondering why Nepal is still poor when its countries of equal economic status has reached the sky with booming economic development. Let me try to answer this is one of the reason, I have recently found.

Nepal is one of the poorest countries of the world but Nepal's king is the highest paid king of the world.

The income of Nepali king Gyanendra Bir Bikram Shah Dev is :
2,426 times higher than that of Chinese president
318 times of Pakistani president
173 times higher than that of Russian president
57 times higher than higher than that of Indian president
301 times higher than that that of French president
15 times higher than that of British president
10 times higher than that of American president

Netherlands queen's income : Rs. 22,32,00,000 (per capita income Rs 17,25,120 )
American president earns Rs. 3,24,00,000 (1,15,20,000 returns in tax), (per capita income Rs 25,24,320)
Japanese king earns Rs. 22,23,52,000 (per capita income Rs.24,15,600)
Chinese president earns Rs. 1,35,000 (per capita income Rs 67,680)
Indian president earns Rs. 10,11,000 (per capita income Rs 34,560)
French president earns Rs 57,96,000 (per capita income Rs 15,84,000)
Pakistani president earns (after the coup) Rs 10,94,000 (per capita income 29,520)
British Queen does not get any salary from the state. She has a property of Rs 30,24,00,00,000 (the profit of investment, after paying the tax, is hers) but even her necklace is the property of the country.
British prime minister earns Rs 2,19,58,000 (per capita income is Rs 18,16,200)
Russian president earns Rs 19,03,000 (per capita income is Rs 1,54,000)
Belgium king receives salary as a civil servant (per capita income is Rs 16,74,000)
And,
Nepali king earns Rs 61,91,00,000 (per capita income is Rs 16,560=US$ 230)
[This means the Nepali king earns Rs. 19,878 times higher than a citizen. Last year it was 37,385 times higher. Thus a citizen can earn as much as the king earns in a year only after working for 19,000 years or in 316 lives. Ho la!]

Appendix
Nepali royal family is involved in various business.
A king does not have to pay tax according to Nepal's constitution.
The present king has inherited the property of earlier king's family and nobody knows how much it is.
This king has taken Rs 1,06,45,00,000 in past three years for his small family

Courtesy: Mulyankan Monthly (Nov-Dec 2005)
US dollar 1 = Rs 72
So we want to finish monarchy.

Baburam Bhattarai

In his famous work The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, Karl Marx had said: "Hegel observes somewhere that all great incidents and individuals of world history occur, as it were, twice. He forgot to add: the first time as tragedy, the second as farce." It was while drawing a parallel between the coup of 1851 by Napoleon's nephew Louis Bonaparte, who had then crowned himself as Napoleon III, and the original Napoleonic coup of 1799. Of course, this was in a satirical sense.

Similar law of Hegelian dialectics seems to be in operation in the history of Nepal, too. While the father, King Mahendra, had staged a military coup on December 16, 1960 against the first parliamentary democracy established after 1950 to centralise all power in himself, now the son, King Gyanendra, has staged another military coup on February 1, 2005 against the second parliamentary democracy restored after 1990 and centralised all state power in himself. However, for the politically enlightened ones, it is not difficult to see beneath the surface that this episode of February 1 is merely a continuation or culmination of the episode of June 1, 2001, when the relatively more weak or liberal King Birendra, along with his entire family, was butchered and a new dynasty ushered in by Gyanendra. This way, the "First February" of the Nepalese history seems to be a carbon copy of the "Eighteenth Brumaire" of the French history; but it is yet to be seen whether it will be more 'tragic' or more 'farcical'.

The Essence of the Royal Regression

In his every public utterances after the coup, including the 'royal proclamation' of February 1, Gyanendra has laboured hard to sell the theory that his present move is designed to restore 'peace' and consolidate 'multi-party democracy' by exorcising the ghost of 'terrorism' [i.e. the ongoing revolutionary People's War led by the CPN(Maoist), and this is meant only for a definite time-frame of coming three years. While talking to a group of selected media persons on February 24, he has particularly taken pains to project himself as the real Messiah of 'democracy' and the exorcist of 'terrorism' and has demanded of the parliamentary political parties and the entire members of the international community to cooperate with him in this grand venture against 'terrorism'. Thus, he has sought to project himself as the true follower of the US President George W. Bush in the international crusade against 'terrorism' and begged everybody to grant legitimacy to his autocratic military regime at least on that count. Of course, he seems to have learnt a few lessons from General Musarraf of Pakistan.

However, Gyanendra's such political gimmicks are not cutting much ice among the masses, as he has a tainted image as the hardliner autocrat even within the palace since his father's and bother's days and is particularly hated among the public as the real fratricidal and regicidal culprit in the palace massacre of June 1, 2001. Particularly after his induction of the old palace stooges of known anti-democratic persuasions like Tulsi Giri and Kirti Nidhi Bista as his principal political associates and his abduction of all fundamental and democratic rights of the people with the contrywide declaration of emergency, the essential nature of his despotic military rule has been thoroughly unmasked. Despite his incessant parroting about his commitments towards 'multi-party democracy' and 'constitutional monarchy' , all his real practices so far including the crackdown on political parties and their leaders, free media and human rights activists and blatant trampling upon the limited democratic provisions of the old constitution, leave one in no doubt that the supine parliamentary democratic system has been snuffed out and the autocratic monarchy restored in the country.

Hence the questions arise: How could the limited bourgeois democratic system established after 1990 be abolished and the autocratic monarchy restored so smoothly? Should not the wheel of history move forward rather than backward? For the correct answers to these questions, one has to grasp the laws of social development in a scientific and objective manner and to correctly evaluate the weaknesses and limitations of the chronically infirm parliamentary system after 1990.

Firstly, it should be acknowledged that struggle between social classes provides the basic motive forces of societal development. The present Nepalese society in a semi-feudal and semi-colonial stage is a multi-class society, and the principal struggle there is among the feudal, the bourgeois and the proletarian classes. All the three principle contending classes have their allies, too. The traditionally dominant feudal class has the comprador and bureaucratic bourgeoisie with it; the small and weak bourgeois class has a section of the rural and urban petty-bourgeois class with it; and the proletariat has the vast number of poor peasants and semi-proletariat with it. This basically triangular class contention is increasingly turning into a bi-polar contention after the initiation and development of revolutionary People's War under the leadership of the proletariat since 1996. In other words, according to the law of class struggle and social development , the parasitic reactionary classes are polarised on one side under the leadership of the most capable and strong class among themselves, and on the other side are rallied the working and the progressive classes under the leadership of the most advanced class, the proletariat. As the monarchy representing the feudal and comprador and bureaucratic bourgeois classes is historically the strongest representative of the reactionary classes in Nepal, the parasitic classes most adversely affected by the revolutionary People's War have been increasingly rallying under the leadership of the monarchy. This is the rationale and essence of the current royal regression or the restoration of autocratic monarchy in the social class terms. The regressive march of the reactionary classes in opposition to the progressive march of the working classes is perfectly in keeping with the dialectical law of social development.

Secondly, viewing from a further political angle, it should be acknowledged that the inherent defects and weaknesses of the bourgeois parliamentary democracy established after 1990 and the general infirmity and incapacity of the middle strata and forces also provided an objective basis for the ultimate feudal autocratic regression. Historically, the major parliamentary political forces, viz. the Nepali Congress and later the revisionist UML, enjoy no independent class base of their own, and tend to represent a hodge-podge of class forces ranging from the feudals and comprador and bureaucratic bourgeoisie to the petty-bourgeoisie and constantly take vacillating and conciliatory political positions. Contrary to this, the monarchy traditionally draws its strength from the prevailing feudal property and cultural relations, and principally, from its monopoly hold over the Royal Nepal Army (RNA). To be more specific, the political change and the Constitution of 1990 did not properly settle the question of 'state sovereignty' traditionally claimed by the monarchy and left the final 'state authority' and strategic control over the RNA in the hands of the monarchy. This 'historical blunder' (to paraphrase Jyoti Basu from India!) paved the way for the monarchy to gradually gobble up the parliament and the Constitution and consummate the current royal regression. Moreover, the parliamentary forces during their twelve years long rule in between did nothing to bring about a progressive transformation in the traditionally feudal and increasingly comprador and bureaucratic capitalist socio-economic and cultural base of the society. In the later period, particularly along with the rapid development of the revolutionary People's War, their class and political base got further eroded. As a result, the upper strata of the society which had backed the parliamentary forces after the political change of 1990 gradually returned back to the fold of the monarchy and the lower and a section of the middle strata naturally got polarized around the revolutionary People's War. This dilemma of the reformist parliamentary forces has been summed up in Chairman Com. Prachanda's recent People's War Anniversary statement thus: "Ultimately, the so-called royal proclamation of February 1 has not only exposed the irrelevance of reformism in the Nepalese politics, but also shattered the collective lethargy of the parliamentary political forces."

Thirdly, from a military point of view, this action of total centralization of the old state authority in the absolute monarchy can been as an attempt of the moribund reactionary classes to wage a final battle with the revolutionary forces in the ever mounting class war in the country. In view of the recent declaration of the CPN (Maoist) to lead the nine-year old revolutionary People's War into the final and decisive stage of strategic offensive, it is not unnatural, though foolish, for the frightened reactionary classes to attempt to wage a final battle of life and death under the direct leadership of the monarchy, which has assumed supreme commandership of the RNA since its inception. In the recent past the pathetic showing of the RNA in almost every real battle with the People's Liberation Army (PLA) has been blamed by certain quarters on the contradictions of de jure political leadership of the parliamentary forces and de facto leadership of the monarchy over the RNA, Also, it is not hard to understand the super military ambitions of Gyanendra, who has grabbed the throne by butchering the entire family of his brother, Birendra, to project himself as the great savior of his tottering feudal and comprador-bureaucratic bourgeois class. Nevertheless, as any common student of military science would know, the victory or defeat of a particular army ultimately depends more on its social class base and the political goal rather than on the leadership prowess of its commander, and in that sense the ultimate defeat of the reactionary RNA should be a foregone conclusion and Gyanendra's dream would be mere chimera.

Role of the International Forces

In the present day world of imperialist globalization any internal political event has more international ramifications than ever before. Hence the February 1 royal regression has generated worldwide reactions, and all major world and regional powers and organizations, including the UN, the USA, the UK, the EU, India, China and others have issued public statements on the question. Surprisingly none of the major international players have supported Gyanendra's regressive steps so far. Not only that the major powers like the USA, the UK, the EU and India, which have been the principal props for the reactionary regimes in Nepal in the past, have publicly opposed the current developments, and others like China, Russia, Pakistan, Bangladesh etc. have commented upon the events as 'internal affairs of Nepal'. The most significant international development has been the suspension of military aid by India and the UK (the USA also appears to be toeing the same line) and suspension of 'development aid' by a number of EU countries. International human rights organisations such as the Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, etc., have publicly denounced the royal regime for its rampant violations of human and democratic rights of the people. Thus the autocratic royal regime has been totally isolated from the international community so far, which is a good omen for the democratic movement.

However, the despotic regime is desperately seeking to exploit two issues to gain international support for itself. The first is the 'anti-terrorism' card, and the second, the 'geo-political' card. The hackneyed 'anti-terrorism' card, much exploited after September Eleven by all and sundry petty dictators and reactionary regimes of the world, has already lost much of its original steam and is yet to be seen how it will fare in Gyanendra's case. But one can be fairly certain that the enlightened world public opinion won't be easily hoodwinked by the 'anti-terrorism' claims of a person of Gyanendra's ilk, whose hands are blood-stained in the infamous palace massacre and who has now launched a countryside reign of military terror against the people by suspending all political and fundamental rights. Nevertheless, as all the values and norms in a class-divided society are governed by class interests, it won't be surprising if some of the reactionary rulers of the world would ultimately back the regressive royal regime, overtly or covertly.

As far as the 'geo-political' card of the country's strategic positioning between the two super-states of China and India is concerned, Gyanendra's attempts to repeat the skillful diplomatic maneuvering of playing one neighbour against the other as practiced by his father, Mahendra, in the specific cold-war context of the last century cannot be expected to bear much fruit in the changed situation of international balance of forces in general and the India-China relations in particular. The recent coming together of the USA and India and their coordinated policy against royal regression may tempt Gyanendra to play the China card. He has given enough hints of this by appointing the old royalist Kirti Nidhi Bista with a known pro-China tilt as one of his principle associates in the government. Similarly, Pakistan and Bangladesh, with traditional contradictions with India, may provide some breathing space for the royal regime; some indications of which have already come from the Pakistani ambassador in Kathmandu. However, given the extremely shaky position and uncertain future of Gyanendra himself, it is hard to believe that any of the neighbours will go beyond diplomatic niceties to extend him any substantial material help. Similarly, on the part of the proletarian revolutionaries they should be prudent enough to practice strategic firmness and tactical flexibility in the matters of diplomatic relations particularly with the immediate neighbours.

Another noteworthy factor in recent days is the indication of some positive change in the attitude of major international and regional powers towards the revolutionary forces in Nepal. Due to their own distorted class outlook and interests, these major powers in the past used to regard the monarchy and the parliamentary forces as the so-called 'two pillars of stability', and they were seen working hard to bring about a grand alliance between the two against the revolutionary democratic forces. Now they seem to be increasingly veering round a 'three pillar' theory, including the revolutionary forces; which is, of course, a step forward. But the historical necessity and the new objective reality of the country is that the new 'two pillars' of parliamentary and revolutionary democratic forces join hands to uproot the outdated and rotten third 'pillar' of monarchy. The CPN(Maoist) has already made a policy decision to this effect, which is reflected in the recent Anniversary statement issued by Chairman Com. Prachanda.

The Question of Democratic Republic

After the royal regression of February 1, there are seen some important developments in the internal political situation. Whereas earlier the national politics was divided into three streams of monarchy, parliamentary democracy and revolutionary people's democracy, now it is gradually getting polarized into two broad streams of monarchy and democracy. Particularly, the leaders, cadres and supporters of parliamentary democracy have now seen through the anti-democracy maneuvering and divide-and-rule policy of the monarchy in the past and their collective ire against the monarchy has sharpened more than ever before. Though there are sponsored public rallies and statements in favour of the autocratic monarchy on a daily basis, none of the known political parties or their leaders have openly endorsed the royal move so far. While the royal regime has laboured hard to propagate that the harsh autocratic measures are directed only against the 'terrorists' (i.e. Maoist revolutionaries), the people have increasingly realized that they are against all the democratic forces. Similarly, almost all the members of 'civil society', media persons, human rights organizations, professional organizations, etc. have openly come out against the royal coup. This is obviously a good sign for the future of democracy in the country.

However, it is a matter of serious concern that even after more than a mouth since the coup the democratic forces have not been able to come up with an effective & coordinated plan, programme or mechanism of resistance against the autocratic monarchy. The CPN (Maoist) attempted to provide initial tempo to the resistance movement by organizing a three-day 'Napal Bandh' (shut-down) and a fifteen-day transportation blockade in February, and is planning further mass-mobilization and military-action programmes in coming months. The parliamentary forces did organize some propaganda activities from India and symbolic public rallies within the country, and are planning peaceful mass-arrest programmes for the future. But the desired sharp attacks against the monarchy in a unified manner, firstly, amongst the parliamentary forces and, secondly, between the parliamentary and revolutionary democratic forces, has not materialized so far. Whereas the Nepali Congress has come out more sharply against the monarchy, the so-called 'leftist' UML has made a relatively muted response against the royal coup. This has naturally raised some apprehensions among the masses whether a new 'Rayamajhi' trend (i.e. the capitulation of the then general secretary of the CPN, Keshar Jang Rayamajhi, to the monarchy in the 1960s) is in the offing. However, after so much blood-bath the situation has undergone a sea change since then. Hence, even if a few Rayamajhis from the left camp and a few Tulsi Giris from the Nepali Congress camp may arise, the overwhelming majorities of the leaders & cadres of the political parties and the general masses of the people are likely to fight till the end against the autocratic monarchy. Moreover, with the presence of the revolutionary PLA to take on the monarchist RNA, and the more favourable international situation than ever to fight against the absolute monarchy, a new objective ground is prepared for the democratic political forces to mount a unified assault against the monarchy so as to sweep it away for ever.

Precisely in this context the question of anti-monarchy common minimum programme and slogan acceptable to all the democratic forces, including the parliamentary and revolutionary democratic forces and the international community, has become pertinent. It has been the considered view of the CPN(Maoist) that the programme of election to a representative Constituent Assembly and institutionalization of the democratic republic is best suited for the purpose. The old slogan of restoration of the parliament or re-activization and amendment of 1990 Constitution, advanced by the parliamentary forces and the international community, has been totally outdated and inadequate in the new context. A brief recapitulation of the incessant struggle between the monarchy and democracy since the 1950s in the country should leave no one in doubt that without the complete abolition of the archaic institution of feudal monarchy and its puppet RNA no form of democracy can be secure and institutional in Nepal. It has been proved time and again that the so-called 'constitutional monarchy' seen in operation in some of the highly developed capitalist countries cannot be replicated in a semi-feudal & semi-colonial society. Hence any attempt on the part of the parliamentary political parties and the international forces to preserve the thoroughly rotten and discredited institution of monarchy, in this or that pretext, does not correspond with the historical necessity and ground reality of balance of forces in the country, and the agenda of 'democratic republic' has entered the Nepalese politics.

As for as the sincere commitment of the revolutionary democratic forces, who aspire to reach socialism and communism via a new democratic republic, towards a bourgeois democratic republic is concerned, the CPN(Maoist) has time and again clarified its principled position towards the historical necessity of passing through a sub-stage of democratic republic in the specificities of Nepal. Particularly, in "An Executive Summary of the Proposal Put Forward by CPN(Maoist) for the Negotiations" presented during the negotiations in April 2003 [See, Some Important Documents of Communist Party of Nepal(Maoist), 2004] the minimum content and the process of realization of this democratic republic through a Constituent Assembly has been expressed in concrete terms. The fact that the democratic republic is envisaged to be institutionalized through a freely elected Constituent Assembly, should cast away any illusions about the democratic credentials of the revolutionary forces. Further concrete issues like the creation of a new national army after the dissolution of the royal mercenary RNA can be discussed during the process of negotiations.

The need of the hour is unity of all democratic forces of the country on the common minimum programme of a democratic republic. If anything is lacking so far it is the real democratic vision and will power on the part of the leadership of major political parties. Also, it is the time to win confidence of the masses of the people through a correct projection of the democratic credentials of political parties, and for this the correct practice of inner-party democracy would be a significant component.

In the end, it may be useful to recollect Engels to understand why a proletarian party needs to uphold the programme of a bourgeois republic in the particular historical specificities of a country like present-day Nepal. Lambasting the Bukuninist anarchists who had opposed the immediate programme of a republic in nineteenth-century Spain, Engels had said:

"When the Republic was proclaimed in February 1873, the Spanish members of the Alliance [i.e. Bakuninist 'International'] found themselves in a quandary. Spain is such a backward country industrially that there can be no question there of immediate complete emancipation of the working class. Spain will first have to pass through various preliminary stages of development and remove quite a number of obstacles from its path. The Republic offered a chance of going through these stages in the shortest possible time and quickly surmounting the obstacles. But this chance be taken only if the Spanish working class played an active political role." [From "The Bakuninists at Work"]

From The Worker

R0lpa, Rukum & Jayarkot districts in Western Nepal have had the highest number of casualties and faced the worst type of state repression during the first one year of the people's war. Even among these Mirul village in the lap of the mighty Jaljala mountains in Rolpa district has borne the brunt of severest genocidal campaign by the reactionary state, where more than a dozen revolutionary activists and peasants have been brutally murdered by the police and their hirelings.

The worst instance of state terrorism and genocide so far was witnessed in this red bastion inhabited by poor peasants of oppressed nationalities of Kham Magar stock on November 17, 1996. On that day armed police forces and state protected goons from the surrounding areas descended on Mirul, ransacked the peasant households and took into custody almost all the unarmed adult population from two wards of Rapa and Bisauni in the Mirul VDC. While the rest were released subsequently after thorough screening and dire warnings, five of them were taken to a nearby jungle and shot dead. Those brutally murdered were 70 year old Bardan Roka, 65 year old Singha Budha and Bal Prasad Roka, Dilman Roka and Kumari Budha. The young woman revolutionary Kumari Budha was still alive when her body was set on fire.

On December 3, Sunsara Budha along with her 2 year old daughter was captured, stripped naked, paraded through villages and shot dead In front of her infant child by the armed state goons.

Similar instances of state terrorism and brutality have recurred regularly in Mirul with a view to shatter the revolutionary will-power of the masses into submission. However, the terror tactics has boomeranged on the reactionaries. Not only have the peasant masses boldly resisted this repression, they have retaliated by eliminating the enemy agents in the village and virtually seized the local power In their own hands. Mirul has thus shown the way for the liberation of the oppressed masses in the country.

By Nallamma International Women�s Day (IWD) is the story of ordinary women as makers of history; it is rooted in the centuries-old struggle of women to participate in society on an equal footing with men. The idea of having an international women�s day was first put forward at the turn of the 20th century amid rapid world industrialization and capitalist economic expansion that led to protests over working conditions. IWD is a time to reflect on progress made, to call for change and to celebrate acts of courage and determination by ordinary women who have played an extraordinary role in the history of women�s rights. IWD, March 8, is a holiday celebrated by the oppressed around the world. It is a holiday that came out of the struggle of women. In particular, the struggle of immigrant garment workers in New York�s Lower East Side provided the inspiration for the demand that there be a special day to celebrate the struggle of women. Women Workers� pioneering struggles in US Around the turn of the century thousands of women worked in the garment district in New York. Most of these women were immigrants from Russia, Italy and Poland. They worked up to 15 hours a day and were paid by rate per piece. They were charged for needles, thread, electricity, and even the crude boxes they had to sit on because there were no chairs. They were issued harsh fines�for being late, for damaged work, for taking too much time in the toilet. Children also worked for long hours, huddled in the corners of the shops, snipping threads from finished garments. One garment worker recalled, �We wore cheap clothes, lived in cheap tenements, ate cheap food. There was nothing to look forward to, nothing to expect the next day to be better.�� The labour struggle in the US traditionally concentrated on men. A little examination shows that women carried their weight and their share from the beginning, both supporting the men�s organizing and quite soon, after realizing that women�s needs were ignored in the existing unions, forming women�s caucuses or all women�s unions. The first all women strikes took place in the 1820�s in the New England tailoring trades. The most famous of the early strikes took place at the Lowell cotton mills in Massachusetts. Here young women worked eighty-one hours a week for three dollars, one and a quarter of which went for room and board at the Lowell company boarding houses. The factories originally opened at 7 AM, but for men, noticing that women were less �energetic� if they ate before working, changed the opening hour to 5 AM, with a breakfast break at 7 AM,. (for one-half hour). In 1834, after several wage cuts, the Lowell women walked out, only to return several days later at the reduced rates. They were courageous but the company had the power; a poor record or a disciplinary action could lead to blacklisting. In 1836 they walked out again, singing through the streets of the town: Oh, isn�t it a pity such a pretty girl as I Should be sent to the factory to pine away and die. Again they returned to work within a few days. In l844 serious organizing led to the Lowell Female Labor Reform Association. Their prime demand was the ten hour a day. The leadership and activity of this union is credited with initiating some of the earliest reforms in the conditions of the textile industries. In the period of intense labor activity following the Civil War, when widowhood and general hard times forced thousands of women into the labor force, thus causing panic and hostility on the part of men, women found themselves excluded from most of the national trade unions. So they formed their own, including the Daughters of St. Crispin, a union of women shoemakers. During this era unions were formed by woman cigarmakers, umbrella sewers, and printers, aswell as tailoresses and laundresses. Women from clothing and textile factories staged a protest on March 8, 1857 in New York City. The garment workers marched and picketed, demanding improved working conditions, ten hour a a day, and equal rights for women. They were protesting what they saw as very poor working conditions and low wages. The protesters were attacked. Their ranks were broken up and dispersed by the police. These women established their first labor union in the same month two years later. More protests followed on March 8 in subsequent years. Fiftyone years later, on March 8, 1908, their sisters in the needle trades in New York marched again, honuoring the 1857 march, demanding the vote, and an end to sweatshops and child labor. The police were present on this occasion too. In 1908 women began to stage walkouts and strikes at various sewing factories. In 1908, 15,000 women marched through New York City demanding shorter workinghours, better pay and voting rights. Sometimes the company would settle a strike by meeting some of the demands of the male strikers but included clauses in the settlement that said �no part of this agreement shall refer to or apply to females.�� In spite of many arrests and heavy fines, brutal beatings by police and hired thugs, the women, many of them teenagers, continued the walkouts. Middle and upper class women inspired by the strikers came out to the pickets to give their support and they too were arrested. And when newspapers covered these unusual arrests, the public began to find out about the brutal conditions and slave wages of the women strikers. The clothing workers formed some of the most famous unions in U.S. history, notably the International Ladies Garment Workers Union, founded around 1900. The garment trade shops in the big cities, such as New York, were deplorable. Fire hazards were rife, light was scant, the sound of machinery deafening, the environment polluted. Women were fined virtually for anything - talking, laughing, singing, machine oil stains on the fabric, stitches too large or too small. Overtime was constant and required, but no special pays for overtime work. With the support of the National Women�s Trade Union League, founded in 1903 - a combination of working women and middle-class, often professional women who supported the working women�s struggle - the shirtwaist makers launched a series of strikes against Leiserson and Company and Triangle Waist Company, two of the most notorious shops in New York. After months of small shop actions, the women decided to escalate the struggle by calling for a tradewide general strike. And in defiance of the heads of the union, on November 22, 1909, the �Uprising of the Twenty Thousand�� began. It culminated in the first long-term general strike by women, putting to death the tiresome arguments that they were unable to organize and carry out a long and strenous struggle. One garment worker from the Triangle Shirtwaist Company described the event: �Thousands upon thousands left the factories from everyside, all of them walking down toward Union Square. It was November, the cold winter was just around the corner, we had no fur coats to keep us warm, and yet there was the spirit that led us on and on until we got some hall to keep us warm and out of the coldwind for at least the time being. I can see the young people, mostly women, walking down and not caring what might happen. The spirit, I think, the spirit of a conqueror led them on. They didn�t know what was in store for them, didn�t really think of the hunger, cold, loneliness, and what could happen to them. They just didn�t care on that particular day; that was THEIR day.�� For thirteen weeks in the bitter cold winter, women between 16 and 25 years of age picketed daily, and were clubbed by police and carried off in �Black Maria� police vans. The courts were biased in favour of the sweatshop owners; one magistrate charged a striker, �You are on strike against God and Nature, whose prime law is that man shall earn his bread in the sweat of his brow. You are on strike against God.� This elicited a cablegram from George Bernard Shaw, who with other Europeans was following the course of U.S. labour history. He wrote: �Delightful. Medieval America always in intimate personal confidence of the Almighty.� The Women�s Trade Union League provided bail money for arrested strikers and large sums for strike funds. The strike was ultimately broken, as settlements were made shop by shop, but the talent and endurance of the women made it impossible for people to go on claiming that labour organizing was for men only. The strike lasted for months and ignited strikes in other areas. Though the strike itself was only partially successful in terms of changing work conditions, the �uprising� did change some important things. It challenged the image of what uneducated immigrant women could do, and it filled the East Side and many women and immigrants and oppressed people more broadly with pride and a sense of strength. One year after the strike was broken the infamous Triangle fire occurred on 25th March 1911. Trapping women on the upper floors (the fire doors had been bolted from the outside to prevent escape by the workers) the fire took l46 lives, most of the women between the ages of 13 and 25, most of them recent emigrants to the U.S. Most of them were Italian and Jewish immigrants. A lack of safety measures was blamed for the high death toll. This event had a significant impact on labour legislation in the United States, and the working conditions leading up to the disaster were invoked during subsequent observances of International Women�s Day. The employers were tried; one was fined $20. A settlement was made to the families of the dead women for $75 per death. Rose Schneiderman, a Garment Workers organizer, berated the community for supporting the law and institutions that made such tragedies possible. �I know from my own experience that it is up to the working people to save themselves,� she proclaimed. �The only way they can save themselves is by a strong working-class movement.� The story of American working women is often tokenly recognized by referring to great heroines of the movement Mother Jones, Ella Reeve Bloor, Kate Mullaney, Sojurner Truth, and Elizabeth Gurley Flynn. These were remarkable women and so were their stories. But it should not be forgotten that these were individual women, and that the bulk of the organizing, struggling, as well as succeeding and failing, was done by ordinary women whom we will never know. These were women who realized the tactical necessity of standing and working together lest they be destroyed individually, women who put to shame the ridiculous theories of �woman�s place�,� women who in the famous Lawrence textile strike carried picket signs reading �We want Bread and Roses, too�, symbolizing their demands for not only a living wage but a decent and human life, and so inspired James Oppenheim�s song �Bread and Roses� Beginning of Women�s Day in US The official holiday had its modest beginnings in 1908. That year in the U.S., the Socialist Party appointed a Women�s National Committee to Campaign for the Suffrage. After the meeting, this Committee recommended that the Socialist Party set aside a day every year to campaign to women�s right to vote, a big step for socialists and welcomed by women working for suffrage. The First Women�s Day was observed across the United States on 28 February in 1909 and large demonstrations took place calling for the vote and the political and economic rights of women. (in those days only men had the right to vote). In 1909, two thousand women attended a Women�s Day rally in Manhattan. Women continued to celebrate it on the last Sunday of that month through 1913. In 1910 Women�s Day was taken up by socialists and feminists throughout the US. In May 1910, at the national Congress of the Socialist Party, the Women�s National Commission recommended that the Last Sunday in February be recognized as International Women�s Day. Later that year delegates went to the second International Conference of Socialist Women in Copenhagen with the intention of proposing that Women�s Day become an international event. Declaration of IWD and early celebrations of the event Inspired by the actions of US women workers and their socialist sisters, Clara Zetkin, the legendary German Communist leader and an international figure had already framed a proposal to put to the Second International Conference of Working Women that women throughout the world should focus on a particular day each year to press for their demands. The conference meeting in Copenhagen in 1910 established a Women�s Day, international in character, to honour the movement for women�s rights and to assist in achieving universal suffrage for women. It would commemorate the US demonstrations and honour working women the world over. Among other relevant historic events, it commemorates the Triangle Factory Fire (New York, 1911), were over 146 women lost their lives. From the beginning, IWD has been linked with the communist revolution. International Women�s Day was the fruit of the efforts of women in the Second International. Zetkin and others emphasized the international scope of their vision, calling on �the Socialist women of all countries [to] hold each year a Women�s Day,� and declaring that �The Women�s Day must have an international character.� The conference decided that every year, in every country, they should celebrate on the same day a �Women�s Day� under the slogan �The vote for women will unite our strength in the struggle for socialism�. It was decided to have a Woman�s Day in every country as a form of struggle in getting working women to vote. This day was to be a day of international solidarity in the fight for common objectives and a day for reviewing the organized strength of working women under the banner of socialism. Over 100 women from 17 countries, representing unions, socialist parties, working women�s clubs, and including the first three women elected to the Finnish parliament, greeted Zetkin�s suggestion with unanimous approval and International Women�s Day was the result. (It was again passed unanimously a few days later in the general International Socialist Congress.Com V.I. Lenin, the great leader of the Bolshevik Party and the Russian Revolution, was among those who voted at this conference to establish this tradition). Since then it has been celebrated worldwide by class conscious workers and those fighting for the liberation of women and the emancipation of all humanity. That conference also reasserted the importance of women�s right to vote, dissociated itself from voting systems based on property rights and called for universal suffrage - the right to vote for all adult women and men. The voice of dissent on this decision came from the English group led by Mrs. Despard of the Women�s Freedom League, a group actively engaged in the suffragette movement. No fixed date was selected for the observance of IWD in the conference. Consequently, until 1913, IWD was celebrated on different days throughout the world. In the U.S., IWD continued to be celebrated in February. Internationally, the day provided an opportunity to highlight the movements for woman suffrage and peace. IWD was marked for the first time on 19 March, 1911 in Austria, Denmark, Germany, Switzerland and other European countries, where more than one million women and men attended rallies. Socialists held strikes and marches on the same day. In addition to the right to vote and to hold public office, they demanded the right to work, to vocational training and to an end to gender discrimination on jobs. Clara Zetkin organized the first IWD on March 19 in 1911 in Germany. A million leaflets calling for action on the right to vote were distributed throughout Germany before IWD in 1911. In 1913 International Women�s Day was transferred to the 8th of March. This day has remained the working women�s day of militancy�. The Bolshevik Pravda and the Menshevik Looch � carried articles about the IWD. They carried special articles, portraits of some of those taking part in the working women�s movement and greetings from comrades such as Bebel and Zetkin. In those bleak years meetings were forbidden. But in Petrograd, at the Kalashaikovsky Exchange, those women workers who belonged to the Party organized a public forum on �The Woman Question.� Delegate fee was five kopecks. This was an illegal meeting but the hall was totally packed. Members of the Party spoke. But this animated �closed� meeting had hardly finished when the police, alarmed at such proceedings, intervened and arrested many of the speakers. In 1914, �Women Workers Day� in Russia was better organized. Both the workers� newspapers concerned themselves with the celebration. Because of police intervention, they didn�t manage to organize a demonstration. Those involved in the planning of �Women Workers Day� found themselves in the Tsarist prisons, and many were later sent to the cold north. For the slogan �for the working women�s vote� had naturally become in Russia an open call for the overthrow of Tsarist autocracy�. As the nascent annual event developed, it took on the cause of peace as well as women�s rights. Furthermore, on the eve of World War I, women across Europe held peace rallies on March 8, 1913. Elsewhere in Europe, on or around 8 March of the following year, women held rallies either to protest against the war or to express solidarity with their sisters. In 1915, Zetkin organized a demonstration in Bern, Switzerland, to urge the end of World War I. Women on both sides of the war turned out. Organizing IWD and women proletariat in Russia More and more articles on the work that needed to be done among women and on specific women�s problems began to be published in the party press. Then, under pressure from Com Lenin, a special journal for working class women was created: �The Woman Worker� (Rabotnitsa). The members of the first editorial board were arrested by the repressive Tsarist police, but nonetheless the first issue of the paper was published in 1914. In the same year the Bolshevik Central Committee decided to create a special committee to organise the meetings for IWD. Meetings were held in the factories and public places to discuss issues concerning women�s oppression, and to elect representatives from those who had participated in the discussions and proposals, to work on the new committee. The propaganda work of the paper �Rabotnitsa� was now becoming ever more central to the work of the Bolsheviks. On its editorial board were such stalwarts of women�s liberation as comrades Krupskaya, Innessa Armand, Stahl, Kollontai, Eliazarova, Kudelli, Samoilova, and Nikolayeva and other female workers of St Petersburg. These women were totally dedicated to the revolutionary cause, they organised meetings, called aggregates and generally focused the work, developing the revolution. Each factory had its own representatives on the editorial board of �Rabotnitsa� and there were weekly meetings, where all would participate and review the reports received from the different areas. The paper was also used as an instrument to raise the level of understanding in both trade union and political structures, which were still lagging behind the consciousness of the masses, towards a better understanding of the role of women workers. In March 1917 the Bolsheviks created a bureau to promote revolutionary work among women workers. The party called for a Congress for all women workers, to discuss the best way to involve and organise women in the revolutionary struggles then taking place. In this period Lenin wrote many articles on the need to find new strategies and specific organisational models to attract women workers to socialism. Demonstrations marking IWD in Russia proved to be the first stage of the Russian Revolution. With 2 million Russian soldiers dead in the war, Russian women again chose the last Sunday in February to strike for �bread and peace�. This was led by women in St. Petersburg. The government attempted to stop the demonstrations called to celebrate International Women�s Day. This provoked clashes with workers, especially in the Putilov factory in St Petersburg, which ended in a mass mobilisation of workers. The women came out onto the streets and spoke to the soldiers, who then refused to open fire against the demonstrators, turning their bayonets against the Tsarist monarchy. During 1917 the general consensus of opposition to the imperialist war increased, strengthening the Bolsheviks, who had been courageously denouncing the imperialist war since 1914. Coming on the rise of long struggle and many strikes, IWD 1917 inspired thousands of Russian women to leave their homes and factories to protest the terrible shortages of food, the high prices, the world war, and the increased suffering they had bitterly endured. The protest inspired the last push of a revolution. A general strike spread through Petrograd. The IWD strike merged with riots that had spread through the city between March 8-12. The rest is history. The February Revolution, as it became known, forced the Czar Nicholas II to abdicate four days later and the provisional Government granted women the right to vote. That historic Sunday fell on 23 February on the Julian calendar then in use in Russia, but on 8 March on the Gregorian calendar in use elsewhere. (Russia switched from the Julian to the Gregorian calendar in 1918, which moved the dates of the February revolution [Feb. 24�28, old style] to March.) Following the October Revolution, the IWD was made into an official holiday, and during the Soviet period it continued to celebrate �the heroic woman worker�. Chinese women began celebrating IWD in l924, paralleling a strong women�s movement in the Chinese Communist party. After the revolution, China made IWD an official holiday, as in the USSR