Opinion The intimate enemy

First it was the king that the Maoists projected as the ‘enemy’,and nearly all the signatories to the New Delhi agreement shared this belief. But that didn’t stop the Maoists from inventing more. Nepali Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML),the two biggest democratic parties,became the next target. And now it’s Bhattarai — ‘India’s man’ — who is being cast as the enemy within.

The relationship between Bhattarai and Prachanda now spans more than 15 years,and has seen many ups and downs. The fluctuations have at times confused even party rank and file. This is not the first time that Bhattarai has been branded an ‘Indian agent’ by Prachanda. Way back in late 2004,Bhattarai was put in a labour camp as his political line — that Maoists must join hands with pro-democracy forces in the country and secure international support for its transformation into a peaceful party — was defeated in the party around then. Prachanda,who had the backing of the majority then was in favour of the Maoists and the monarchy joining hands against the forces of imperialist hegemony. But with King Gyanendra’s takeover in February 2005 with the avowed objective of fighting and defeating ‘terrorism’,Prachanda was left with no option than to toe the Bhattarai line. This made the anti-monarchy front possible,which the Delhi agreement formalised. Naturally,Bhattarai and not Prachanda was the spokesperson of the new alliance and the pivot of Nepal’s emerging politics.

The Maoists then monopolised the right to influence the political course,warning other parties — mainly the Congress and the UML — that they would meet the king’s fate if they did not fall in with the Maoists’ ‘progressive’ politics. They also emerged as the biggest party in the constituent assembly election and Bhattarai,a quiet aspirant for the PM’s post,gave way to Prachanda’s ambition. But in the days that followed,Bhattarai tried to project himself as the most radical ‘revolutionary’ and indicated that the party’s joining the peace process was just tactical. In his writings and speeches in the party forum,he said the party was determined to ultimately establish the people’s republic. On May 4,when Prachanda resigned as prime minister in protest against the president reinstating army chief Rookmangud Katawal within hours of his being sacked by the PM,Bhattarai lambasted India for supposedly instigating the army and president against the Maoist-led government.

Many thought Bhattarai wanted to be in Prachanda’s good books and become prime minister as the UCPN-M was still the biggest party in the constituent assembly. Prachanda helped Bhattarai nurture that ambition up to a point by stating that somebody else from the party,not Prachanda himself,would be PM once ‘India’s puppet regime’ led by Madhav Nepal was ousted. Entrusting the movement’s leadership to Bhattarai was the party’s endorsement of that message.

But in Nepal’s politics,Prachanda is now seen to be as megalomaniacal as G.P. Koirala. Ever since a secret understanding between Prachanda and Koirala in Singapore — when the latter was admitted to a hospital there — that the 86-year old Koirala will be president and someone from the Maoist party would be prime minister,Prachanda’s lust for power was on display again. The best way to achieve that was to deliver a politically mortal blow to Bhattarai,and what could be more effective than branding him an Indian agent?

In fact,Prachanda used Bhattarai very cleverly in the last few months in the renewed anti-India politics that the Maoists call a ‘struggle for freedom’. Prachanda even told India’s Minister for Exernal Affairs S.M. Krishna how betrayed he feels by India after ‘it supported the regressive forces represented by the president’s army and Madhav Nepal’. That was a clear message that in the days to come,the Maoists would pursue anti-India politics,perhaps pro-China by extension. Krishna may have guessed that Prachanda still calls the shot in the Maoist Party,if not in the country. Nepal will enter a new phase of trouble if it fails to promulgate its new constitution by the May 28 deadline. Bhattarai and his comrades have said that in that eventuality,the Maoists would capture power — an unacceptable situation to other players inside and outside the country. India’s response will be crucial.

The fact that Bhattarai has not yet given up and challenged Prachanda means that he is prepared to take on a political and ideological fight within the party. The message that he is likely to be trying to convey is that he commands enough clout in the party to not have to go to the labour camp this time round. But in the past four years,in the politics of power and deceit,Bhattarai has lost much more. In the intertim,he has reduced himself to the status of Prachanda’s sidekick. He surrendered too much to appease Prachanda. He refused to recognise the fact that as someone who played a crucial role in bringing Maoists and democratic parties together on the anti-monarchy platform,such servility would leave his fate solely to Prachanda’s whims. And Prachanda has spoken — almost decisively.

yubaraj.ghimire@expressindia.com