Recent Interviews with Leaders of the UCPN(Maoist)

Attached below are two interviews with leaders of the Kiran faction, Com. Netra Bikram Chand aka “Biplab” and Com. Kiran himself. Both discuss the recent developments inside the Party although they really do not provide any new information that has not been repeated in other interviews and articles. What is interesting about the interview with Kiran is his positive call for a general convention (some media outlets have suggested otherwise, for example as a means by which to reconcile some of the problems of the party, although not all of them (I wish that the interviewer had asked which questions needed to be resolved prior to the convention and which could wait for the convention), and his approval of attempts to form a new RIM (this of course is going to be the content of the next major post I write, although I may do a similar information dump of the articles from Maoist Road magazine No. 0 before I do that as most readers probably have never read that issue as an English edition was never made available). However, it does not seem clear from either Kiran or Biplab’s interviews how such ideological and political resolution could be achieved prior to a general convention, especially in their favour. Furthermore, I echo Biplav’s call for the emergence of a new party leadership from the younger generation (indeed, Kiran, Prachanda and Bhattarai all were political leaders in the mid- to late 1980’s) and hopefully any new general convention would take age composition into account as well, besides gender, caste, linguistic and regional characteristics as well.

“Nepal Army proposal is nothing but a ploy to dissolve Maoist Militia”, Netra Bikram Chand

(Steering Committee member, UCPN(Maoist))

Q1: What is happening inside your party’s ongoing Central Committee meeting?

Chand:  The CC meet has two objectives. First, we presume that since Nepal as a nation-state is currently undergoing through a period of sheer confusion and thus a clear policy needs to be developed to get the country rid of the confusion prevailing. Talks are there to be discussed on militia integration, of the constitution drafting and of course the issue of state restructuring.

Secondly, we have been discussing about the internal matters of the party as well. Of late, some issues have cropped up to the fore about our party which have made the general population serious. It is thus our bounden duty to dig the truth out for the sake of the avoiding people’s concerns.

Q2: Your party is mired in internal rivalry. How will you then proceed with the issues of peace and draft of the constitution?

Chand: Well, so many things have already been decided by the party beginning from Chunwang, Palungtar, Kharipati and the CC. We have to take lessons from the past and write the new constitution accordingly. If done so, it will pose no harm to anybody. That will not even pose any sort of threat to the NC and the UML instead will in all likelihood benefit the entire nation. The talks that we are not in favour of peace and new constitution draft will be an erroneous conclusion. But the constitution must not be made an issue of just a formality. The constitution must be drafted which transforms the society and benefits the people.

Q3: On what issues or say points you beg to differ with others for example even with your party Chairman?

Chand: We wish that whatever has been agreed upon with the signing of the 12 point agreement on issues of the constitution to be drafted, I think the NC and the UML appear to have abandoned to what they agreed in the past. We feel like that. The NC and the UML’s reluctance in not agreeing on state restructuring procedure and for the formation of a national army and side by side the attitude of our own Party’s Chairman Prachanda to go by their instructions has not been taken in good taste by us. We have taken those as faulty decisions. The people will finally reject those. The current discussion is centred on state restructuring, land reform, formation of a national army and also of awarding rights to the women folks and the dalits.  We wish that these above mentioned issues be well incorporated in the constitution so that the rights were a guaranteed one. This is what I feel and wish also. I wish that our leaders do not yield to any sort of pressure which ignored the people’s aspirations.

Q4: You and your friends halted the peace process which had taken a start. Why so?

Chand: The decisions that have already been made were done so without managing the country on how to get it out from the prevailing transitional state and also without finalising the details of the new constitution, to me, were done so in order to weaken the morale of the Maoists and the Militias. The lifting of the dual security system is not a wise decision. The decision in itself was a wrong one which sans the required procedure with which it should have been decided primarily. Any decision that appear to be a binding one and which looks to have been an imposing one doesn’t do good ultimately. Such decision finally doesn’t work. The leaders of the NC, the UML and our own party claim that the situation was not that favourable but on the other hand made such decisions in haste which are faulty ones, for example, the lifting of the dual security system.

Q5: Did you lift the dual security system?

Chand: No! I haven’t yet. One needs to jump onto another decision when you manage the first. This is what I want to say. The analysis that there prevails great threat remains itself in a limbo or at best has been completely ignored. The decision in itself has become parentless. Without even providing suitable alternative to the dual security system and without convincing Mohan Baidya aka Kiran, the system was scrapped. This is what has pained me.

Q6: Your party is in government and more so your own party’s person now is the Home Minister but yet you appear to not to be comfortable with the decision? Why it is so?

Chand:  Don’t talk of us. Even the police men are not secured. They themselves appear insecure. Thieves have entered their houses. Police men at times become the victim of abduction. This doesn’t mean that I don’t have any trust left. One can’t depend on the assurances of the establishment without having the needed political consensus. This has been proved in practice.

Q7: What you say of the proposal that has come from the Nepal Army that the Maoists army will remain under the command of the NA through a directorate?

Chand: The entire proposal which has come from the Nepal Army is a positive one and the rest all bogus. The proposal which talks of the formation of a directorate under the NA command is itself a matter of joke and distressing as well. Responsibilities (of the district development, forest department, land reform, industrial sector) should be shouldered by the Maoists militias but the command should remain with the Nepal Army? What a funny proposition? It was a puzzling proposal indeed. Look at this proposition which is nothing but a ploy to dissolve the Maoists Militia structure. Nothing more than that it is. This is not acceptable. We have been discussing on these very issues. The entire 19, 000 militia must be allowed to go through integration. Why they be not allowed? Provide logical answers. To which Maoists militia brothers should we tell them to pack for his or her homes?

Q8: Then how the peace process will proceed ahead?

Chand: Let’s not make it an issue of tension. Problems come and go. Issues confronting will be sorted out. First the Nepali Congress and the UML must abide by the politics of consensus and coexistence. This should be the party’s mentality primarily. We have done so in the past, if one were to recall. If it is a matter of coexistence then shouldn’t they come to terms with the Maoists in building confidence on issues related with the organs of the state? Shouldn’t it be so?  Is it possible for the prevalence of the talked coexistence without the presence of the Maoists in state organs? Can we go together without coexistence? Should not the state structure of the bygone era need to undergo through a characteristic transformation? If done so then the Maoists militia will definitely come out with a substantial support. It could not be a desired solution to the current problems if we go on thinking on how to frustrate the combatants now residing in various cantonments and force them to go astray and finally force them to devastate their weapons. It can’t provide a solution.

Q9: The 18 point allegations that you have labelled upon Chairman Prachanda appears to be more aggressive one. How then the party’s internal disputes will come to an end?

Chand: Those are not allegations but presented as corrective measures that need to be taken. The insertion of some words in those allegation sheets is not in itself the final decision. Well, it has just been tried to exhibit that look such allegations remain. If you look at those 18 point charges you could see that those points have been a compilation of the errors and mistakes made from the very beginning. It has just been compiled in an orderly fashion.

Q10: It is widely believed that you have remained instrumental in bringing the differing opinions against Chairman Prachanda?

Chand: I take Chairman Prachanda as a capable leader of the party of the old generation. When we have made a theory under his name-Prachanda Way-then let’s not talk of other peripheral things. He is our ideal. We have just wished to tell him that not so many charges have been labelled against you for your ideals and thus we wish that he himself takes corrective measures and also have suggested him that if you need supplementary support then please accept it in a pleasing manner. At personal level, I still enjoy cordial relations with Chairman Prachanda. Initiation of internal struggle shouldn’t mean that it is aimed at blocking everything.

Q11: It is talked that your group is making an equation with Dr. Bhattarai in order to corner Chairman Prachanda?

Chand: I am surprised to observe as to how the Maoists are being taken? Some feel that if he or she meets Dr. Bhattarai then his or her sanctity is gone forever. It is also talked the other way round. However, the fact is that our leaders are Maoists and the party is the Maoists. We are free to talk with anyone who belongs to our party.

Q12: You quite often talk for the need of the emergence of new leadership. Do you mean to say that the leadership now should go into the hands of new generation?

Chand: The central leadership has an important role to play in sorting out party internal disputes. I mean to say that the old leadership prevails in the party’s position now. We have just been telling the leadership that if you need our support then we are ready to help you.  I have not also told that there is a big gap in between the old and the new leaders. If the leadership think so then they are in an illusion. I haven’t said so. However, one shouldn’t think that an individual can do everything or is capable enough and that the others were just redundant.  One should abandon such considerations. We have not demanded that leadership be awarded to us. All that we have been saying is that let’s have “intimate” relations with each other. A relation must be established. This is all what we wish in the party to prevail.

We will never let down the revolution : Kiran

(Mohan Baidhya, popularly known as Comrade Kiran, is the senior vice chairman of ‘Unified ’ Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) . He has been contributing relentlessly for almost four decades as a professional revolutionary in developing the Maoist movement in Nepal. Since his early political life, he resolutely fought against revisionism, neo-revisionism, and all sorts of deviations within and outside of the Party. He is known as a revolutionary leader, a beloved leader of the oppressed Nepalese people and an outstanding leader of the international proletariat.The Indian expansionist ruling class   put Comrade Kiran, in an Indian jail more than two years.

Here is the fresh interview given by Comrade ‘Kiran’ to the ‘The Next Front’. We all know, these days a fierce two line struggle is taking place within the Maoist movement in Nepal. This interview has focused on many burning issues running within UCPN–Maoist. )

Question: When is your central committee is going to meet? What was the reason for the delay of the central committee meeting?

Kiran: It would probably be convened soon. The delay was for homework.

Question: Has the issue related to army integration been finalized? It is said that you have also abandoned the earlier stance on army integration. What is the reality?

Kiran: The issue concerning the army integration has not been finalized. On this issue, we had registered our ‘note of dissent’ against the decision taken by majority in the meeting of the Standing Committee of the party. Similarly, we have differences on the decision taken by majority in the party’s central office. We have not given up our position and stance and our position is consistent.

Question: The focal point of the two-line struggle should have basically been on strategic goal. Instead, given its nature, this seems to have been muddled up in the tactical questions and issues. Does it not weaken the struggle to be launched for achieving the main goal?

Kiran: The two-line struggle has basically been concentrated on strategic goal. On this issue, our dissenting opinions have been registered. These dissenting views are based on the issues concerning the use of terminology like ‘Mao Thought’ instead of ‘Maoism’; objection to some key peace accords signed in the past; and issues related to the implementation of people’s federal republic and insurrection. In addition, we have dissenting views on some other issues like the ones concerning the army integration and constitution. All these issues are of strategic importance. The disagreement on these issues cannot be called as mere ‘differences on tactics’. Some of the differences on tactics are also related to strategy.

Question: The present dispute has been called as a two-line struggle but the differences and disputes seem to be on the question of who should be minister or on the issue of ‘inclusiveness’ like representing different ethnicities, regions and sex in the cabinet. Are we not being unnecessarily occupied in the issue like ‘inclusiveness’, which is against the basic Marxist principle, instead of focusing on class issues? What is the ground reality behind this?

Kiran: The dispute concerning ministers is linked with the political line. The dispute concerning inclusiveness and proportionate representation cannot be against Marxism. Marxism has been firmly resisting all kinds of patriarchal repressions on women and the so-called high caste domination on nationalities and has emphasized the necessity of empowering the entire oppressed people including women and nationalities. This struggle is also not outside the parameters of class struggle.

Question: The external and internal situation of the party has demanded a concrete and bold decision. The revolutionary line has not advanced in the way it should have done, which has given rise to impression that the party is going to be entrapped into the politics of compromise and a new type of eclecticism in the name of unity. Do you not think it is necessary to be cautious against the danger of being fallen into the trap of new type of eclecticism?

Kiran: Yes, this is true. The situation has definitely demanded a concrete and bold decision. But like the class struggle, the two-line struggle also does not advance in a straight line but faces many twists and turns. We have to correctly understand the direction of class struggle and  the two-line struggle. So far as the question of compromise is concerned, this is not a new phenomenon but has been in practice for a long time. Compromise has to be made on certain occasions and there should not be any reason to doubt the intention. But we should not fall into the trap of politics of compromise. There is also a danger of eclecticism but it should be made clear that we have always been firmly resisting and fighting all kinds of eclecticism and revisionism and will continue to do so until our goal is achieved. We are fully conscious and cautious about this.

Question: Do you not think that the continuity of ‘politics of note of dissent’ for a long period is, in a way, tantamount to get the politics entrapped into compromise and inaction?

Kiran: Its answer has already been given in the previous answer.

Question: The general convention of the party is a good aspect. Does it not create the situation to keep the problem unresolved for a long time and push the politics towards directionless confusion. What do you say?

Kiran: The general convention of the party is a must. But I don’t think that all the questions that have been raised now would be resolved in the general convention. Clarity on some issues of ideological and political importance is necessary prior to the convention.

Question: The world has been keenly and seriously watching the revolutionary line of the Maoist party. Supporters of proletariats all over the world are also watching it and the reactionaries, too, are doing the same. What is your reaction?

Kiran: We have taken optimism and expectations of proletariats in the world very positively while the reactionary outlook is negative in our eyes. I assure you that we will never let down Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, revolution and communism. We will further develop it to a greater height one after another.

Question: Efforts have been made to constitute a new RIM and once again advance the Maoist movement in a new way. What can be and should be the role of revolutionaries in this context?

Kiran: We are positive on the formation of a new RIM.

Question: History has proved that nowhere in the world has the revolution been completed without breaking the relationship with opportunists. A trend has developed in the party to make decisions like the ones made in Kharipati and Palungtar but not to implement them in practice, which has been repeated in series. In such a situation, what are the actions to be taken by the revolutionaries? Can you specify on point wise basis?

Kiran: We are serious on this issue. In this connection, we have to pay special attention to creating appropriate ground in favour of revolutionary ideology and political line, exposing opportunism, properly disseminating information to the people on issues of crucial political importance; and rebelling against the party if it deviates from the basic principles. But, in addition to this, we must seriously give consideration to the issues concerning unity, struggle and transformation.

Question: How can you instill revolutionary optimism in the mind of cadres who have less questions and doubts but more expectations from the party? What are their bases and what is the guarantee that the same old story would not be repeated?

Kiran: What we want to assure the revolutionary cadres and the people is that  we in the past had firmly launched ideological struggle against all types of revisionism and have been doing the same even today. We have been expressing our commitment towards the country, people and revolution by our practical activities of class struggle and two-line struggle. Thus, practice is the basis of solution to doubt and trust, for which we must be clear.


One thought on “Recent Interviews with Leaders of the UCPN(Maoist)

  1. Dea comrade,
    I leave here a comment not concerning the issue you deal here, but concerning the issue of Nepal in general,

    Paolo Babini, of the Party of the Committees to Support Resistance – for Communism (CARC) – Italy
    Via Tanaro, 7 – 20128 Milano – Tel/Fax 02.26306454
    e-mail: – website:,
    National Direction – International Relations Department
    Tel. +39 0226306454 – e-mail:,

    To Mike Ely and the others signers of the call Support The Revolution In Nepal!
    To all concerned people

    Dear comrades,
    I read carefully your call, and I send you some comments about it, about the situation and the tasks of communists as regards Nepal and the International Communist Movement.

    You write that in the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (maoist) “one influential minority wing of that party has aggressively (and rather articulately) advocated a road of capitalist modernization”. Amongst other things “international conditions are too adverse, they say, for Nepal to take a radical course alone.”

    Is the international situation adverse?
    As a matter of fact, neither the comrades who declared themselves in favor of continuing or starting again the war nor those who declared themselves in favor of a definitive stop of the war, gave a concrete and let alone complete characterization of the international situation.
    Surely, one year ago comrade Guarav talked about whether the international situation was favorable or not (see
    He told that “in many cases, the question of “unfavorable international situation‟ is being (mis)used by rightists or revisionists to justify their degeneration from a communist or revolutionary to a revisionist or a bourgeois politician”, adding that “What MLM teaches us that if situation is not favorable we should not sit idle, we should be active in changing the situation to make it favorable.”
    Comrade Guarav is right: they are the communists who make the situation favorable or not. Anyway, communists’ action must be based on the concrete analysis of the concrete situation, and the concrete international situation today is determined by the general crisis of capitalism.
    In his article, comrade Gaurav gives not so much space to the matter of the crisis, and does not says something new and different or more detailed than what is commonly known. The same attitude I find in the “Political resolution adopted by the 5th Conference of CCOMPOSA”. The resolution says that “the specific causes underlying this crisis and its particular dynamics need to be further probed”, and just describes the effects of the crisis.
    I say that we first of all need to understand the structural causes and the structural effects, that is to say we need to have a scientific understanding of the crisis just now and first of all. It is not enough to describe the present effects of the crisis: the peoples and the popular masses in the imperialist and in the oppressed countries are already experiencing them. They need to know why we are in this situation and how we can get out of it. They wait for the communist forces to tell them why.
    So, the communist forces start their action understanding “the specific causes underlying this crisis and its particular dynamics”, and they do it with the scientific debate and the scientific research.
    Without knowing “the specific causes underlying this crisis and its particular dynamics” the leftists wings will hardly be able to fulfil their tasks, to face the rightists, to demolish their statements about “adverse international conditions”. So it is in general (in the ICM), and in particular (in Italy and in Nepal). That is why the (new)Italian Communist Party has paid and pays so much attention to the matter of the crisis. That is why I proposed to comrades of UCPN-M (Basanta, Gaurav and others) to analyze the conclusions about the crisis of the (new) Italian Communist Party, as a weapon for their struggle ((see The Interpretation Of The Nature Of Current Crisis Decides Communist Parties’ Activity in
    The general crisis of capitalism is going on, and there are no ways out of it but revolutions and war. What decides which way we shall turn into, or revolution or war, is communists’ action.
    It is obvious that the rightist wings of parties and organizations in the International Communist Movement, and in UCPN-M too, portray the imperialist system stronger than it is without talking about its crisis. On the contrary, the leftist wings of parties and organizations in the ICM need to know nature and course of the crisis. It is not enough to do as many of them do, to say that “this crisis is bigger than ever” and something like this and to describe its effects more or less in detail.
    The left wings of parties and organizations in the ICM need to know the nature and the course of the crisis, and its possible ways out, because according to dialectical materialism the communists need to know the objective situation in order to fulfill their tasks. If the leftist wing does not know this enough well, then it not only is not able to advance, but it withdraws. On the other side, the rightist wing advances: it has no need to have a scientific knowledge because such a knowledge is a need for building revolution, and the right wing is not doing it (it opposes it).
    This is what happened in the ’50 of the last century, when modern revisionists took the upper hand in the International Communist Movement. The leftist wings of the ICM were not able to fight and win the right wing because they had not an enough right conception, an enough right line, an enough right strategy. They were defeated not because the revisionists were traitors. The struggle within the communist movement is not a matter of ethics, between honest people and traitors. It is a matter of science, of developing the dialectical materialism as a weapon to fight the imperialist bourgeoisie and its influence within the communist parties, that is to say to fight against the rightists who bring imperialist bourgeoisie’s influence within the parties.

    In conclusion, you signers of the Call can help the Nepali revolution defining precisely the characters of the international situation: the ongoing crisis of capitalism, the contradictions the imperialist groups and powers are facing, how they are facing them and how many resources they have for doing this.
    So doing , you shall be able to deal with a particular aspect of the international situation concerning Nepal, that is the intervention by India and USA and how to face it.

    “Dangers of Indian intervention and blockade” and “little-known U.S. military conspiracies and political threats”

    You signers of the Call can help the Nepali revolution denouncing all the forms and extensions of past and present interventions of the Federal State and of the rest of the ruling class of the Indian Federation and of the USA.
    You are talking of “dangers of Indian intervention and blockade”, but Indian intervention is already going on. It is a matter of serious activity of information to denounce its present forms and dimensions, and to write its history. So we could also understand its form and dimensions in the future.
    You talk about “little-known U.S. military conspiracies and political threats”. Why do you express such a poor knowledge about something that must be and is enough well known? US intervention has been going on for a long time, and it has been openly carried out, as in the case of the activity of International Crisis Group, presided by J. Carter, who supervised peace speeches and agreements in 2006 and supervises the relations derived from this, managing millions of dollars. It is surely supported by documentary evidence, available to a specialists’ research that some of you can surely carry out, as US Government has to document its allocations to the Congressmen. It has been documented recently by Peter Tobin’s report (see Besides, after 2006 UCPN(Maoist) has been head of the government for months and has participated to State and government activity for years at maximum levels, and therefore it has been able to know a lot about th ematterso why to tell that what the US are doing in Nepal is little known?
    On November 7-9, 2011 it will be held the Third International Anti-imperialist Conference of the International Anti-imperialist and People’s Solidarity Coordinating Committee (IAPSCC) jointly with the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) (UCPN (M)), in Kathmandu. Maybe you know that the President of IAPSCC is Ramsey Clark, Former Attorney General of USA, and the General Secretary is Manik Mukherjee, Vice-President of the All India Anti-imperialist Forum. So on this occasion there will be the leaders of the Nepali revolutionary movement, and leaders of the anti-imperialist movement from USA and India. Certainly, US and India intervention in Nepal, what consists of and how to face it must be a most topic of the Conference. Surely, the Nepali, Indian and US promoters and organizers of the Conference know everything about the matter and can answer, if requested, to you, to us and to anybody else.

    Can Nepal to take a radical course alone?
    Yes, it can. Revolution can be built in single countries, it has already been built in single countries in the past, it advances internationally as revolutions built in single countries.
    Surely, we have to take into account a negative factor for building the revolution in the single countries: the ICM is weak, and it is particularly weak in the imperialist countries. Let us try to understand which are weaknesses and shortcomings in the ICM, and how the ICM can make the Nepali revolutionary movement less “alone”.
    The communist forces in a country help the communist forces and the popular masses of the other countries in two ways:
    1. Making the revolution in their countries;
    2. Contributing to develop the right conception, strategy and line for building the revolution that is to say, today, developing Maoism.
    According to this, it is a duty of all the communist forces all over the world 1. to help the Nepali revolution making the revolution in their countries, and 2. To carry out an open and frank debate in order to develop Maoism. They are absolutely wrong all the forces that say they are revolutionary and that think that to make the revolution in their countries is impossible, and they wait for the revolution to come from elsewhere.
    Unfortunately, great revolutionary movements in the oppressed and neocolonial countries are somehow victims of this prejudice. Many parties and people within them believe that the principal contradiction is that between the world imperialist system and the oppressed countries, that revolution in imperialist countries could come after the victory in the oppressed countries, or even could not come, has it happened in the first wave of proletarian revolution.
    Maybe they think so because the revolutionary movement in their country is visible. But are we or are we not bearer of a new science, and is not science an instrument to see what is not immediately visible? Was the oak visible when it was a seed underground? Are the data running in the web visible as they run from one side to the other in the world?
    Maybe they think so because nobody ever has made the revolution in an imperialist country. So I ask them, but I mainly ask the communists of the imperialist countries, firstly: “Aren’t we communists the ones who are opening new ways?”, and secondly: “Why no communist party has been able to seize the power in any imperialist country?”
    And I ask you, after all, if the international situation is favorable to revolution in Nepal, why is the same situation not favorable to the revolution in USA, in Great Britain, in Australia, in New Zealand? Why are USA not able to succeed in Iraq, In Afghanistan, Somalia, Libya, Palestine?
    After all we shall win the game in the imperialist countries. Let’s do it, and we shall give the best help to Nepali revolution and any other revolution. Let’s understand it, and we shall make advance the revolutionary theory, that is today Maoism.

    In solidarity,

    Paolo Babini
    CARC Party – International Deparment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s