Kathmandu, March 29. The CPN-Â UMLÂ â€™s political report drafting committee is lost in a debate, with conflicting views surfacing from the party rank and file over key theoretical issues and interpretation of contemporary Nepali politics.
Leaders on the drafting committee said interpretation of the Peopleâ€™s Movement (2006) has emerged as a major cause of disagreement. While some leaders including party Chairman Jhala Nath Khanal and Secretary Shankar Pokharel argue that the uprising was a political revolution, another group terms it as social revolution.
The Ghanashyam Bhusal-led group argues that the 2006 movement was a social revolution as it abolished monarchy and paved the way for the countryâ€™s socio-economic transformation. With the abolition of monarchy, it says, there remains no feudalism.
Additionally, the nature of Nepali society, the main contradiction, and different takes on the partyâ€™s guiding principlesâ€”Peopleâ€™s Multi-party Democracy (PMPD)â€”propounded by the late Madan Bhandari have emerged as major sources of difference in the political report drafting process.
A group of leaders say that there should be no changes in the partyâ€™s guiding principles, calling them an excellent policy for the party, in contrast to the Bhusal-led teamâ€™s stance of making them timely. This group believes that the Nepali society has already entered a capitalistic era and that maximum economic development is necessary to transform the â€œcomprador-dominated societyâ€ into a communism model. As the debate rages, the Khanal-headed 33-member panel mandated to prepare a political report by March-end has yet to begin its work. â€œDiscussions are ongoing and we have not yet started drafting the document,â€ said Pradeep Gyawali, a member of committee.
On the nature of society,Â UMLÂ leaders are divided in terming it semi-feudal or semi-colonial. Till date, the party calls it semi-feudal and semi-colonial as â€œimperialist forces are controlling the nation economicallyâ€.
â€œPeople may not notice the physical presence of semi-colonialism but domination of super-power can be felt as economic influence,â€ said Gyawali.
Bhusalâ€™s group differs on the logic of semi-colonialism in Nepal. They argue that feudalism ended in Nepal with the abolition of monarchy in 2008 and the debate on semi-colonial is futile as Nepal has been an independent and sovereign nation from the very beginning of state formation. â€œWhen we were never colonised, why are people forcefully terming Nepal as a semi-colonial state?â€ said Bhusal.
Before the abolition of monarchy in 2008,Â UMLÂ termed it and other regressive forces as its â€œprincipal enemyâ€. In the changed context, said Gyawali, â€œWe are not in favour of naming a particular party or force as the principal enemy.â€