Opinion The strike that failed to ignite change

But ordinary people came out on the streets — in some cases,in confrontational mode — clashing with Maoist cadre and asserting their right to livelihood. What could be more painful for the farmers,who had to throw out their produce on the streets,after the strike blocked their access to the regular markets? Subsistence was even harder for daily wage earners. About 300,000 industrial employees suffered as industries and business were forced to close down. According to available government figures,hotels suffered losses close to a billion rupees. All this made the Maoists appear anti-poor and anti-proletariat.

The Maoists took this unpopular step as its cadres and sympathisers were apparently confident that their party would capture power this time,declare a constitution from the street,and have it endorsed by the “people” on the appropriate occasion. But that calculation was decisively dashed when the media — including the ones who initially sympathised — changed their tune,and the Kathmandu community refused to extend the hand of cooperation towards Maoists. Their message to the Maoists was clear: they must sit and talk it out with other political parties and chart out a clear agenda for promulgation of the constitution and total adherence to the peace process.

To demonstrate public support to this line and record their displeasure towards the Maoist strike,various professional groups and the Federation of Nepal Chamber of Commerce hosted a massive peace rally in the capital on May 7,ignoring the Maoist warning that it will be taken as a challenge to their “decisive movement”. Lathi-wielding cadres were deployed to warn the pro-peace,white-clad citizens — but they had little impact.

That perhaps came as the biggest setback to the strike. Top Maoist leaders privately admitted that the hostility towards the movement,both at home and in the international community,was much more than initially perceived. The easy way out was to call it off. But asking the cadres who had come to the capital determined to capture power to go back empty-handed would have its own costs. Loss of face would have been the certain and undesirable consequence of that withdrawal.

The UCPN-M leadership made every effort to minimise that erosion in its credibility when Prachanda addressed the cadres in Kathmandu’s open theatre on May 8,a day after the withdrawal of the strike. He targeted the media,organisers of the peace rally,the “intelligentsia”,and Kathmandu locals,among others. His abusive,slander-filled speech reflected frustration,as he threatened to settle scores with journalists. He had harsher words for the Kathmandu community — “you have insulted the ordinary village people who came here to catalyse a change. You will have to pay the price”. And on May 9,the cadres implemented that command with fury,injuring at least half a dozen.

No one knows yet whether the outbursts were aimed at pacifying the UCPN-M cadres who could have otherwise targeted their own leaders for this “surrender” or whether Prachanda was referring to a future where conflict and “annihilation of the class enemies” would be a given. Maoists,with their insurgent background,are not yet used to accepting setbacks normal for democratic parties. The past four years of the peace process have not seen the Maoists transforming into a democratic party. Instead,the major pro-democracy parties including the Nepali Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML),have followed every agenda and method dictated by the Maoists,ostensibly to stop them from raising arms. “We agreed to abolish our commitment to constitutional monarchy on assurance from the Maoists that they would come to peace and the democratic fold”,declared Congress leader K.P. Sitaula,who played a crucial role in what now appears like a fledgling peace process. The extent of division between the political forces that joined hands to oust the monarchy in 2006 has ensured that they are no closer to their common pledge to deliver a new constitution and a stable democracy paving the way for economic prosperity.

In the coming days,the Maoist course of action will determine the future of the peace process and that of democracy. Already,people have started openly venting their frustration and sense of betrayal about the Maoists and other political parties. The withdrawal of the Maoist strike in no way guarantees citizens’ support to the current government. The “heroic” forces of the 2006’s political change are fast falling in people’s esteem. The cost to the cause of peace and democracy will be heavy,to say the least.

yubaraj.ghimire@expressindia.com