A Leading Indian Poet On Gandhi, Violence And The Struggle There

I wrote an introduction to this very recent and very important poem, but have decided it works better as an afterword.



A Discourse on Non-Violence

by Satchidanandan
(translated from the Malayalam by the poet)

The day was calm.Three of
Gandhi’s visitors stepped forward:
an expecting Mahar woman, almost a girl,
from the Maratha region, a young dumb Bhili youth
from Gandhi’s own place, his body burnt black,
a Korba from mid-India on crutches,
still carrying his bow.

As soon as Gandhi, filling post-cards
with his small hand, gestured to them to talk,
the woman pointed to her belly and said:
“You are responsible for this.”
Gandhi just smiled his Zen smile
as she went on: “ I could have cut him
to pieces, but you taught us to loathe violence.”

Now the Bhil spoke in sounds and gestures:
His landlord who had trapped him in debts
and enslaved him, tied him to a tree,
cut off his tongue and burnt him all over
for having drawn water from his well.
He had endured it all as to resist
would have meant violence.

The Korba lowered his bow: “ With this
bow and arrow I could’ve killed that leopard
that had left me lame; but what do we have
once we give up non-violence?”

Gandhi dropped his pen and told his
faithful disciples: “You have taken me literally.
Here violence was done by that rapist,
the landlord and the leopard. Of these
only the scared leopard was unaware that
he was committing violence. He was
just following his instinct. But the other two
deserved no mercy. Dear child, if teeth and nails
were of no help, you could’ve saved your honour
with your sickle or the kitchen-knife.

Gandhi now turned to the Bhil and spoke in gestures:
“Your axe would’ve helped where words failed you.”
“Then what about non-violence”, asked the Korba.
“Nowhere have I said that it is wrong
to harm the aggressor in order to save
your life or honour; only it should be
the very last resort..”

An onlooker now
posed a question: “Then why did you condemn
Bhagat Singh and his comrades?” “Simple.
I knew who I was fighting and we had
better chances if we abjured violence.”

“Is not fasting violence too?”, asked another,
“you torment your body and blackmail your enemy.”
“Look here: there is no iron-wall between violence
and non-violence, and no value in life is absolute.”

The woman stared at her belly, the Bhil youth
at his near-charred body and the Korba
at his leg-stumps: “ We didn’t understand.”

A tender voice responded from within the
woman’s womb: “ I understood.”


The author, Koyamparambath Satchidanandan, is a leading literary figure in India. Satchidanandan, as he is usually known, is revered as one of the writers who led in the development of modern poetry in the Malayalam language, a major tongue in Southern India, especially Kerala. He is not just a poet but a translator, a critic and a teacher.

When India was shaken in the late 1960s and early '70s by the Naxalite movement of Communist guerrillas based among the poorest section of the peasantry, Satchidanandan turned his attention away from abstract literary questions, to the point where his poetry was censored by the state and he was harassed by the Crime Branch. He, like many other progressive cultural figures, became less overtly concerned with political and social issues as state repression, adventurist errors and infighting drastically weakened the Marxist-Leninist movement by the late 1970s

Thus it is extremely significant that he has written this poem, this year, as well as another (still only in Malayalam) about the stunning military success of resurgent Maoist guerrillas in battle with Indian police at Dantewada. This reflects a revival of interest among Indian intellectuals and cultural figures in the suffering of the rural poor and in their rising resistance. This development has been spearheaded by Arundhati Roy's sympathetic reportage on the guerrillas.

The subject, too, is most timely. It challenges Gandhian non-violence as a useful response to gender, class and caste oppression. This is an important debate to have in today's India, where many dedicated activists among the rural poor, dalits ("outcastes") and adivasis (tribal people, the First Nations of India) see themselves as followers of Gandhi. Here in the US, folks steeped in Gandhian principles and stone revolutionaries have been among the most steadfast forces in the anti-war movement and often developed deep mutual respect, providing a good foundation on which to explore our differences.

Read more!

Eyes on the Maobadi: 4 Reasons Nepal’s Revolution Matters

[The estimable Mike Ely, perhaps the main sparkplug behind the Kasama website and project linked here since early this year, has requested that this new piece on why Nepal matters for revolutionaries in the US be reposted and publicized widely. FotM is glad to contribute its small bit to this worthy effort. And while you are at it, bookmark the "Internationalist Info Project" called Revolution in South Asia, a valuable resource that the Kasama folk have put together.]

By Mike Ely

Something remarkable is happening. A whole generation of people has never seen a radical, secular, revolutionary movement rise with popular support. And yet here it is – in Nepal today.

This movement has overthrown Nepal’s hated King Gyanendra and abolished the medieval monarchy. It has created a revolutionary army that now squares off with the old King’s army. It has built parallel political power in remote rural areas over a decade of guerrilla war – undermining feudal traditions like the caste system. It has gathered broad popular support and emerged as the leading force of an unprecedented Constituent Assembly (CA). And it has done all this under the radical banner of Maoist communism — advocating a fresh attempt at socialism and a classless society around the world.

People in Nepal call these revolutionaries the Maobadi.

Another remarkable thing is the silence surrounding all this. There has been very little reporting about the intense moments now unfolding in Nepal, or about the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) that stand at their center. Meanwhile, the nearby Tibetan uprisings against abuses by China’s government got non-stop coverage.

There are obvious reasons for this silence. The Western media isn’t thrilled when people in one of the world’s poorest countries throw their support behind one of the world’s most radical movements.

But clearly many alternative news sources don’t quite know what to make of the Nepali revolution. The Maobadi’s mix of communist goals and non-dogmatic methods disturb a lot of leftist assumptions too. When the CPN(Maoist) launched an armed uprising in 1996, some people thought these were outdated tactics. When the CPN(Maoist) suspended armed combat in 2006 and entered an anti-monarchist coalition government, some people assumed they would lose their identity to a corrupt cabal. When the Maoists press their current anti-feudal program, some people think they are forgetting about socialism.

But silent skepticism is a wrong approach. The world needs to be watching Nepal. The stunning Maoist victory in the April elections was not, yet, the decisive victory over conservative forces. The Maobadi are at the center of the political staqe but they have not yet defeated or dismantled the old government’s army. New tests of strength lie ahead.

The Maoists of Nepal aren’t just a opposition movement any more – they are tackling the very different problems of leading a society through a process of radical change. They are maneuvering hard to avoid a sudden crushing defeat at the hands of powerful armies. As a result, the Maobadi of Nepal are carrying out tactics for isolating their internal rivals, broadening their appeal, and neutralizing external enemies.

All this looks bewildering seen up close. This world has been through a long, heartless stretch without much radicalism or revolution. Most people have never seen what it looks like when a popular communist revolution reaches for power.

Let’s break the silence by listing four reasons for looking closely at Nepal.

Reason #1: Here are communists who have discarded rigid thinking, but not their radicalism.

Leaders of the CPN(Maoist) say they protect the living revolution “from the revolutionary phrases we used to memorize.”

The Maobadi took a fresh and painstakingly detailed look at their society. They identified which conditions and forces imposed the horrific poverty on the people. They developed creative methods for connecting deeply with the discontent and highest hopes of people. They have generated great and growing influence over the last fifteen years.

To get to the brink of power, this movement fused and alternated different forms of struggle. They started with a great organizing drive, followed by launching a guerrilla war in 1996, and then entering negotiations in 2006. They created new revolutionary governments in remote base areas over ten years, and followed up with a political offensive to win over new urban support. They have won victory in the special election in April, and challenged their foot-dragging opponents by threatening to launching mass mobilizations in the period ahead. They reached out broadly, without abandoning their armed forces or their independent course.

The Maobadi say they have the courage “to climb the unexplored mountain.” They insist that communism needs to be reconceived. They believe popular accountability may prevent the emergence of arrogant new elites. They reject the one-party state and call for a socialist process with multi-party elections. They question whether a standing army will serve a new Nepal well, and advocate a system of popular militias. And they want to avoid concentrating their hopes in one or two leaders-for-life, but instead will empower a rising new generation of revolutionary successors.

Nepal is in that bottom tier of countries called the “fourth world” – most people there suffer in utter poverty. It is a world away from the developed West, and naturally the political solutions of the Nepali Maoists’ may not apply directly to countries like the U.S. or Britain. But can’t we learn from the freshness they bring to this changing world?

Will their reconception of communism succeed? It is still impossible to know. But their attempt itself already has much to teach.

Reason #2: Imagine Nepal as a Fuse Igniting India

Nepal is such a marginalized backwater that it is hard to imagine its politics having impact outside its own borders. The country is poor, landlocked, remote and only the size of Arkansas. Its 30 million people live pressed between the world’s most populous giants, China and India.

But then consider what Nepal’s revolution might mean for a billion people in nearby India.

A new Nepal would have a long open border with some of India’s most impoverished areas. Maoist armed struggle has smoldered in those northern Indian states for decades – with roots among Indian dirt farmers. Conservative analysts sometimes speak of a “red corridor” of Maoist-Naxalite guerrilla zones running through central India, north to south, from the Nepali border toward the southern tip.

Understanding the possibilities, Nepal’s Maobadi made a bold proposal: that the revolutionary movements across South Asia should consider merging their countries after overthrowing their governments and creating a common regional federation. The Maobadi helped form the Coordination Committee of Maoist Parties and Organizations of South Asia (CCOMPOSA) in 2001, which brought together ten different revolutionary groupings from throughout the region.

A future revolutionary government in Nepal will have a hard time surviving alongside a hostile India. It could face demands, crippling embargos and perhaps even invasion. But at the very same time, such a revolution could serve as an inspiration and a base area for revolution in that whole region. It could impact the world.

Reason #3: Nepal shows that a new, radically better world is possible.

Marx once remarked that the revolution burrows unseen underground and then bursts into view to cheers of “Well dug, old mole!”

We have all been told that radical social change is impossible. Rebellion against this dominant world order has often seemed marked by backward-looking politics, xenophobia, lowered sights and Jihadism. And yet, here comes that old mole popping up in Nepal — offering a startling glimpse of how people can transform themselves and their world.

Some of the world’s poorest and most oppressed people have set out in the Nepali highlands to remake everything around them — through armed struggle, political power, and collective labor. Farming people, who are often half-starved and illiterate have formed peoples courts and early agricultural communes. Wife beating and child marriage are being challenged. Young men and women have joined the revolutionary army to defeat their oppressors. There is defiance of arranged marriage and a blossoming of “love matches,” even between people of different castes. There is a rejection of religious bigotry and the traditions of a Hindu monarchy. The 40 ethnic groups of Nepal are negotiating new relations based on equality and a sharing of political power.

All this is like a wonderful scent upon the wind. You are afraid to turn away, unless it might suddenly disappear.

Reason #4: When people dare to make revolution – they must not stand alone.

These changes would have been unthinkable, if the CPN(Maoist) had not dared to launch a revolutionary war in 1996. And their political plan became reality because growing numbers of people dared to throw their lives into the effort. It is hard to exaggerate the hope and courage that has gripped people.

Events may ultimately roll against those hopes. This revolution in Nepal may yet be crushed or even betrayed from within. Such dangers are inherent and inevitable in living revolutions.

If the Maobadi pursue new leaps in their revolutionary process, they will likely face continuing attacks from India, backed by the U.S. The CPN(Maoist) has long been (falsely!) labeled “terrorists” by the U.S. government. They are portrayed as village bullies and exploiters of child-soldiers by some human rights organizations. Western powers have armed Nepal’s pro-royal National army with modern weapons. A conservative mass movement in Nepal’s fertile Terai agricultural area has been encouraged by India and Hindu fundamentalists.

Someone needs to spread the word of what is actually going on. It would be intolerable if U.S.-backed destabilization and suppression went unopposed in the U.S. itself.

Here it is: A little-known revolution in Nepal.

Who will we tell about it? What will we learn from it? What will we do about it?

Read more!

Nepal Maoists: "We chose a new form of struggle"

[As vote-counting shows the election in Nepal to be a massive victory for the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), Fire on the Mountain is very pleased to be able to publish a second interview with Hisila Yami, a central committee member. Like the earlier one, this was conducted in English in Oslo, Norway in December. Where that piece focused particularly on the role of women in the Nepalese revolution, this one deals directly with questions of the revolutionary strategy adopted by the Maobadi. FotM is deeply grateful to the Norwegian comrade who gave us permission to use this interview. This is the first publication of the interview anywhere. The editing and explanatory comments are by FotM contributor Skwisgaar Skwigelf.]



Interview with Hisila Yami
Conducted by Frontlinjer/Campo Antiimperialista

F/CI: How does the CPN(M) see the current stage of the struggle in Nepal?

Hisila: We took a new course after the people's war; we chose a new form of struggle. From the outside it might look simpler, but seen from the inside, it was a much more difficult course. We took a zig-zag path, as we were near to the smashing of the old state, we felt that the US and India was closing in to smash us. This situation could have led to a never-ending war. Today we gain through the legal struggle and on the streets.

Before, we followed a military strategy, where the politics were influencing the military situation. Now we follow a political strategy, and it's much more difficult.

During the peace talks, our strategy was always to break up the alliance between the Ranas [a historical ruling family of Nepal --ed.], the King and Congress. After the second Jana Andolan [the 2006 mass movement against the monarchy --ed.] we began a new alliance, to expropriate the property of the king. The law has been passed, but only on paper. It has not been implemented.

We have today two basic demands: to declare the republic before the elections for the constituent assembly and to go for a full proportional electoral system in these elections. In order to achieve these aims we went into an alliance with the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist) [called UML for short --ed.] against Congress, which remains a feudal force. On the issue of a proportional system we could make compromises, but on the issue of the king we are not flinching.

Before it was only us who were in favor of a proportional electoral system. Now, the umbrella front of all ethnic groups ask us not to leave these issues. They have all been raising these issues. There's also increasing support in all the parties and mass organizations. The parties have realized that they can use the ethnic groups to create a vote bank. Also, the UML tried to outsmart us when we left the principle of a full proportional system. But it wasn't for real, it was just to trap us. After they criticized us, they went back on their position again. But we had to unite with them to smash the Congress Party.

After UML diluted our stand, they said that we should "go for the process" both in terms of elections and declaring the republic. It was a middle way, neither to declare a republic directly before, nor after.

Now, sections of congress are complaining that they are being "pushed by the Maoists" and are starting to talk about "returning to the constitution of the first Jana Andolan [the 1990 mass movement against the monarchy --ed.].

Before the elections the People's Liberation Army and the Royal Army should be integrated.


F/CI: Do you think there will be elections for a constituent assembly this spring?

Hisila: Chances are equal. Tomorrow I'm told that they are meeting with Koirala [the prime minister, from the Congress Party --ed.]. There are efforts to come to some understanding and a republic may be declared.


F/CI: What will you do if the demands of a republic and a proportional system are not being met?

Hisila: We will go back to the mass movement. That's why we have the republican front. Prachanda has also said that "even patriotic forces which before were forced to ally with Gyanendra could come over to our side."


F/CI: How will a 40/60 proportional system affect the ethnic groups? Could this stir up new problems with for instance the Madhesi [the populations in the southern lowlands near the Indian border --ed.]?

Hisila: This depends on to which degree the umbrella of the ethnic groups, Janjati Masan, is successful. They want to establish a round-table conference of all the parties, ethnic groups and all the other people. This conference should be the decision-maker on this issue.


F/CI: But if you're running for elections to a constituent assembly without it being a fully proportional system, what are your chances of success?

Hisila: We will make an alliance, preferably also with Congress, but at least with the UML and the other left parties.


F/CI: What are the goals of the Maoists with the constituent assembly?

Hisila: Our goals are the new structuring of the state, federalism, employment, a better health service and to take action against gender disparity. The end result will be what we've been addressing all the time. We'll get radical reforms, not New Democracy, as we initially wanted when we began the people's war. The New Democracy will have to wait for another wave of the people's struggle.

It's nothing new in our strategy, it's like before, when we went to parliament after Jana Andolan I. You never know--later, we might go for a higher leap.


F/CI: What's the power of the Maoists?

Hisila: We've got associations parallel to the state level. We'll be continuing like before, and if we fail, at least we'll fail in a new way.


F/CI: What's the importance of the Indian revolution to the situation in Nepal?

Hisila: In India, we can hope for another leap coming with the Indian revolution.


F/CI:: How do you work on your international relations?

Hisila: With increased globalization we have to use all kinds of avenues. We are taking now intense diplomatic moves from the party headquarters. Before, Maoist leaders were denied entry to the United States, but now that we are in parliament they allow us to go there for talks. Now the US also wants to come to Nepal through the UN. That is why we press for the constituent assembly, because we want the UN to leave as soon as possible. In this we stand together with China and India.

The US want to make us into a new UML.


F/CI: What's your relation to the Communist Party of India (ML)?

Hisila: There are no party relations with the CPI(ML). During the peace process there was some contact and we considered the CPI(ML) easier to deal with than BJP.


F/CI: What do you think of the Norwegian role?

Hisila: Norwegian businessmen are better in some regards, they are more sensitive to public and social issues.

Before, Norway was on the side of the US, now they are more neutral. But Norwegian neutrality can easily shift, they could soon lean towards the US.


F/CI: What will happen to the king?

Hisila: If the king is sensible, he'll run away. If he tries to act smart, he'll be killed or imprisoned. Unlike your king, he's had a lot of power, he even killed his own family! If he were ousted as a result of the people's war, we'd take other steps than we do now. But if he remains silent, we will not touch him.


F/CI: What about child soldiers in the People's Liberation Army?

Hisila: The last statement by Prachanda stated that if it's proved by the UN (they have a system to prove this) that there are children in the PLA camps, they should be sent back to their villages with some economic means. But during the war, we even had children's organizations. We had many orphans, as in tribal societies remarrying isn't a taboo. This leads to children being abandoned, and they would come to us. We even let them help to carry things with the army.


F/CI: Wouldn't it have been better to continue fighting while you were on top?

Hisila: Through all the peace talks, we had the strategy of isolation the king and coming to an understanding with the parliamentary forces. During the people's war we were able to limit and encircle the enemy to the district headquarters. The enemy was fortifying their bunkers and our effort was to bring them to their bunkers and fight. After the two-line struggle [a struggle between Prachanda and Baburam Bhattarai--ed.], you had two major military attacks, like the one in Kara, where we lost many people, and in Pili, where we won, but only because the bunkers was still being built.

We were feeling that neither they nor we could win. So the coup was a breakthrough. Whenever before we said to the other parties, "Look, you'll be cheated by the king," they refused this, but then they saw this with their own eyes.

Read more!

Maobadi Winning Big In Nepal Election! [Updated 2x]

Votes are being counted in Nepal right now from Thursday's balloting to elect a new Constituent Assembly which will determine the future of the country's political and economic institutions. (You can track the vote counting hour by hour at the English language nepalnews.com website.)

The votes being counted first are those for "first past the post" elections in districts around the country, totaling 240 seats. Still to be calculated are the 335 seats in the Constituent Assembly to be assigned by proportional representation based on the total votes garnered by various parties.

Right now, Sunday morning in the US, the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) is kicking some serious ass. 114 seats have been decided and the Maobadi have won 63 of them. That's with 18 seats each for the two other major parties, the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist)--despite the name a social democratic outfit at best--and the Congress Party of Nepal, the main center-right party in the country, which played the leading role in governing Nepal on behalf of its feudal royal family from 1990-2002.

[Update 4/15: Tuesday morning EDT, 212 "first past the post" candidates (biggest vote in constituency wins) out of 240 have been declared winners. CPN(Maoist) candidates have won 114 and with 28 seats undecided look certain to win a majority. Meanwhile the Maobadi also lead in counted votes under the proportional representation (PR) election system, with 37.42%. This count will continue more slowly.]

[UPDATE 4/14: Under 24 hours later, Monday morning EDT, the landslide continues. 179 "first past the post" (candidate with biggest vote in constituency wins) seats (out of 240) have been decided. 101 have been won by the Maobadi! Nepali Congress seems to be edging out UML for a distant second, 30 to 25, with smaller and regional parties splitting the rest. Vote counting has begun for the seats to be allocated by proportional representation, and the CPN(M) is reported to be leading there as well.]

CPN(M) party chief Prachanda won big in the Rolpa-2 district with 34,230 votes while the CPN (UML) runner up pulled only 6029. Another Maobadi leader, Baburam Bhattarai drew 46,272 votes in his constituency, beating his uncle (!), a Congress Party candidate by nearly 40,000 votes.

The CPN(M) victory is so clear that the leaders of both the UML and the Congress Party have already announced their resignations. And Prachanda and Bhattarai have met with the sitting Prime Minister to discuss where things go from here.

The US press will barely cover this but the stakes are extremely high. The constituent assembly will be voting to end the monarchy and establish Nepal as a democratic republic. So far the strategy of the Maobadi--putting the people's war it waged in Nepal from 1996 to 2006 on hold, and using the gains it won in combat to jam other parties into a political alliance aimed at abolishing the monarchy and establishing a republic--has been proved highly successful. The Nepalese masses have made their support clear.

People around the world will be watching to see how the CPN(M) handles being the dominant political party in Nepal and how its cadres plan to build a new society and move the country toward a socialist economy. The scale of their victory diminishes but does not eliminate the possibility of a coup by the Royal Nepalese Army, backed by foreign powers freaked out that a communist party has won such a massive national victory.

It will also be important to keep an eye on the US government. Nepal's large and intrusive neighbor, India, has grudgingly acknowledged the elections as fair and promises to deal with whatever regime comes forward. The Bush administration has made no such statement and continues to characterize the CPN(M) as a terrorist organization and maintain it on the list of "Specially Designated Nationals" with whom it is illegal for US citizens to do business.

I wonder if anyone from the mainstream media will ask McCain, Clinton and Obama to respond to the Maobadi victory.

Read more!