Maoists Threat Increasing And Way Out Of Peace
Maoists Threat Increasing And Way Out Of Peace
By Kamala Sarup
Maoists, have threatened poor people and children. The Maoists, at present, are the most difficult and Nepal is trying how to stabilize the present situation. The main challenge now is the long-term stability of the peace. Therefore, naturally it is difficult to bring the Maoist which had turned against the system. This is the biggest challenge for peaceful process. There is the need for cooperation and participation of all sides to make it relevant and fruitful. All should give priority to restore the country back to normalcy. After the country gets back to normal, those who can rally the people behind it through peaceful means can run the country. Any side, which would run the country in the future, must keep in mind the trouble and tragedy of the last eleven years. Therefore, the whole country must be patient.
Maoists themselves do not have the belief that it is possible to bring the kind of revolutionary changes they are saying in the present world situation. Maoist threat has to be solved to protect the constitution and to allow the constitutional provision to become active. People want peace, and they are least concerned about how it is achieved.
The communism received its impetus only in twenties in Southeast Asia from China. The Nepalese Communist Party was established in 1949 only. That party was established at a 'time when the great Chinese revolution had been won and socialism was developing in the USSR.' The adoption of Chinese style revolution, although today the Chinese diplomat denies of any relationship with Maoist except with the name of Mao, is based upon the principle of Mao's successful revolution in China.
The doctrines of insurgency are important factors in the sense that these are determinant in the successful sustainability of the insurgency. There are generally two doctrines--offensive and defensive. Maoists of Nepal are adopting the doctrine of offensive action or the emphasis on armed action rather than on the doctrine of mobilization of masses. Castro, Che Guevara, and Sendero Luminoso in Cuba and Peru also chose this course. In Nepal, the most notable development in the last one decade is--the populations at large condemn Maoists' terrorism. The situation is slipping out of their hands. This is going to be fatal for Maoists, ultimately culminating into total stop of terrorism in the country.
The best and surest way of controlling the insurgency is to win the people's heart and mind. Winning heart and mind would require taking serious actions to reform.
Therefore, how major changes in the nation affected the peace for Nepali people today? As used here, peace means the good government, economic development, security and rule of law and processes that ends with those consumable goods and services that comprise essential peaceful living; that is, the quantity and quality of life to the average family in an average populated area. Remote and isolated populations, e.g., pioneers, must do with much less.
Peace can put more idle Nepali people to work and teach them to work more efficiently. It can use more of its existing resourcesand existing technologies. In addition to the existing peace, changing work habits improved the nation. Economic depressions, terror threat, wars, resource depletion, among people could not operate these functions. Peace also are related to Nepali people and each other through efficiency and productivity.
Nepal as part of its Asian "sphere of influence" strategy for both economic and political purposes. In summary, there will be Nepal Chinese and Indian rivalries as well as cooperative ventures across a wide range of geography and economic entities in Asia for the foreseeable future. Nepal, meanwhile, has a young, talented group of very bright, talented young people who are just itching to prove that Nepal belongs and deserves the utmost respect for its accomplishments of the last thausends years. This is perhaps the most significant change in Asia in the last 15 years, as China has had the region pretty much to itself in its unparalleled rise to economic greatness and global power since 1979. Nepal and South Asia see a bright future for mutual cooperation while acknowledging that rivalries will (and perhaps should) occur naturally.
While the recent elections in Nepal were marred by some episodes of violence and threats against some candidates, the fact that they were successfully held. Form what we are able to glean from popular press accounts and scuttlebutt (rumors) on the Internet, all is going surprisingly well in Nepal. Nepal will only continue to grow and prosper and that the Nepali people and the opposition will continue to work things out step by step. This thought process, combined with the classic "co-relation of forces" Nepali theology should provide at least the outlines of responses to current and future problems.
Nepal must show that it can be a responsible partner in such areas as South Asia and Central Asia. To each American or EU "sermon" a polite listen then a gradually more firm response with "proof" should be offered. Gradually the sermonizing will cease and more active actual partnerships can be forged with such compatible partners as the French and the British both of whom have long histories with Nepal. Once American interests see positive partnership, they will probably follow along shortly thereafter.