All Hail the People's Revolution in Nepal!

[Imran Siddiqui]

Face it Adam Smith, Communist rebels are for the most part moronic nitwits that really don't care about government and just want to kill stuff.

The world would be better off without them.

[Adam Smith]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Multiple parties doesn't guarantee democracy. We've got multiple parties and our system is farce.

So far as I can tell, and absent any evidence on this thread to the contrary, the people of Nepal have been making reasonably good progress at figuring things out for themselves without any help from Maoists with grenade launchers.

By your standard armed revolution is justifiable in just about any country in the world, regardless of what the vast majority of citizens in that country think. That's just ridiculous.

Not to mention the difficulty of removing the one party from power once people decide it no longer meets their needs.

Its late. I am going to bed. Good night.

[Tingkai]

There is no freedom of the press in Nepal. Dozens of journalists have been arrested and detained without charge.

This link goes to the Committee to Protect Journalists' webpage on Nepal.

http://www.cpj.org/attacks01/asia01/nepal.html

[chequita guevara]

Nepal Rebel Leader Offers Cease-Fire

05/09/2002 8:19 AM EDT

By NEELESH MISRA

(AP) A Nepal army soldier keeps vigil in the streets of Katmandu, Nepal on Wednesday May 8, 2002. Maoist...
Full Image


KATMANDU, Nepal (AP) - The rebel leader fighting to overthrow the country's constitutional monarchy offered a monthlong cease-fire in the six-year guerrilla war Thursday, after a week of fierce fighting in which the government said hundreds of combatants were killed.

A signed statement by Pushpin Kaman Doha, known as Prachand, was faxed to news media and government offices.

Nepalese newspapers reported a week ago they had received a statement from Prachand in which he offered to restart peace talks, which broke off last year. The government rejected that offer, saying the guerrillas must stop fighting.

"We are offering a cease-fire for a month from May 15," said the statement issued on Thursday.


It added, however, "Even during the period of cease-fire, if the government does not stop the killings of the sons and daughters of the nation, the oppression and the anti-national acts, we will be compelled to launch an even more deadly and decisive war."

In advance of the cease-fire offer, guerrilla forces withdrew from a western Nepal stronghold after fierce fighting that reportedly killed 350 people. The advancing Nepalese army was searching for bodies and booby traps.

The battle at the remote village of Gam, where the communist rebellion began in 1996, started Tuesday and lasted two days. Soldiers cautiously advanced on the area after the rebels retreated, a senior officer told The Associated Press on condition of anonymity.

At least 104 soldiers and police died at Gam, where guerrillas surrounded a joint army-police base late Tuesday, state-run Radio Nepal said. Some 250 rebels were also believed killed, it said.

Reinforcement soldiers spotted 30 unidentified bodies as they approached the abandoned garrison Thursday, the army officer said.


(AP) A Nepalese soldier stands guard in the streets of Katmandu, Nepal, on Monday May 6, 2002. Acording...
Full Image

In other fighting Wednesday, four police officers and 22 rebels were killed in two separate gunbattles, the army said.

Government reports of the military campaign, including casualty figures, could not be confirmed because journalists and human rights groups have not been allowed into the war zone.

For six years, Gam was a stronghold of the rebels, who are fighting to topple Nepal's constitutional monarchy. The village fell to the army two months ago.

Senior officers said that, according to a preliminary reconstruction of the battle, 500 rebels swarmed the garrison in a surprise assault on Tuesday night. The army said the rebels suffered heavy casualties as they advanced in the face of gunfire from the surrounded, outnumbered soldiers and police.

The rebels killed all the government troops, and communication links were broken, so the battle description came from local civilians and police, the army officers said.

Bad weather delayed the arrival of army reinforcements by a day, and it was uncertain when the rebels withdrew, the officers said.

The guerrillas usually seize guns and ammunition after overrunning government positions. They take their own dead with them or bury them, making casualty counts difficult.

After fighting a bush war for years with World War II-era rifles taken from police, the rebels now have seized automatic rifles, rocket launchers and other weapons from the army.

The fighting in Gam began Tuesday night as Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba and President Bush met in Washington to discuss U.S. aid for Nepal. The Bush administration recently asked Congress for $20 million in non-combat assistance for Nepal.

Nepal wants helicopter gunships and other heavy weaponry to crush the rebels. For years, the rebels have gained support from villagers through fear - and sympathy, because of the abject poverty, lingering feudal practices and caste discrimination in the Hindu kingdom.

Human rights groups have accused both the rebels and the government of killing and torturing civilians. The war has killed more than 3,000 people.

[Adam Smith]

Tingkai:

Originally posted by Tingkai
There is no freedom of the press in Nepal.

The BBC thnks otherwise, as noted my first post. Perhaps the reason can be found in a quote from the link you provided

Yubaraj Ghimire, Kantipur's editor-in-chief, told The New York Times that the decision to publish Bhattarai's column was consistent with his newspaper's policy of airing the uncensored views of "every person whose opinion is important to the nation."

Ghimire and two of his colleagues were detained for nine days before a Special Court panel ordered their release pending trial. After strenuous protests from local and international groups, including CPJ, the government dropped the case.

While I am not in favor of jailing editors or journalists, it appears that there are avenues available to criticize the government, that information gets out, and diverse views are aired.

Chegitz:
Thanks for the news article.

As noted in my second post, the rebel leader said that he did not view a cease fire as an obstacle to his group's taking over the country. One has to wonder about the worth of the proposed cease fire. Just enough time to resupply?

For years, the rebels have gained support from villagers through fear - and sympathy, because of the abject poverty, lingering feudal practices and caste discrimination in the Hindu kingdom.

Note that even that in the section of the article that you emphasized, fear figures prominently. I never said that Nepal was Shangri-La, but it does seem that they were working things out for themselves, without the help of the Maoists and their rocket propelled grenades.

Reports I have read indicate there is quite a lot of popular control in the liberated zones of Nepal.

(From last night)
Do you have any support for this?? I have serious doubts. "Well, fellow Sherpas, we can either tote supplies over the mountains for the benefit of the Glorious Revolution, or we can be paid a visit by the man over there with the machine gun." Thats some choice. In addition, the BBC noted that the rebels appeared to be rather successful at raising tax revenues in occupied areas. Considering the rebels have no elected officials, no legal code, and large number people running around with weapons, I think it is far more likely to be extortion than "taxation".

[Imran Siddiqui]

For years, the rebels have gained support from villagers through fear - and sympathy, because of the abject poverty, lingering feudal practices and caste discrimination in the Hindu kingdom.

It seems you forgot the part that says 'fear' in that quote . Stalin gained support through fear as well. Damn commies, all the same .

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Multiple parties doesn't guarantee democracy. We've got multiple parties and our system is farce. The litmus test as to whether a government is democratic or not is the amount of input it gets from the people and how much control over their government they have. Reports I have read indicate there is quite a lot of popular control in the liberated zones of Nepal.

And forcing people into a government at gun point does? Your litmus test can be applied to any communist government so far and they all fail. The reason is that the ****ing leaders think that they know best and that the people are too stupid or corrupt to think for themselves. And by "liberated" don't you really mean controlled. There is as stubtle difference, that even a commie should know.

You know che, you demostrate with every post that you don't give a damn about the people. You care about what you think it best for the people. The reason that communists have to have a revolution is not because the man keeps them down, its because the average person may not exactly like everything about their life but they know your brand of government brings nothing but death and misery. You can set and talk about your beautiful theories all you want, but your brand of soceity is just ****. It has been **** down through the years and it will remain **** as long as you and other want to think for the people. Now the system we have now, isn't paradise but it's a damn far sight better than anything you or any other "leftest revolutionary" has ever come up with.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Hear Hear!

[Shi Huangdi]

We have seen the horrible humanitarian tragedies when Maoists take a country. Let us hope we don't have to see it again......

By the way, does anyone here have an idea how India is handling this situation?

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
By the way, does anyone here have an idea how India is handling this situation?

I think they are busy trying to keep their fighters from crashing into the ground.

[SnowFire]

Who is it who said that communism is really about democracy- bringing democracy into every part of life, not just politics, with rule by the people in every sphere? I think che's echoed that before. As far as I'm concerned, that means a shift away from classic dictator rules and more toward a democracy. Meaning that good commies should work within their democracy to make changes if they want to, and only overthrow governments that are obviously monarchial with no popular representation.

I personally don't buy that explanation of communism much, but I certainly hope that those who do don't defend these rebels. I can sympathize with rebels against the Czar. I can't very much with rebels against democracy.

[Seeker]

I think Che is off-base on this one.

As a liberal Canadian I of course sympathize with the underdog, but these guys are not people you want to see in power.

[chequita guevara]

Nuts, server ate my response.

SnowFire, Karl Marx said that communism was the extension of democracy into every sphere of life.

Shi Huangdi, unless you consider the invasion of Tibet, the only time the Maoists have ever come to power is in China, and China was certainly the better for it inspite of the tragedy of the Great Leap forward and the insanity of the Cultural Revolution. Prior to the Revolution, China was experiencing a famine every other year, since then only one. Women were freed from the traditional forms of female servtitude, such as foot binding and polygamy, as well as being used as beast of burden. Women are equal in China now (except in being able to be born). They expelled the foreign capitalists who were enslaving their country. Heck, they defeated the Japanese in China, with no help from Chaing Kai-Shek (who spent more time attacking the Communists than fighting the Japanese) or the West.

Sprayber, much as I'd like the ability, communists cannot simply create revolutions out of our own willpower. Revolutions happen not because we force them on people, but because governments fail to rule. If there is a viable alternative to the failing government, there will be a revolution, if not, there will be chaos (ala Lebanon and Somalia). Occasionally we create the conditions of the government failing, with a guerilla war, but unless the guerillas are financed by a third party, they cannot even begin to succeed unless the government is an oppressive one. Democratic and non-oppressive states don't breed revolutions, no matter how fervent the revolutionaries. I know of no democratic country which has fallen to a leftist revolution.

Inspite of Maoist thuggery, the revolution in Nepal is growing. The Nepalese government is also using thuggery, but its support is not growing, so it seems that despite media claims, thuggery has little to do with the Maoists success. In fact, thuggery generally leads you to support the other side.

BTW, India is part of the problem in Nepal. The Nepalese government is widely seen to be totally dependent upon India, and it enacts policies which favor Indian capital over the local Nepalese. A lot of monetary support for the Maoists actually comes from Nepalese immigrant workers in India.

[Wraith]

--"Revolutionaries only grow when people resent their government."

There are always people who resent the government, no matter what it is. And this will start with those who did have power, don't now, and want it back. Benevolence is not on the menu.

Wraith
"****, I did not drop you on your head when I brought you into this world - don’t give me cause to regret that."
-- Hayward ("Twin Peaks")

[Ramo]

The guerillas are pretty damn rotten, but the government is even worse. There're extrajudicial executions, "disappearances," indefinite detentions, arbitrary arrests, torture, the works.

http://web.amnesty.org/web/ar2001.ns...L?OpenDocument

This isn't a pluralistic, free society that the Maoists are fighting against...

Considering the rebels have no elected officials, no legal code, and large number people running around with weapons, I think it is far more likely to be extortion than "taxation".

What's the distinction?

[Adam Smith]

Ramo:

Originally posted by Ramo
The guerillas are pretty damn rotten, but the government is even worse. There're extrajudicial executions, "disappearances," indefinite detentions, arbitrary arrests, torture, the works......This isn't a pluralistic, free society that the Maoists are fighting against...

The point, as you can see on the AI site and on Human Rights Watch, and as I mentioned in a previous post, is that there is no evidence of any such activity by the government prior to the Maoist insurgency. So this cannot be sluffed off as a case of "everybody is equally bad". The responsibility, as I said before, lies squarely on the backs of the Maoists.

What's the distinction?

Taxes are voluntarily, though not necessarily happily, agreed to. Extortion, in this case, proceeds from the barrel of a gun. This has direct bearing on the alleged democratic nature of society in rebel-held areas.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Adam Smith
Are you describing the government's actions before or after the start of the Maoist insurgency?

I don't know what things were like before, but the way they are repressing it doesn't give me much faith in their attitude. There are numerous credible reports of civilians with no connection to the rebels being murdered by the Army, and the people in the villages I saw interviewed were clearly as frightened of the government as they were of the Maoists.

[Dr Strangelove]

Are you sure that this revolution isn't being backed by Beijing as a means to reduce the threat of revolt in Tibet?

[KrazyHorse]

Huh?

[Zoid]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Kamrat X/Tom201: You don't appear to know much about the government of Nepal. Tell me, on what do you base your knee-jerk support for the Maoist rebels. Somesort of commie brotherhood?

Yes, all commies are brothers. Didn´t you know that?

[chequita guevara]

Dr Strangelove, it's unlikely the "comrades" in Beijing are behind this. They haven't been pro-Communist since 1977, when Deng Xao Peng began his capitalist road. In fact, I think they'd not be too happy with it, because revolutions have a tendency to spread, even to counter-revolutionary states posing as Communist. Most of the Maoist parties of the world do not recongize the current PRC as a communist society or the CCP as a communist party. If the Chinese were behind it, I'd expect the rebels to be better trained and better armed.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Dr Strangelove, it's unlikely the "comrades" in Beijing are behind this. They haven't been pro-Communist since 1977, when Deng Xao Peng began his capitalist road. In fact, I think they'd not be too happy with it, because revolutions have a tendency to spread, even to counter-revolutionary states posing as Communist. Most of the Maoist parties of the world do not recongize the current PRC as a communist society or the CCP as a communist party. If the Chinese were behind it, I'd expect the rebels to be better trained and better armed.

Heh, Heh. This reminds me of an old Doonesbury cartoon series, in which Uncle Duke and his oreintal girlfreind go up to the sino-Soviet border to investigate the activities of Cuban troops moving into the area. Duke gets all excited about the possible threat of Cuban socialism to China before his girlfriend reminds him about China. It was writen in the late 1970s when Cuban advisors were popping up all over Africa and South America.

[chequita guevara]

Yeah, the Cubans were all gung-ho to support their breatheren in Africa and Nicaragua. They did a lot of good, too, bring doctors and teachers and medical supplies and food. And they helped the locals defeat the US sponsored terrorists in most cases.

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Yeah, the Cubans were all gung-ho to support their breatheren in Africa and Nicaragua. They did a lot of good, too, bring doctors and teachers and medical supplies and food. And they helped the locals defeat the US sponsored terrorists in most cases.

As opposed to the Russian supported Terrorists/death squads?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Lonestar


As opposed to the Russian supported Terrorists/death squads?

Who was talking about the Russians?

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Who was talking about the Russians?

Quiet, Frenchie.

[Giancarlo]

Che you are so misled it isn't even funny. You really want to know what this group is about? It doesn't represent the people, it only represents a bunch of power hungry thugs that are going to end being killed by the Nepalese Army that is undergoing a massive arms build up. If you watch even CNN, it shows pictures of the Nepalese Army and they have M-16A2s (from the Americans). The Rebels have old WWII **** weaponry. Guess who will win this? The Nepalese Army.

I mean who the **** wants to support a Pol Pot revolutionary group that should be hanged because they represent a danger to democracy and the rights of the people? Like every other commie group.

I won't respond to anything because I got a very busy week.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
I mean who the **** wants to support a Pol Pot revolutionary group that should be hanged because they represent a danger to democracy and the rights of the people?

Why don't you ask the US?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Lonestar


Quiet, Frenchie.

I thought so.

[Goingonit]

Che, for all its drawbacks, the advantage of a multiparty system is that if the people want to change governments, they don't need revolution.

And though a revolution may need the support of the majority of the population, an armed uprising only needs the support of the majority of the armed population.