otto's war room banner

otto's war room banner

Sunday, February 16, 2020



By Harsh Thakor
Immortal Comrade Sona Suman for 52 years illuminated the torch of Naxalbari. Faced severe torture but rose like a Phoenix from the Ashes from the deepest depths of despair. He played a major role in steering the activities and shaping the Krantikari Pendu Mazdur Union and all the democratic movements condemning Operation Greenhunt and Hindu Fascism. A major architect in the successful homage programmes for late Comrade Shamsher Singh Sheri, Earlier before 2003 an activist of the Lok Morcha Punjab and a mass activist of the Central Team Group of Communist Party India (Marxist Leninist). Sunam consistently played the role of a catalyst in all major democratic events and with utmost zeal defended the Maoist movement in Dandkarya, A great inspiration for younger cadres who he nurtured like flowers growing. Today around 450 people converged at his homage meeting at Sunam village shimmering the red spark of resistance at its crescendo. A most qualitative memorial meeting was held in Sunam in igniting the spark of anti fascist resistance with speakers highlighting the movement opposing the National Register of Citizens (NRC) and Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). It is this very spark Comrade Sunam galvanized all his life in inspiring people’s movements. The most qualitative resistance of the Krantikari pendu mazdoor Union owes a lot to Comrade Sunam and the rise of student and youth cadre.

Tragically he perished in a road accident on February 10th.He was 71 years old

Fraternal organizations like Lok Sangram Manch, Revolutionary People’s Front. Krantikari Pendu mazdoor Union, Punjab Radical Students Union etc participated and comrades addressed like Swaranjeet Singh,Darshan Pal, Baseshwar Ram,Sanjeev Mintu etc.

He may have departed but his soul lives on as a beacon to enable new red roses to be resurrected and bloom in the dark hour of fascism.



Dear people,

Comrade Kesho Ram has given us eternal separation on 30-01-2020 due to serious heart disease. He was born on 04-04-1956 in the house of Mata Vidya and Father Vasdev. Father Vasdev was a tenant and a tenant movement worker. He was a well-known local level leader under the leadership of the Red Party. There was frequent traffic of tenant leaders in the house, and Vasdev always gave preference to party work to family responsibilities. Mother Vidya served to each and every visitor very well. She participated in tenants struggle along with the women of the village. All children born in this home became sympathetic to the rights movement. The family struggled with economic hardship but was restricted to their rightful means. All five brothers studied in hard conditions. His both sisters also studied at the local school level. Of course, all the brothers promoted the parents' revolutionary legacy, but Comrade Kesho Ram was the leader of all. Comrade Kesho Ram associated a strong connection with the revolutionary movement of the Punjab and by adjusting his personality at the values of the revolutionary values, he proved to be a true fanatic of saying and doing.

He applied what he learned from the revolutionary movement to life. In his youth, when the Punjab Students Union has a big name in Punjab and the Naujuan Sabhas were of great strength in the villages, he was inspired by the elder brother Gian Chand, who was himself active in theNaujuan Sabha. Took the flag off Which he never allowed himself to bow down to. He joined the Punjab Students’Union, Naujuan Sabha, Para-Medical Workers’ Organization, AFDR, the Rational Society, the Inqulabi kender and worked as a General in Lok Sangram Manch since 2011. He held the head of the Lok Sangram Manch, Area Rampura Phool.

Kesho Ram was a humanitarian revolutionary warrior. When he worked in the health department, he served sick villagers, TB. Patients, elders as a missionary. A Part of his salary was always spent distributing free medicines to people. During the Khalistani era when people closed their doors at sunset, Kesho Ram would attend every night for every needy, waking up with poor patients in hospitals, saving their lives by donating his blood and motivating others also. While doing this he did a commendable job in the field of blood donation. He established an organization for eye operations of needy ones’ and contributed to the re-appearance of hundreds of elders. He naturally hated against oppression, and fought against every oppression done by regimes’ officers and all type of offenders. Such struggles fought by him have a life long span. That is why he was the star of the eyes of the poor people in the village, especially the women. Everywhere he worked, he emerged as a watchman among female employees. On many occasions, he rallied against the hard-line officers. Comrade Kesho Ram was a true democratic man. The sectarianism was nowhere near him. If any organization of Punjab would go on the field of struggle then his face would be glowing. Whenever rulers oppressed the people, he engaged in a struggle against the ruling regime. He also guides and coordinates when needed. That is why the police chased him and raided his house even in the conflicts being fought by other outfits. Whether it is a Jethuke village movement, a Miser Khanna movement , a power workers outage, or police oppression on Comrade Harbhinder Jalal. On such occasions he did not bow down nor back down. One of the his most important qualities was that he did not have any personal hatred against the person he fought against. Whenever he needed his help, he stood with the same. Because of this, even his opponents became his admirers. In the Khalistani period, if an injured person sought his help, he did the same. But when the innocent people were killed, he opposed the same. In doing so, he always kept himself in line with the ongoing communist revolutionary movement for social change. This is where he was a true trade union leader, a true democratic activist, a true revolutionary democratic leader. He was a true Communist.

His death has caused a great loss to his family, our organization, the people and the entire revolutionary movement. Creating a revolutionary quality like Comrade Kesho Ram and walking in his footsteps is a true tribute to him. Let us pledge to attend a final prayer and tribute ceremony at the big gurdwara of Rampura village on Sunday 9th February, for the pledge to follow the path given to him.

Punjab State committee
Lok Sangram Manch (RDF)

Posted By Harsh Thakor

Friday, February 14, 2020

We need to debate Protracted People’s War and how or if we should implement it

By SJ Otto
This blog is dedicated to debate and discussion on issues taken up by Marxists and Maoists. We, on the left, have issues and ideas that are not beyond debate. Therefore it is important to air such discussions and debates. But do I agree with Harsh Thakor’s latest article? He has taken on the Ideas of Chairman Gonzalo and his followers and their ideas on Protracted People’s War (PPW). It seemed only right that I should provide my ideas on that subject. But it is not that simple. I am 65 years old. Despite all my years as a political activist, as a Marxist and a Maoist, I just can’t really say I have a definite opinion on this. I can say that I agree with the idea of launching PPW. However I can’t see HOW we can do this. It may be possible, but so far I don’t see any easy or definite way to do this. That is perhaps why we need these articles of debate. Should we try and use a PPW strategy and if so, how do we do that?  
I have lived through the time when Mao Zedong actually lived and ran China. I was a child at the time and I was no Maoist. I became a Maoist in the 1970s, following my acquaintance with several Iranian Students who were against the Shah of Iran.
They were my introduction to Maoism. Before that I treated Maoism and much of the left as left-wing versions of fascism. Obviously we change over time and our ideas evolve.
Harsh Thakor used to write for the blog, Democracy and Class Struggle. While I have respect for that institution they had written some very unflattering things about Thakor. But since that time he has written for Otto’s War Room (毛派) and I believe his work is well worth printing. Democracy and Class Struggle has stopped posting and I don’t know why. Thakor has been an on the spot reporter, recording some important rallies and movements in India. I have learned to respect his viewpoints.
As to weather I agree with this particular point of view, I can only say I’m not sure. It is hard to believe that after all theses years there are some questions that I admit I don’t have the answers to. It takes many years to develop our ideas on such subjects as PPW. This has been very tricky for me. For a time I did not believe it was possible to launch a people’s war in such developed countries as the USA. The USA has spent years developing the weapons, manpower and strategy to launch and sustain wars in many parts to the world. Che Guevara was quoted as saying: “Create two, three many Vietnams.”
The idea was that we should overwhelm the US military might.  But today the US has already created two and maybe three times as many Vietnams. This country has developed a military strategy of fighting all of these wars. The US today has developed a warier strategy of keeping this country at war for many years to come. The US has actually made fighting wars a kind of normality—much like the situation imagined by George Orwell in his book Nineteen Eighty-Four. In his nightmarish view of the future, the world is divided up into three major alliances that are continually at war. That war is used to draw the future society into a kind of normality in which war keeps people in their place. They must rally around the war, much as we do in the US today. It is an example of reality imitating fiction.
I was somewhat surprised when I read that the blog, Democracy and Class Struggle actually supported the idea of PPW as a universal Marxist/ Maoist rule. Many of the supporters of PPW live in 3rd world countries where guerrilla warfare seems quite possible. One example of this is the Communist Party of Ecuador- Red Sun. This guerrilla movement was developed in a poor, small, 3rd world country, located close to Peru, where Chairman Gonzalo and his Communist Party of Peru, where originally developed. India has one of the world’s most successful guerrilla armies, especially The Communist Party of India (Maoist)/ (भारत की कम्युनिस्ट पार्टी (माओवादी). India is not a developed nation as much as Europe or the USA.
However, the people at Democracy and Class Struggle live in the British Isles. These countries are first world. They are almost as developed in the US. Their economies and military establishments are about as developed. While the IRA was able to wage a PPW against the government of Northern Ireland, their attacks were limited. They were never able to launch the kind of war it would take to forcibly take control of that country.
We have had examples of PPW, more or less, in Europe, with such groups as the Red Brigades of Italy and the Red Army Faction of Germany. There have been a few others. In the US, the Symbionese Liberation Army (SLA) was the closest thing the US ever had to an actual guerrilla army, in opposition to the US military establishment. Some might also consider the Weather Underground Organization as PPW. The only question is weather that group wanted to over throw the US government or weather they were only trying to pressure the US government to leave Vietnam.

There have been other groups, for example, in Puerto Rico.[1] None of these groups are active today. The only revolutionary military or para-military groups in the US or Europe today are Islamic.
Joma Sison has written about Maoist groups in Europe. He has admitted that none of them have developed a real version of PPW. As with me and Thakor, he has a hard time imagining that these groups can seriously pull off a people’s war.
Again, I don’t have a solid opinion on this. I would like to support PPW, but I have a hard time imaging how this can be done. I invite anyone who wants to debate this issue to send me an article or comment I can post here. This site is for debate and this is one issue we need debate on. In the mean time, we need to explore all our options of changing our societies, countries and the world.    
Also I hate to admit that at the age of 65, there are issues I do not have answers to.
The Weather Underground Organization.

[1] Here is a right-wing diatribe on groups who resisted the colonial status of Puerto Rico. This article list many of the groups once active.

Wednesday, February 12, 2020


By Harsh Thakor
Maoism, Dogmatism, and the Post-1976 Disarray of the International Communist
Movement-Maoism synthesized by chairman Mao Zedong(毛泽东) and not Chairman Gonzalo. Gonzalo equated Maoism with Universality of Protracted Peoples War (PPW) and to justify that revolution was on the strategic offensive worldwide. Maoism originally reached a 3rd stage with the Great Proletarian Cultural revolution when the thesis of Continuous revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat was formulated. I feel even if Gonzalo was correct his followers today most incorrectly award Gonzalo thought as having Universal significance with his concept of militarization of the Communism Parties,' principally Maoism and of 'Unified Peoples War' which combined armed insurrection in cities. Gonzalo did not devise any strategy as his military line was a component or application of Chairman Mao's PPW theory which he tried to apply in Peruvian conditions where urban population was fare greater than China. Gonzaloites like Red Guards Los Angeles or Red Guards Austin incorrectly term that Gonzalo developed a new military line which could also be a strategy for Imperialist countries. Comrades must make a distinction between the positive practice of Communist Party of Peru (PCP) under Chairman Gonzalo and the most sectarian interpretation by RGA groups in America, some of which are now defunct or the DemVolke Dienen Norway. Chairman Gonzalo did not morally promote personality cult or Jetafura as an International trend but had mechanical understanding of Maoism in certain respects. Significant that Gonzalo defended Joseph Stalin (Иосиф Сталин/ იოსებ სტალინი) much more than Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP) America or Revolutionary International Movement (RIM) and he and his followers, tooth and nail, refuted Maoism as a rupture like Many Comrades today. Joshua Moufawad Paul and Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP)-Canada strongly uphold concept of rupture in spite of refuting 'principally Maoism' concept to their last blood. The most dialectical Maoist analysis has been made by Chairman Jose Maria “Joma” Sison[1] who explains how subjective factors are unfavorable for immediate launching of Peoples War. He does not reject eventual possibility but amply demonstrates how the Gonzaloites have scant respect for subjective conditions. Overall to me it is Chairman Sison who is theoretically the soundest Marxist-Leninist Maoist leader after Chairman Mao, particularly in aspect of mass line as practiced by Communist Party of Philippines. I greatly recommend cadres to read the article by Kenny Lake in Kites blog which is one of the finest exponents of Non -sectarian and dialectical approach.
It most fairly gives Gonzalo and PCP Its due and refutes certain negative criticisms of it by Andy Belasario in PRISM blog. It gives great insight into the complex conditions of Peru where Gonzalo had to make inroads in the cities with greater population of people residing in urban towns than the rural areas. He also gives Chairman Sison due credit for refuting Protracted Peoples War as a strategy today applicable in Imperialist countries and at the very root refutes the mechanical concepts of its Universality by Gonzaloites. It praises the achievements of the PCP in comprising the United front and negates Gonzalo's strategy as 'left adventurist' as attributed by Belesario. Arguably it is over critical of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution (G.P.C.R.) attributing mechanical understanding. Still it makes a most relevant criticism on the point of how subjective conditions can be created to combat objective factors, in opposition to Sison and Belasario. I also recommend Comrades to read the views of Comrade Peter Korotaev who attributes Lin Bia-ist (林彪) tendencies to PCP or Gonzalo with thesis of  'peoples War till Communism.' He felt this denies “Dictatorship of the Proletariat." He too feels the Gonzaloite trends reveal great sectarianism. Still he gives relevance to militarization of the party from a proletarian angle. Korotaev with great Marxist-Leninist-Maoist[2] depth refuted the 'military' approach and how peoples war could never be a solution in the GPCR. Still I do not feel there was a theoretical similarity between Lin Biao and Chairman Gonzalo as both highlighted Peoples War in a different context. I feel Gonzalo did not want Peoples War as a strategy and used that term as a metaphor or to be used tactically. Several Comrades who refute 'Jefatura' of 'Great Leadership' still uphold universality of PPW and Maoism being a rupture. Here the analysis of Comrade Stalin is a decisive aspect. Comrade Nick Marlatte and Matts Alfred Olsen have very analytically refuted principally Maoism and dogmatism of Gonzaloitse but are arguably holding different views on the question of Stalin. They feel that October road cannot be applied to Imperialist countries. Even if 'Gonzalo Thought' may have been introduced pre-maturely we must historically remember that in the 7th Congress in 1945 itself, before completion of the revolution, Mao’s thought was upheld as a new military line for semi-colonial countries and thus had Universal significance. Gonzalo thought was never universally applicable but played an important role towards applying Maoism in the Peruvian conditions. Still we have to tooth and nail refute sections that wish to copy Peruvian example.

[1] See “On the Question of People's War in Industrial Capitalist Countries” by Jose Maria Sison.
[2] Karl Marx, Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (Влади́мир Ильи́ч Ле́нин), Mao.

Further notes from Harsh Thakor on this article:
Chairman Mao also never stated: “PEOPLES WAR TILL COMMUNISM V DICTATORSHIP OF THE PROLETARIAT" In my view is that Gonzalo replaces communist politics with war. He constantly emphasizes “people's war till communism”, which in my view is a denial of the dictatorship of the proletariat. The emphasis on the 'militarization of the party' as the key characteristic of Maoism is in my view wrong. People's War was the key characteristic of Maoism for Lin Biao. But for Mao, his greatest concern was how to continue communist politics AFTER defeating the enemy in People's War - the problem of the dictatorship of the proletariat. "I think people's war is absolutely a necessary aspect of any communist politics today. But it is a mistake to say that people's war IS communist politics. It is a stage. "I think the dictatorship of the proletariat is the key concept of Marxism—not people's war. The followers of the PCP think the opposite. I am particularly opposed to the idea that launching people’s war as a solution to the problem of revisionism, that it could have saved the GPCR from the rightists. This thesis shows a total lack of understanding of the class interests at stake in the GPCR"(Comrade Perter Kuroatev). Below I am posting outstanding, analytical and dialectical comments by Comrade Peter Korotaev refuting the eclectic path advocated by PCP or Chairman Gonzalo on 'Peoples War till Communism and defending dictatorship of the proletariat." At the very root it sums up the focal point of how peoples war cannot equate with dictatorship of the proletariat. Today 'Struggle Sessions' Tjien Folke media net and Dem Volke Dienen support the thesis of 'War till Communism" even in GPCR. "To put my view very simply: people’s war is certainly the most powerful military strategy of the proletariat, and it will doubtless be necessary to combat bourgeois (especially comprador) dictatorships for a very long time in the future, until communism is established on a world scale. But war does not solve any of the problems of the transition to communism apart from the immediate one of destroying the most obvious oppressors. The dictatorship of the proletariat is central concept of Marxism, and it does not simply mean intensified repression (even at the level of war) against the enemies of the proletariat. The key problems of the dictatorship of the proletariat are: how to limit, and continue limiting the growth of contradictions between manual and intellectual labour, the city and the countryside, and remaining capitalist or proto-capitalist relations of production (like independent cooperatives). This is the rock on which the great dictatorships if the proletariat of the 20th century broke on, and there is no way to solve them through war." I do not even think that these comrades who advocate line of "peoples war till communism" really believe in or practice Mao’s thesis that non-antagonistic contradictions among the people are among the most important to deal with properly, and that if they are ignored, there is no chance to transition towards communism For them, everything is easily solved by just declaring war "As Mao said, there is no construction without destruction. These followers of Gonzalo seem to think that this means that no constructive politics is necessary, only destruction, only the highest form of destruction (people’s war). What this results in is the petty-bourgeois ultra-leftism of many of the student red guards of the early GPCR, who called for a people’s war instead of seriously working towards strengthening and reconstructing the dictatorship of the proletariat. And, of course, Mao was very displeased with this and sent in the workers into Peking University to stop these infantile ultra-leftists." SECTARIAN STAND ON MAOISM BY SUPPORTERS OF GONZALO THOUGHT The PCP's conception is vague. It is taken by supporters of Gonzalo thought and the principally Maoist tendency to generally mean that the People's Army must be made simultaneously with the party, and with the party inside of it. Broadly this is at odds with Mao's thinking, though a critical point of the MLM synthesis is the acceptance that PPW is universal and the focus of every Maoist party is to build it in their conditions. The reason that this conception from these tendencies is odd, and I think disagreeable, is that it doesn't effectively distinguish itself from the failed Focoist strategy. It largely argues for liquidating mass-work, particularly rejecting working with less revolutionary and more reactionary sections of the masses to build an effective united front. It also makes no concessions for development of PPW in advanced imperialist countries, which are at odds with the semi-feudal, semi-colonial conditions of places like pre-communist China, India, the Philippines, Peru, Nepal, Pre-war Vietnam, etc. where a people's army could effectively liberate peasants from landlords with small military forces that could evade state suppression because of their rural positions. Modern Imperialist countries are largely dependent on base area strongholds existing in cities, close to centralized state forces, and the conditions for that have only existed effectively a few times in history and even then those parties were rightly dealing with the contradictions of full out military activity vs. mass engagement to hold those bases properly ie. Black Panther Party in the USA, Irish Republican Army, and maybe the Red Brigades in Italy. The point is though, we don't have those same circumstances as existed in the 60-70s, and even in their height of power they had these same arguments that largely weren't resolved but often times the correct conception fell towards a more mass based approach with small developments of guerilla warfare that were likely only the infancy of a strategic defensive position.(Nick Marlatte) There are profound limits on what can be said about military strategy for revolution in imperialist countries in a public document. Anyone who thinks otherwise is naive, posturing, or worse. When I write about military strategy for revolution in imperialist countries, it is purely hypothetical. In his articles criticizing the church of PPW universalism, Jose Maria Sison makes the correct observation that at present there doesn’t appear to be any communist forces in imperialist countries with the adequate strength—including roots among the masses—and in favorable conditions to carry out military actions. Thus the principal task now, for anyone who wants to transform this situation, is to integrate with the masses, build organization among them, recruit communists and develop solid (and secure) communist organization through this work, and develop theory and strategy in relation to this practice. Joma does not entirely write off the question of revolutionaries and the masses they lead learning how to use hardware now. He gives examples of legally permitted shooting practice clubs and neighborhood defense organizations as instances where this might be appropriate. But Joma warns that connecting the use of hardware, including legally permitted practice with it, with public calls for revolution and revolutionary organization will only result in compromising the security of communist organization and in severe repression of revolutionary organization and the masses before either can be adequately defended. Listen to your elders. From KITES (strategy of revolution in Imperialist countries by Kenny Lake)The church of PPW universalism is keen to argue that Maoism was first synthesized as a third, higher stage of communist theory in 1982 by Chairman Gonzalo, and that today revolutionaries must adhere to a “principally Maoism” version of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism (MLM) as well as apply the universal lessons of Gonzalo Thought. Since this is mostly a declaration of dogma it is not worth addressing in its own right, though philosopher J. Moufawad-Paul’s book Continuity and Rupture does present a more intellectually savvy version of the “1982 synthesis” view. Nevertheless, all this does raise the questions: What is Maoism? How did it come into being internationally? How has it been interpreted by different people and organizations? How has the disarray of the international communist movement following the 1976 counterrevolutionary coup in China as well as attempts to come out of that disarray shaped the present state of the subjective forces for revolution? I am not interested in religious attempts to declare a “one true Maoism” and enshrine the apostle who transmitted it to us. We already have Mao’s writings and speeches and the historical experience of the Chinese revolution and socialist rule from 1949 to 1976, and we can take from that what we want. While I uphold the hard-fought lessons of communist theory as it has been developed by Marx, Lenin, Mao, and others, I don’t treat communist theory as a closed system that can only develop further through establishing a fourth great teacher. Or to put it another way: yes, Gonzalo and other communist leaders developed some strategy and theoretical insights that we all should learn from, but that doesn’t mean we need to declare, let alone be obsessed with declaring, a new Thought, Ism, Synthesis, Path, etc. In any event, it does seem relevant today, especially with a new generation interested in Maoism, to explore some of the real issues that have come up in the real struggles around the world to uphold and apply Maoism in opposition to the revisionism of the Soviet Union in the 1960s and ’70s, and especially since the 1976 counterrevolutionary coup in China. As a starting point, I agree with Andy Belisario that irrespective of appellation, Maoism was synthesized by Mao and the Communist Party of China (CPC), and this synthesis can be found, in written form, in the Selected Works of Mao Zedong and in the Red Book. Foreign Languages Press, probably the greatest translation operation and international publisher in human history, published these “classics” of communist theory in numerous languages and distributed them as cheaply as possible far and wide, thus disseminating this synthesis worldwide. Furthermore, the practice of the CPC—its leadership of the PPW to victory in China and, even more, its leadership of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution (GPCR)—was equally a part of the synthesis of Maoism. To suggest that Maoism requires someone other than Mao, an entity other than the pre-1976 CPC, and an experience other than the Chinese revolution, socialist state, and GPCR to synthesize it is to veer towards arrogance and concern for credit.(Kenny Lake in KITE blog on Strategy of revolution in Imperialist countries) ON THE MILITARY THEORY OF INTERNATIONAL PROLETARIAT.CHAIRMAN MAO THE FOUNDER? I am reproducing this quote by Andy Belesario for a serious debate. I disagree with Belesario that Chairman Mao did not found theory of Peoples War or that the contribution of Ho Chi Minh, Giap or Sison are comparable. In that light even Gonzalo is right up there. However Maoism cannot be projected as a International military theory as propounded by Gonzalo with Lenin even having a military line. Still it was Mao who founded a military theory for semi-colonial countries like in Asia, Latin America or Africa—Through path of protracted Peoples War. The CCP itself acknowledged this when establishing Mao Zedong Thought in 1945 itself. What Ho or Sison did was interpreting Mao's military line in accordance to the situations in their country, just like the Maoists in India. None have made the development of any new military theory like Chairman Mao, so ANTONIO BELESARIO "Despite Kinera’s misplaced flattery, Mao was not the original proponent or first theorist of people’s war as “the military theory of the international proletariat.” For Kinera (or his idol Gonzalo) to make this claim is a disservice to other great communist leaders who made equally valuable contributions to the proletariat’s military theory and practice, as expressed in the strategic, operational, and tactical principles that they adopted for their respective revolutions and are now available for study and creative application by all revolutionaries of the world."

Friday, February 07, 2020

Nepal- Negotiation Proposal of the Government and Issues of the Country

From The CPN and 'Nepali P.L.A.' [MAOIST_REVOLUTION]

By Dharmendra-Bastola (Kanchan)
The government has issued a public notice proposing a negotiation with the political parties and organizations which have not been satisfied with the current state-regime. However, it has not clarified the nature of the negotiation with the distinctive theoretical ground and objectives. Different parties and organizations might have different demands in the country. The contradiction raised by the regime, is creating the demands in the society. Those appointed for the negotiation on behalf of the government are expressing the opinions like for the formation of the ‘inclusive’, ‘equitable’, ‘justified’ and ‘forward-looking’ state-system in totality. The government using such terminologies seems to The very cautious and prudent; the government has not been able to come out of the imperialistic parliamentary system, is hesitant to come forward solving the current burning issues of the country. The government seems to have the intention of utilizing the environment of the negotiation to encompass all the parties and organizations into the outdated parliamentary system but not to solve the real problems of the country. Therefore, all the people including the members of our party should be out of such confusion.

Generally, it is a positive step for the government, to put-forward the negotiation proposal to solve the problems of the country. Generally, negotiation is a political aspect, whose possibility and necessity lies everywhere. No Marxist, Leninist and Maoist Communist Party deny the possibility and necessity of the negotiation. Out party is struggling for the goal of installing the ‘scientific socialism’ ending the former as well as current comprador capitalism; is moving forward to end the suppression of the comprador capitalism unifying all the suppressed people in the country; is also struggling empower the people ending the dominance of the handful of the plunderers. There is no chance of deviating away from the negotiation, if these issues are addressed and solved properly. We whole-heartedly desire the solution of the problems through the negotiation. Needless to clarify that a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Communist Party desires to change of the regime through peaceful process, and to guarantee the radical change of the society. Therefore, neither do we reject the issue of the negotiation, nor does a Maoist Communist deviate from the issue. Nevertheless, the achievement of the negotiation is so little so far, expect in some of the particular issues.

At the process of Second World War, the negotiation between Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin in 1943 had yield a positive result. Such negotiation was signed on an especial ground of power-balance. Otherwise, the negotiation campaigns have been launched with the intention of swallowing up or annihilate other’s existence.. Therefore, the issue of the negotiation has been understood as the special situation of the power-balance.

The issue of the negotiation is not new in the world-communist movement as well as at the Nepalese communist movement. The communist parties have several of the fresh experiences of the negotiation signed with the bourgeoisie-regimes. The people want to know– what is the negotiation for, to create which consensus, and to fulfill which demand? Should we sign the negotiation to fulfill the people’s interest or the interest of the anti-people? Is it for the interest of the workers, peasants and suppressed-class people or for the interest of the comprador-capitalists and feudal land-lords? Should it be for the interest of the national-capitalists or for the interest of the imperialist capitalists? Or is it a tactical game to annihilate each-other. Is it to out-break the war, or is it to create the situation of the fierce-resistance? They are the issues, which the negotiation creates and addresses everywhere in the world.

First of all, we would like to understand the government’s concept and understanding on these issues. Different parties and organizations might have different opinion about these issues. We would rather like the parties in the power have clear understanding on these issues. No parliamentary party should have any confusion about our party. Because, several of the times, the negotiations have been launched in Nepal.

The political parties in the pasts as Nepali Congress, CPN (ML)
[1] had also signed negotiation with the King. Among so many conspiracies, pressers and confusions, they were forced to accept the Kingship in the parliamentary system. The leading forces of the movement of 2046-47 BS (1990AD), like Nepali Congress and CPN (ML) were not able to install a minimum capitalist regime according as their goal and objectives, and were forced to yield in front of the modern feudalism. Being participated to the age-old feudal regime, NC and UML kept on supporting it. They were not sensitive to the issues of the people, and people were forced to launch decade-long armed struggle, they kept on deceiving the people in the name of negotiation again and again.

Similarly, UCPN (Maoist) was our own party then, but it couldn’t bear the struggle with the Nepali Congress and CPN (UML) and converted according with their desire and drowned into the swamp of the parliamentary system. Being into the same basket these parties have been standing on the same ground and shouting for the negotiation. Being alert and disagreeing with such conspiracies and shamelessness, we have been committed to the issues of the country and people. We can’t be deviate from the issues and interest of the people in the name of the negotiation.

All the political parties, the Nepalese people and international community know well that out party is a revolutionary party which is launching movement for the installation of the scientific socialism in the country, to develop Nepal as the self-dependent and prosperous country and fighting for the prosperity and independence of the people. To introduce a radical transformation in the country, to empower the people ending the bourgeoisie comprador class, to unify the people in a real sense, and lead the country to the prosperity, progress the comprador-capitalist class in the country are under a threat.

Nepal Communist party is also a force of all the working-class people in the world, which doesn’t aim for the revolution within the country only, rather desires to establish a friendly relationship with the people fighting for the liberation, all over the world through the revolutionary parties and organization. This party aims to end the capitalist regime and install the scientific socialism on the basis of the theoretical, political and philosophical norms of the Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. The scientific socialist society is far better than the current capitalism for the prosperity and progress of the human-being. Such society will be free from all of the vices of the current capitalist society like poverty, unemployment, war-threat, environment-crisis, diseases and maladies, inhuman tortures, all people being harmonious to nature, all the people will be unified not for the capitalist profit, but for the necessity, welfare and progress of the human society. The concept and aim of this scientific socialism have created a threat to the headquarters of the imperialism. With such Marxist-Leninist-Maoist goal and objectives, our party has targeted the comprador capitalist in the country and imperialist capitalism at the international level; they like to crush it at the bud. Now our party has been working to complete the responsibility of the revolution, to explore the way for the human virtues and progress, and struggling to end the plundering, smuggling, human-trafficking, and dependence of the country imposed for the profit of the few of the people in the country.

Though the country has been politically changed into the republican state, the suppression and plundering upon the country and people has not been changed. There is great difference between the parliamentary parties and out party on the issue of the solution to this problem. Otherwise, there needn’t be any necessity of the struggle and negotiation there.

What is the fundamental difference between the parliamentary parties and ours? Primarily, we can enumerate the difference like: should the political power to all the people or to some handful only? Should we make the country self-dependent, independent, and sovereign or keep it dependent, neo-colonial and satellite situation? Should we develop the national capital in the country and make the national industrialists and whole country to be competent in the international market, should we keep the country just a market to consume foreign product? Should we create the employment within the country through the entrepreneurship environment, should well sell the youth of the citizen in the foreign land in a cheap price? Should we convert the country in the economically solvent selling all the natural resources in the name of foreign employment or should we make the country able to consume the ‘Direct Foreign Investment (DFI)’, making the domestic economic system stronger? Should we keep Nepalese Currency independent or keep it under the subjugation of the foreign-currency? Should we keep the security system of Nepal under the control of Nepalese people, or keep it under the foreign power? Should we reform the international treaties cancelling all the former and humiliating treaties signed to keep the country under the dominance, should we make them humiliating surrendering to the foreign power? Should we keep the army-police of Nepal the safe-guard of the Nepalese people, Nepalese sovereignty or Nepalese dignity, or make them just the mercenaries of the foreign power? Should we develop Nepal just a playing ground to breed the mercenaries or should we develop it as a dignified country able to maintain a friendly relationship for the international friendship, peace and prosperity? There is completely radical difference between these parliamentary parties and out party.

The Parliamentary parties and their reactionary regime are standing for the comprador capitalists and is using the propaganda of ‘elected representatives’, ‘adult enfranchise’, ‘periodical election’ etc. They like to lead the country under the subjugation to the foreign powers; they are inviting and welcoming the foreign interferences. They do not like to install the industries; rather make the country the market of the international business. They don’t like to create the employment in the country rather like to send the youths to the foreign land to sell their labor in cheap price. Just to preserve their power, they like to invite the uncontrolled foreign investment. They are converting the Nepalese Army to be most corrupted one. They are converting whole nation into the breeding land or mercenary and cheap labor-force.
We like to know what is the opinion of the government on these issues, while they are shouting for the negotiation, which need to be clarified by the government itself?

We had also tabled the talk, negotiation and consensus with the seven parliamentarian parties during 2062/064 BS (2006-08 AD) in the leadership of the then Chairman of Maoist Party, Comrade Prachand. The negotiation was for the purpose of ending constitutional monarchy to install people’s democratic republic and ending the dictatorship of comprador capitalism and to install people’s democratic dictatorship in the leadership of working class or proletariat people. We wanted to utilize the negotiation to empower the people well. As the parliamentarian political parties agreed to it theoretically, ‘The Comprehensive Peace-negotiation’ was made possible then.

However, the people’s government installed in their initiation, were being displaced. The process had started to displaced the revolutionary culture installed by people’s government. The inter-caste and inter-cultural marriages which were being flourished have been disappeared again. The social evils like caste-discrimination, witch-crafts, Dhami-Jhakri, tribal-discrimination, which were almost finished with the people’s power have also reviving now. ‘The People’s Liberation Army’, which contributed that much to install the republicanism in the country has been dissolved and its commanders were misused for the benefit of the capitalists within the party and outside. Directly or indirectly, the right of the women, minorities and marginalized people have been finished. Though new country’s code has been introduced displacing the former one, which has pushed the women to the suppression of the barbaric stage and the rulers have been so dictator like Hitler abusing the individual right of the people.

As such symptoms were seen in the so-called peace-process, we launched the two-line struggle within the party. During such two-line struggle, comrade Prachand had once said, ‘Sometimes, a large ship takes a long time to take a round.’ whose meaning was they needed a good deal of time, to come back to the revolutionary line from their newly taken parliamentarian line. The ship of Prachand has no hope to return back to its right revolutionary course; rather it has been completely drowned into the parliamentarian system. The then revolutionary Maoist party has been swallowed up by parliamentarian UML Party. It has completely drowned there without any of its symptoms.

After the Palungtar plenum, the party split one group was under the leadership of comrade Prachand, and another under the leadership of comrade Kiran. At that time, comrade Prachand was launching propaganda that this party-split is nothing more than a drama, where things have been already designed well. The group under Prachand’s group is to launch the struggle within the parliament and the group under Kiran’t leadership is to launch the struggle outside. Some of them were also reinterpreting it as the designed collaborating between these two parties strengthening all the struggles as people’s war, people’s struggle, negotiation, diplomacy and parliamentarian as well as road-demonstration, according as the mandate of ‘Kamidanda-plenum’.

There was a vested interest after such propaganda, which was to dissolve the Maoist movement. Whatever the attitude we were doubting and protesting, for which we have separated the party, has been proved hundred percent; the leadership of comrade Prachand has been proved to be the neo-reformism, and surrenderism. In the name of negotiation, are those former UML-MK leaders ready to correct their mistakes? They are not clarified in this regard so properly.

While they are shouting for the negotiation, on the other hand, all the programs and activities of our party has been prohibited and annihilated. The polite-bureau members of our party including the spokes-person Prakand, like Padam Rai, Uma Bhujel, Krishna Dhamala, Mohan Karki, Om Pun, and central Committee members like Dev Narayan Yadav, Deepesh, Asal, Ajaad have been arrested. They have been dragged to different places and harassed with the fake-litigations. The state-power has been abused to threat upon our party, we have been prohibited to go to the people, they have tried their best to make competition in the development, which can be interpreted as the bourgeoisie-dictatorship too.

Very interestingly, the government which has been claiming for the ‘Rule of Law’ has been discarding the order of the supreme-court, and all the norms and values of the civilized system have been refuted. Moreover, out party has launched a program of organization strengthening and organization expansion campaign. The spies have been deputed in the plain-clouth country-widely, to distract people’s support to our party as they have not been able to compete with us politically. Our phones have been trapped, in some of the places, the armed police and civic-police have been deputed against us. The leaders and cadres have been arrested from their home. How should we understand such activities of the government? Is this government forcing us to refute it equally with the similar manner?

There is sufficient ground for us to raise the use of anti-national activates, the market-skiing, corruption, smuggling, ill-activities, and plundering upon the country. We have been saying that we Nepalese people should launch large projects like upper-Karnali, Arun third, West-Seti, upper Marsyangdi, in our own investment otherwise in out our initiation and leadership but taking the foreign loan, but to keep our control over it. But they are selling their authority to the foreign powers.

The current government was believed to be free from the corruption; however, more than two-thousand representatives have been charged of the corruption. Can we say it a corruption-free government? It has imposed the tax upon the people up to 2000 percent keeping the facilities to the people under zero-level. Is it a political purity hiding that much smugglings and black market, in the name of taking action upon the minor officers, but protecting the major ones?

The heinous incidents like rape, murder etc. have been launched under the protection of the government. After this government of Nepal Communist Party got the two-third majority in the parliament, it has snatched back all the right even to speak in the parliament. Such attitude of the government is going to the bourgeoisie reactionary dictatorship.

At this state, the whole Maoist Communist Movement needs to the reformed, polarized and strengthened again. All the leaders including the Baburam Bhattarai, Prachand and Kiran should return-back to the Maoist movement again realizing all of their past mistakes. Those leaders who had so great contribution to the revolution in the past shouldn’t have the such mistakes now.

All the leaders and comrades, who have not been completely drowned into the parliamentary system, should return back to the main-stream of the Maoist revolutionary struggle. No one should have any confusion in mind; the scientific socialism is possible through the parliamentary system. All of the revolutionary comrades and leaders should join their hands for to develop the struggle in the right course.

We should not be deviated from the path of the martyrs. They should not deceive to the martyrs and should not be drowned to the parliamentary politics, they should return back to the right-line as soon as possible. Maoist party is alive; the party-line of unified revolution is still alive. The necessity of the revolution is the necessity of all people in the country. Therefore, all the revolutionary forces, all the Maoist leaders and comrades should be mainstreamed for the liberation of the country and people.

Now in the name of the negotiation, the government is speaking the language of gun, forcing us to take the gun, to murder out leaders, to arrest and imprison our leaders. However Nepalese people are observing us, are evaluating who is right and who is wrong? Therefore, the design of the government is not going to be sustainable. Those in the leadership of the current state-power are forcing people to come into the counter or resistance activities and programs.


Wednesday, February 05, 2020


By Harsh Thakor

The spirit of resistance against the ascendancy of saffron fascism unleashed through National Register of Citizens (NRC) and Citizenship Amendment Act  (CAA) has been shimmering the state of Punjab like a spark turning into a Prairie Fire. Above all it has mobilized every democratic section of the people be it the peasantry, landless agricultural labour, industrial workers, government employees, women, students or youth. There are of course divided trends within the revolutionary camp but all with equal zeal are confronting the monster of NRC and Citizenship Amendment Bill  (CAB) which are entrapping the entire nation like fascist noose strangulating it, putting the lives of the Muslim minority in peril as never before. The secular and anti-Hindutva spirit is at its crescendo in Punjab with wrath literally written on the faces of the Punjabi masses against the vampires.

On February 1st at Malerkotla we witnessed a historic day in the struggle against the tyranny of religious fascism, with one of the most qualitative protests ever in the history of revolutionary movement for secularism in India. It was a tribute to the meticulous preparation and practice of mass line. Thousands of farmers & Muslim women thundered in like a huge army or lightning striking to invite for success of 16th Feb. massive protest rally against CAA, NRC and National Population Register (NPR) Malerkotla (Punjab). Nearly 20000 women coming from Muslim & farmers families today organized a massive "invitation march" under the banner of B.K.U. (ekta-ugrahan) for the success of a huge protest rally to be organized here on 16th February by over a dozen struggling mass organizations of Punjab against CAA, NRC and NPR. Thousands of women from all over Punjab after gathering here in the grain market and marching towards the town under the leadership of Harinder Kaur Bindu State Leader of women wing and Joginder Singh Ugrahan State President of the farmer organisation, reached the Sirhindi Gate of the town. They were warmly greeted by thousands of local Muslim women lead by Shagufta and her companions from Jamat-e-Islami Hind, Zarka Zaafri and different Muslim organizations waiting there. When this joint procession of nearly 20000 women wearing 'basanti' dupattas &  burkas  advanced in the bazaars of Malerkotla to invite local people to join the proposed rally and protest march on 16th February, it appeared like a basanti coloured flood of women power. Shouting sky rending slogans "Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Isayee, saaray kirtee bhai bhai", "Bhai nal bhai larren nee dena, sun santaali banan nee dena" and holding photos of Shahid Bhagat Singh and banners of slogans of communal harmony/unity this massive, disciplined and enthusiastic march of women was also conveying a massage to defeat the foxy moves of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government dividing people of our country on communal basis. This massive gathering was addressed at some places in the town by Harinder Kaur Bindu, Harpreet Kaur Jethuke, Baljeet Kaur, Parmjit Kaur Pitho and Paramjit Kaur Kotra. They hailed the steps of Muslim community especially their women for coming out openly in the field of struggle to defeat the vicious plans of Narendra Modi government to disrupt communal harmony of the working people by imposing CAA, NRC & NPR throughout the country. They said that this undeterred resistance by the Muslims strongly supported by the students' protests, intelligentsia and democratic forces of our country has once succeeded in defeating the vicious moves of the rulers to ignite communal riots between Hindus & Muslims. They highlighted that since 1947 whenever the rulers succeeded in spreading such riots, the women of our society had to bear the most dreaded consequences of it. The women leaders stressed that linking the citizenship issue with religion, CAA deeply violates the secular and democratic values. It especially targets Muslims to deprive them of all types of citizenship rights. While strongly condemning the brutal repression being let loose over peaceful protesting people along with students of J.N.U. and Jamia Milia University they said that these repressive steps of BJP government are part of their vicious plans to establish Hindu Rule all over the country. They said that apart from Muslims, Dalits, Advasis, other minorities and all working people are the targets of this communal fascist attack. They stressed that the purpose behind this Hindu Rashtra Plan is not the welfare of total Hindu community; rather it is to establish such a backward regime where all the human rights of working people of all communities including Hindu workers will be crushed. They said that Modi government is diverting the attention of the working people from brutal excesses on women, rampant unemployment & soaring prices, farmers debts/suicides and economic disaster by imposing communal fascist mobilization and blind patriotism. Thus by pushing the country into the fire of communal riots Modi government wants to sell all public sector entities along with all natural resources like water/land/forests to imperialist corporates by imposing more draconian labour laws. As well as by imposing heavy taxes and more repressive black laws on all the working people of the country. But they emphasized that the women and other working people of our country have now awakened, who will not allow such plans of Mode govt. to be successful. They demanded repeal of CAA, NRC and NPR, arrest all the culprits of murdering 39 Muslims and injuring hundreds including students by police and RSS/BJP gundas. They invited all residents of Malerkotla & surrounding areas along with whole of Punjab to rise above religious & caste differences and reach in Malerkotla on 16th February forming long convoyees in order to fight unitedly against these vicious plans of Modi government Apart from other activists state representatives of B.K.U. (ekta-ugrahan) Sukhdev Singh Kokri Kalan, Jhanda singh Jethuke, Hardip Singh Tallewal, Zora Singh Nasrali, Lachhman Singh Sewewala (Punjab Khet Mazdoor Union), Hoshiar Singh Salemgarh (PSU-Shaheed Randhawa), Srishati (PSU-Lalkaar) were also present there.(Report from Sukhdev Singh Kokri Kalan 9417466038)

In Patiala and Sangrur the anti-fascist front has been exhibiting many marches, seminars and cultural programmes condemning NRC and CAA.The most impressive resistance has been depicted by the Punjab Radical Students Union who inspite of limited cadre have dug deepest amongst students groups to instill secular revolutionary political consciousness .Some radical protests have been undertaken in around 50 villages in Sangrur area by Punjab Radical Students Union and Naujwan Bharat Sabha(Punjab)like in Chajli, Namol. Dhuri etc.I n meticulous depth the students explained the fascist nature of the NRC and CAA in terms of it completely striping the minorities of their basic rights. Around 50 people assembled for their meetings organized. A Candle light protest was organized at Sangrur Bus Stand .The anti-fascist front comprising groups like Lok Sangram Manch, Inquilabi Lok Kendra, Communist Party India(Marxist Leninist) Liberation, C.P.I.(M.L.) New Democracy etc held a significant convention in Patiala involving around 300 persons, with significant intervention of the Punjab medical students Association. We witnessed some of the most heart touching moments with villagers assembling together giving full fledged moral support to their Muslim brethren who in turn looked as though a new life was infused into them, after seeming dead and buried in spirit a short while ago. Also a very qualitative women's march was organized by the Krantikari Pendu Mazdoor Union in Sangrur.Lok Morcha Punjab also conducted important educational seminars. in Kalajhara Village. The Punjab Khet Mazdoor Union held a march in Muktsar district while Punjab Students Union(Shaheed Randhawa) held meeting at Rajendra College tin Bathinda to Mobilize cadre for protest on February 16th.

The revolutionary camp in Punjab remains divided on issue of doing joint programme with nay political party and thus constituents of the Anti-fascist front will support the Malerkotla Protest on February 16th but not be a formal part of the front formed of the conference. The main objection of organizations like Bharatiya Kisan Union(Dakaunda and Ugrahan) or Punjab Khet Mazdoor Union are allying with opportunist forces like revisionist left parties. Organizations like Lok Sangram Manch, Revolutionary Peoples Front and C.P.I.(M.L.) New Democracy feel that the united front against fascism should be broad and should include liberal opposition who are vocal against saffron fascism.

On 16th February we could expect a new glorious chapter written in the central protest at Malerkotala in the revolutionary movement against Hindu fascist religious tyranny,. We must give credit to sections of all contingents of the revolutionary camp for striking the fascist poison at its very roots, who have set a shining example to the whole of the nation.