I was surprised to read this fact about Baburam Bhattrai.
.
.
.
"Before committing himself fully to politics, Bhattarai was also a brilliant chess player. He used to say that chess was to Communists what water was to ducks, and tirelessly pointed out that Lenin was also a chess enthusiast.

When the then FIDE president Max Euwe gave a simultaneous exhibition in Kathmandu, Bhattarai played against him and beat the former world champion in 23 moves with a brilliant queen sacrifice. Afterwards, Dr. Euwe was reported in local media as saying, "Alekhine lives in Nepal!".

Many Nepalese chess fans rue the fact that Nepal lost its first potential FIDE Grand Master when Dr. Bhattarai gave up competitive chess to devote himself exclusively to the revolutionary struggle."

Source: - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baburam_Bhattarai

- http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/7598_1663502,000500020003.htm#image

"Revolution in Nepal: A New World is Possible" was the theme of the tour organised by a London-based leftist group, World People's Resistance Movement.

Yeah, why don't they experiemnt New world people's resistant movement intheir own countr4y, why Nepal?

Baburam Bhattarai a potential chess grandmaster....what a joke

that fother mucker is one of the piuso of the chess board to some fat and black indian mooji somewhere in delhi.....

" So, I would think that the right thing to say the Maoists is this: "So long as you do not denounce violence and give it up altogether and even stop calling yourselves Maoists , you are NOT a political force of any sort. A political ideology with an obviously wrong practice cannot be a right ideology at all. You are just a destructive force. Don't fool yourself and don't fool us." " Good observation.
A corollary to above statement: As long as the king doesn’t stop ruling and being the commander-in-chief, people have every right to rebel against him. Maoists’ right to take up guns to oppose tyranny can’t be questioned.

I don't think Maoists consider the King as a Tyranny... If they had considered so, their revolution would not be like this... killing innocent Nepalese in thousands of number. Maoists target is not the king.. but to gain power by terrorizing general public of Nepal. Also, they are the puppets of India to fulfil Indian dreams!!!

Shaiva..................

do you know when the Moaist terrorist group in Nepal started...if i am not mistaken they did not start when there was a Panchayat rule..it started when sher bahadur was the PM and as far as my knwledge goes they had some demands then , against the corruption underdevelopment and all that...... i dont think maosit originated because of the kings "tyranny"....
and add another thing ....right now they are talking about joining hands with the so called democratic forces...now how in the hell are they maoists... from when did the extreme left ideology start to defend and fight for democracy.....

if they have the right to take up arms then every other disatisfied soul in the world can take up arms against anything or anybody if they choose to....

Remember what Prachande said in the interview to BBC... ha ha... he is now saying he will even accept the King re.. ha ha... chor prachande.

"Obviously, those Nepalis who have not had their family members and/or friends
killed or hurt by Maoists harbour such pie-in-the-sky sympathies as though Maoists' having a wonderful-sounding philosophy is good enough of a credential for them to
be for democracy and against feudalism REGARDLESS of how their philosophy
actually plays out in practice"

Ashu

Just refute this statement if anybody can.

To add on this when did maoists and democracy go hand in hand? Also communits a democratic??? Is this April 1st joke? LOL...

peace

Ashuji, ''a democrat, with a small d'' by your own definition, your criticism of the maoists and the skepticism towards their recent change of tone is pretty obvious for other democrats too. What is not obvious though is your reluctance to speak a real word against the wrongdoings of the royal regime. Just wondering why your eyes are stuck at the violent deeds of the maoists only? Why not at the government sponsored violences?

As a democrat, and being in Kathmandu and experiencing the ground reality, don't you have time to write something about the government's unlawful directives? Don't you think it is hypocracy at its height when your more -democratic- than- the -maoists' government orders public servicemen to participate in the pro-royalists programmes while threatening to take actions if they attend the democatic rallies? How democratic is it to force private media to broadcast messages telling people not to participate in the upcoming rallies?

As an economist, what prevents you to write about the consequences of the undisclosed expenditure of 50 billion rupees from the state's coffers in a single year?

ahh well, you are not the only democrat of your type. There are many I-fit-to be- a democrat like you everywhere. The problem with you guys is you hype up the maoists fear factor to relay people with the message that the King's regime is better than the potentially dangerous maoists' regime. This is, in fact, helping the maoists to strengthen. This is giving the King the room to take more undemocratic steps. Its absolutely intruguing how you guys think the maoists can be handled if they are left out at a time when they are more willing than ever to compromise. Now don't tell me that you are not more comfortable with the King's regime than any other possible scenarios. The democrats with a small 'd', as you are.

I Hope Ashuji will not pick up favourite lines for him to defend. And this is nothing personal, just for the sake of discussion hai:)

Newuser asks:

"Ashuji, ''a democrat, with a small d'' by your own definition, your criticism of the maoists and the skepticism towards their recent change of tone is pretty obvious for other democrats too. What is not obvious though is your reluctance to speak a real word against the wrongdoings of the royal regime. Just wondering why your eyes are stuck at the violent deeds of the maoists only? Why not at the government sponsored violences?"



Newuser-ji,

Great questions, and I appreciate them all.

This is the reason I like -- for reasons of democracy -- OPEN forums with minimal control than CLOSED email lists where there is this pressure to toe the party line and those who don't toe the party line get, ahem, purged, Stalin-style!

But I digress.

That said, I cannot answer your questions in broad, idealistic terms.
I can only answer them, as they apply to me.

So, here it goes:

ASSUMPTIONS: Resources are limited. Time is limited.

IN PRINCIPLE: As a matter of strategy, one cannot fight too many battles on too many fronts with too many people at the same time. One wants to pursue activities in which not too many are involved (at the moment) with the hope that, done right, the chances of influencing people through one's efforts are higher through such presently 'undervalued' activities than in presently overvalued 'activities' which
just require you to play safe and follow the herd.

IN PRACTICE: The Nepali press is doing a good job showcasing the excesses of the royal regime. Nepali civil society pundits are, by and large, doing their bit to launch various protest programs against the royal regime.

The field, as you can see, is already over-crowded with Democrats of all stripes. Given this, what difference can one individual such as myself make in such a overcrowded field, except to say 'me-too', then follow the herd and win an easy round of applause from Democrats like you? The easiness of it all does not interest me.

In contrast, how many people do you see speaking out against the Maoist atrocities? How many NGOs/civil society pundits out there have steadfastly opposed Maoist extortions, killings, and destruction?

Hardly any.

Those who do so, do so only sporadically. And you know why? Those who have opposed the Maoists in the past have been hurt or killed or uprooted from their villages.

After having talked with a number of Maoist victims, I have concluded that Maoists,
in their present avatars, represent a greater threat to our collective freedom and democracy than ANY other groups. This "oppose Maoist violence" is a field that's
not crowded, so to speak. People are just too scared and frightened to make
this a burning issue that it seriously deserves.

And this is where, I, as a citizen, expect to concentrate all my attention on: Doing everything I can to peacefully persuade (through speaking and writing) the Maoists
to give up violence altogether, to stop killing people, to stop bombing places and kidnapping people. Is that too much to ask?

Sure, the task is NOT easy.
It has its own challenges and difficulties and risks.

So, yes, let others oppose the royal regime; they can perhaps do it better than
I can. And that's fine.

Let me, as one concerned citizen, oppose the Maoist atrocities. To make Nepal better, we do NOT need such atrocities, the burden of which appears to fall on the poorest
and the defenceless of Nepalis.

This is the reason I am critical of the Maoist violence: paying attention to one issue at
a time than trying to be everything to everybody.

oohi
"democrat with a small 'd'
ashu

This is the problem with all Maoists Sympathizers as they are totally brain washed.. very sad situation. These Maoists sympathizers keep on thinking that those who are criticizing Maoists atrocities, motives, tactics, philosophy are supporting King. What a f*ccccked up brains these Maoists sympathizers have.. it's no surprise to us anyways.

Ashu jee:

The recent interview of Baburam Bhattarai with Kishor Nepal might answer most of your questions and objection about the Maoist.

Here in an excerpt of the interview.


> बौद्धिक पक्षलाई सैन्य पक्षसँग कसरी मिलाएर राख्नुहुन्छ ?

साथीहरूको शहादत भएको अवस्थामा हामी भावुक भएर रुन्छौँ, साथीहरूको स्मृतिमा सबै रोएका छौँ । जस्तो कि प्रचार गरन्िछ, हामी असाध्यै क्रूर हौँ, मान्छे मार्छौं । तर, प्रचार गरेजस्तो पक्कै होइन । हाम्रा लागि हतियार खालि बाध्यात्मक मात्रै हो । अब यसतर्फ मान्छेले ध्यान दिइराखेको छैन । हामीले यो बन्दुक उठाएको अन्यायको बन्दुकलाई रोक्नका लागि हो । हामीलाई अब यो कुरा बुझाउन गाह्रो हुन्छ । तर, यथार्थ यही हो । हाम्रा भावनात्मक अभिव्यक्तिहरूले पनि यसलाई पुष्टि गर्छन् ।


> यसमा तपाईंहरूले बोक्नुभएको हतियारको प्रभाव कत्तिको छ ?

हतियारचाहिँ आत्मीय पक्षमा पर्छ । किनभने, हतियार बोकेको सत्तालाई हतियार नउठाई नष्ट गर्न सकिँदैन भन्ने बोध हामीले उठायौँ । सुरुमा हामीसँग दुई थान हतियार मात्र थियो । एउटा मागेको, एउटा लुटसुट गरेर ल्याएको राइफल, त्यो पनि बिग्रेको । हामीले सुरु गरेको विन्दु त्यही थियो । अहिले हामीले लडेर हतियार जित्यौँ र थुप्रै हतियारहरू हामीसँग भए । तर, हतियार प्रधान कुरा होइन, हतियार सहायक मात्र हो । विचारको क्रान्ति हाम्रो प्रधान लक्ष्य हो ।

> तर, मैले नबुझेको एउटा कुरा, धेरै राम्रा राम्रा र बलिया पुलहरू भत्काउनुभएको छ । तर, धूले पुलहरू बनाउनु पनि भएको छ । त्यो रणनीति हो कि ? सैन्यगत हो कि ? के हो त्यो ?


हामीले सबै भत्काएका छैनौँ । कतिपय त राजनीतिक तथा फौजी कारणले गर्दा दुस्मनको आवागमनलाई रोक्नका लागि पनि भत्काउनुपर्ने हुन्छ । अमेरकिाले इराकमा गएर हमला गर्छ । उसले विस्तारै त्यहाँका निर्माणहरू ध्वंस पारििदएपछि अनि आफ्नो हिसाबले बनाउँछ ।

Source: - http://www.kantipuronline.com/Nepal/aabaran.php#1

Turbulence,

13000 + innocent souls have been lost. Everyday commoners are living in fear. What does Baburam gotta say about this?

What Bauram said in taht shitty interview is only WORDS.. words and words.. Sorry friends.. words aren't enough.... They are Cruel... i knwo you sympathizers don't like this comment.. but reality is what it is.

Crocodile'e tears.. That's what Baburam's tears... got it?

I can see lots of people in this thread have condemned the Maoists' atrocities, killing of 13000 people...... But, why people do not acknowledge that there is an equal or even greater degree of atrocities and killing by RNA. Couples of weeks back, I was reading a news which says 3 civilian(Non-maoists) when were going to find work in India some 3 years back were captured and killed by RNA suspecting they are maoist. Actually there are many many cases which are not public yet. I dont believe this number of 13,000 which all the people want to mention.

I personally know a family, whose 2 sons were killed in the name of Maoist and now you know what the rest of family memebers doing? The father, daughter-in-law and the daughter are in Maoist army. And there are many such cases/ I know there are families in same situation whose members are killed by Maoist army too. My point is, it is really difficult to judge which side is to be blamed most.

Another important point to mention, our Security force has perhaps one of the highest amount of spending( as a percentage of total outlay) in world, but look at their efficiency and also their honesty to maintaining law and order. With such a huge amount of spending at hand they should have been able to provide law and order that cause minimum possible killing.Peole may say law and order and not tangible but i believe that should be directly related to spending if the state is really commited to maintaing human rights. Otherwise, they should not be allowed to use a rupee from national treasury, KG can pay them from his personal fund if he wants.

Again you missed the point - condemning Maoists here doesn't not also mean approving RNA's actions.

gamle,

I felt like your comment was directed to me so let me clear up the steam. There is no way in hell murders are justifiable. Be it from the royals, polticians or maoists.

Again I say commoners are the who are hit hard. SO who is gonna speak up for them. Polticans? R they really? Commis? By killing the commoners.

King must be brought under constitution. But K Gs power lies in inept polticians and ruthless maoists.

Also, Maoists are communist. They are fedual too. COmmunism is a failed philosophy. And when the communists become democratic? Instgead of living in past, you gotta work in present so that future is secure.

peace out

Karmarana,
I dont disagree with you, my point is that those 2 are parallel in their atrocities.
Again, the state (and here the RNA) should have a higher responsibility in maintaining human rights because it has resources and the legitimate authority. My concern is that they are no good than the maoist with all they have.

But i dont believe that the 'royals, polticians and maoists ' all are of no use they must be tried in some court ( like international court), if such situation comes then we will be nowhere. I would rather prefer if they reconcile. 'Radical change', this phrase sounds nice, but I dont think we can afford it in present day.

आशुको रमाईला स्पष्टीकरणहरु सुनेर मजा आयो ।

तर त्यति मात्र भन्न के छिर्नु हगि ? एक-दोटा कुरा थपम् ।

I agree with the view that, despite this and that, Maoist insurgency is the first and foremost issue to address. Because, I think, no significant progress towards peace and democracy can be made by keeping the issue of the Maoists insurgency aside.

And thanks to whoever deserves the credit, the 12 points agreements for ending the insurgency for a popularly decided constitution and management of disarmament [of course, only after the royal regime is dismantled ] of the Maoists, are exactly to our priority need I explained.

Of course, the minute procedural and other detail is a long way from being worked out. However, the fundamental agreement of letting THE PEOPLE do chinophano of rajya_ko_khaka is a foundation on which details can be relatively easily worked out.

Those who were wishing for political parties compromise/reconcile with the King FIRST (to keep the pre-2002 status quo) and THEN deal with the Maoists accordingly, are, of course, unhappy with the developments. But life is what happens when you keep wishing for something else (apology to John Lennon). Life sucks, doesn't it ?

Nepe

Nepe,
Yes I wrote, I wish they reconcile or compromise if they are synonymous words. Not only the parties and king but also the maoists should sit together. And I am not unhappy with the development related with 12 point agreement as you might have suspected. I am the one in this thread who talked about RNA atrocities and the lack of justification to allocate the money to kill the civillian.

The question of 12- point agreement- I dont feel it will get you any radical change as the signaturies themselves have said there is room for reconciliation. I have some friends who are strongly against maoists atrocities, some who are strongly againts the KG and RNA killings and some strongly against the parties for whatever they did in past. My friends only represent the larger groups of people who are right on their point (let me give you my estimate, I guess those 3 groups who hate the other group are somewhat in equal proportion).

Now, what is the solution ? Is it to crush KG as said by Prachanda or is it to take top maoist leaders to international court (if the national court could not handle this issue) or is it to hang the leaders for their misdeeds? This is not the set of solutions that I proposed, but my friends who are representative of those 3 larger groups want this.

If you try to implement all of the above, we all know where will we be. Again if you want a 'radical change' (there can be different interpretation to 12-point agreement),you first have to think whether you can afford it. If you are ready to bear it, you are really ready for a nationwide civil war.

Gamle-jyu,

My comment was not particularly directed to you. I apologize if there was a mix up.

As for reconcile, it is always a good thing, regardless of with whom. It is only the TERMS of reconcile that make the difference.

However, I am more into "what will be" kind of thinking rather than "what should be" kind.

And, based on my analysis of King's activities, I think the King is not going to reconcile with Democracy. The Maoists might; they have already taken the initiative.

And seeing Nepali people's unwillingness to settle down with anything less than Democracy, it does not really take a speculation to speculate what will be.

Regarding "what should be", there are not three but hundreds of different views out there. All are valid until proven otherwise.

Mero bicharma.