<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
问：In Baluwatar, you said that within 15 days there will be an Interim
Constitution. Till today, it has not happened. Why?
答：The Interim Constitution Drafting Committee is working very seriously.
However, the delay is because of the political parties. It is likely that the
Interim Constitution will be ready in one week. The dominant classes of
the old regime and even some Congress and UML Bamun-Chhetri leaders are reluctant to allow the right to self-determination with autonomous ethnic federations. This is creating bottlenecks in the process of the CA elections, isn’t it? We are in the first decade of the 21st century. The world has moved far ahead. People’s consciousness, awareness and thoughts are high. Such kind of leaders have to understand these realities. In this changing context, how can we resolve ongoing contradictions and conflicts should be the focus of our attention. The slogans that we raised are not going to bring about social unrest, but they will help to resolve social contradictions for hundreds of years in the future. I request all concerned to view, from this perspective, our programmes which will provide a political climate that will not compel people to feel cheated. No one will be in
a situation where they might have to pick up arms.For 237 years, <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Nepal’s State was centralised and feudal. We cannot return to that stage. Now the circumstances have changed. Now people and ethnic groups have awareness about State oppression. There is an advancement of consciousness. The State should realise this consciousness. After that, a new nation-state can be formed. If each and every person feels that they are the owners of the country, then we all will feel secure and safe. This consciousness has to be understood.
问：On this issue, there have been questions raised by the Marxists. They
say that such issues of identity are not Marxist questions. They say that to gain strength, Maoists are raising identity issues instead of focusing on class issues.
答：If they say that, then we feel that they have not understood Marxism.
Ethnic struggle is also a form of class struggle. Ethnic struggle is not different
from class struggle. Marx himself, then, had interpreted in the Irish question, that identity was a part of the class question. Lenin had replaced the slogan of ‘Workers of the World Unite’ with ‘Workers and Oppressed People of the World
Unite’ during the Third International. These Red sloganeers have not understood Marxism. Lenin has used the formulation of self determination within a federal structure. Those who accuse Maoists of having abandoned Marxism have instead acquired stakes in the existing feudal structure of Nepal. If they genuinely want to end class exploitation,then why do they fear giving powers to Madheshis, Newar, Bheri-Karnali, Seti-Mahakali, Gurung, Magar, Tharu, Rai, Limbu and others? Even though the right to divorce is there, it does not mean that a husband will always leave his wife and a wife will abandon her husband. Only after giving everyone rights will national unity be strengthened.
答：假如他们那样说，那么我们认为他们没有理解马克思主义。民族斗争也是阶级斗争的一种形式。民族斗争与阶级斗争是一致的。当年马克思本人就阐明了爱尔兰民族问题，那个问题的性质就是阶级问题。列宁在第三国际期间，把“全世界无产者联合起来”的口号换成了“全世界无产者和被压迫民族联合起来”的口号。这些所谓的马克思主义者并不理解马克思主义。列宁在一个联邦体制内采用了民族自决的形式。那些指责毛主义者放弃了马克思主义的人，自己却把尼泊尔封建制度当做背靠的大树。假如他们真想消灭阶级剥削，那么为什么害怕把权力交给Madheshis, Newar, Bheri-Karnali, Seti-Mahakali, Gurung, Magar, Tharu, Rai, Limbu以及其他民族地区呢？尽管答应离婚，但并不意味着丈夫总是离开妻子和妻子抛弃她的丈夫。只有给与所有人权力，那么国家统一才会加强。
问：The dream of a new Nepal that you talked about after the 2 Asarh (June
16) agreement at Baluwatar evoked a tremendous response among the people and raised their aspirations. But looking at the structure of the State today, without a full transformation, what possibility do you see ahead if you were to be the prime minister? In the circumstances, is not the dream too idealistic?
答：It is not idealistic. We have developed the Marxism-Leninism-Maoism of the
old communist movement into a new manifesto of the 21st century because the old formulations will not work. Knowing that the old methods will not work, ten months back our central committee discussed and agreed on this matter. We did not make all this public. This document of the central committee is the new manifesto of the communist party of the 21st century. We have to evolve a new understanding of contemporary imperialism and revolution. In the prevailing context, strategy and tactics have to be new and relevant. The manner in which the party functions must also be according to a new strategy. In today’s age of globalisation and post-modernism, we have to move decisively in a new form. The 12-point understanding consciously reflects our 21st century interpretation of communist ideology. When we entered into the Baluwatar agreement, I told the world that we feel confident that we would be able to come forward with new ideas. This is not idealism. This is from our experience of the movement. These ideas came from the discussions among the tens of millions of people. Buddha was born in Lumbini but his ideas permeated the world. Likewise during our ten years of people’s war we were not merely confined to Mechchi-Mahakali or Sindhuli and Rolpa-Rukum. We lived in various states of India. We stayed from six months to one year each in Mumbai, Kolkota, Himachal, Delhi, Assam, and many other places. Our consciousness is the result of interactions and influences in a living relationship with humanity in the 21st century. This is why we are realists.
它是现实的。因为旧的方式不能解决问题，所以我们把旧共产主义运动的马列毛主义发展成了21世纪的新的宣言。10个月前，当熟悉到旧办法没用了时，我们中心委员会讨论并通过了这一决议。我们没有把它全面公开。这个中心委员会的文件是21世纪共产党的新宣言。我们必须发展当代帝国主义和革命的新理论。在主要问题上，战略和战术必须是全新的。党发挥作用的方式也应该根据新的战略。在今天全球化和后现代主义的时代，我们必须以新的形式迈出决定性的步伐。12点协议反映出我们对21世纪共产主义理论的解释。当我们签定巴鲁华特协定时，我告诉世界我们有信心以新的观点前进。这不是唯心的。这是来自于我们运动的经验。这些观点来自数千万人民的讨论。佛祖诞生于蓝毗尼，但他的思想却传遍了全世界。同样，在10年人民战争期间，我们并不局限于 Mechchi-Mahakali 或 Sindhuli 以及罗尔帕-鲁孔地区活动。我们生活在印度的各个邦。我们在孟买，Kolkota, Himachal, 德里，Assam和许多其他地方分别呆上半年到一年的时间。我们的思想是21世纪人类生产关系作用和影响下产生的。因此我们是现实主义者。
问：Let’s extend our discussion to the statement of the CPI (Maoist) (in
India) spokesperson Comrade Azad, who in a recent interview cautioned
about betrayal when collaborating with the State.
答：To begin with, we are not going to enter this present State structure.
Many people have represented us as being eager to become ministers.
They have not understood our thought and our feelings or we have
not been able to explain ourselves to them. We will not become ministers,
in the existing bureaucratic structure. We have asked for a democratic federal republic in the Interim Constitution itself. Even so there can be agreement with the SPA. After arriving at an understanding with them we can go into the interim government. Without change we won’t go there. When we believe that change has taken place then only we will go. Our people will run the ministries that we head. It is only on this condition that we will join the government. If we go without this condition then we will become just like the UML and NC.
We will not enter this State structure without this change. The 12- point
understanding and 8-point agreement have addressed issues of State
restructuring. If the SPA agrees then there is no problem. You have asked a very important question about Comrade Azad’s comments. See, when there is a revolution in the world in one instant, that revolution does not replicate itself in another time and another context. The Russian revolution took place in a very different manner to the Paris Commune. The Russian revolution took place in a different manner, the Chinese revolution took place in a very different way. The Cuban revolution did not take place in the same manner as the Chinese revolution. Stalin did not recognise the Chinese revolution as a proletariat revolution. He always held that until 1951, the Chinese revolution was a bourgeois revolution. When they really discussed about the Chinese revolution,
then he recognised it as a Communist revolution. The Russian revolution
faced attacks from all sides after its completion. Lenin proposed a treaty
with Germany in order to keep alive the revolution. Even within their central
committee, there was the accusation that Lenin had betrayed the revolution.
But the central committee rejected this decisively. The central committee needed three meetings to resolve the issue. What we are doing in Nepal is recognising the balance of power in the country, and taking the people for a new kind of revolution. Those who are viewing us from the perspective of the old forms of revolution will say that we have already Spoilt it all. However, those who view us in terms of transformation and flow of revolution will find us to be the most dynamic of communists. We made the Unity Centre (Ekta Kendra) in 2048 BS (1991). We had labelled the 1990 movement as a betrayal. But people did not accept this. When people did not believe this, then we too entered Parliament. At that time, many revolutionaries like Comrade Azad said that we were doomed. In the next three years, the RIM (Revolutionary International Movement) had declared us as Rightists and expelled us from the RIM. They had even brought out a voluminous publication on this matter. For boycotting elections, they also declared that only Mohan Bikram was a revolutionary. When we began the people’s war, all the revisionists of the world declared us foolish. They said that we would be turned into dust in ten months. But even after ten years we are here. During the first peace talks, people like Comrade Azad expected us to be finished. However, do we look at revolution in scientific terms, or do we apply the formulae of the 20th century to it is the primary question? We have, on one side, parties like the UML, who in its ‘progress’ has gone for class co-existence. Whatever we are attempting in Nepal is both risky and challenging. But without facing challenges and risks, which revolution in the world has taken place? When we address these challenges, it will appear that sometimes we are going to the Left and sometimes to the Right. In the course of revolution, if one goes Left, then they are Leftists. If they swerve to the Right, then they will be Rightists. We are walking on both our legs. Sometimes the left foot leads, sometimes the right foot is forward. It is only by walking on both our legs that we accomplished the ten years of struggle. When we extend our right foot, then some people accuse us of being Rightists. When we put forward our left foot, they call us Leftists. It is only when we walk using both our feet, that it is scientific.
问：We see indications that the CA and republic are not on the horizon. If
so, what are your preparations?
答：We have not thought that possibilities are exhausted. But the situation has
gone a bit awry. Against this, people have to raise their voice. When we
explained in our recent statement about being committed to peaceful means, we included that statement after much deliberation. We thought that it was possible to maintain ceasefire and go ahead with a peaceful people’s movement. It is possible to go via constituent assembly to democratic republic. This way has to be peaceful. If this is not to be, then Nepali people will go for an uprising. If people go for such a revolt, then CPN(Maoist) will support the revolt.
问：After you talked with the Misturaled UN team, you were looking satisfied.
What transpired there?
答：There cannot be a universal arrangement for arms management across the
world. Nepal has a unique context. According to our own context, we will manage. I was happy that they acknowledged that they could not replicate the examples of Mozambique and East Timor. Further, they agreed that the prime minister’s letter was not in accordance with the eight-point agreement.