KATHMANDU, NEPAL 1952

                                                             CHAPTER 4      

                                  THE REFORM ISSUE IN NEPAL AND THE  

                                             ANTI-COMMUNIST FRONT 

           Nepal which remained a virtual terra incognita till yesterday, has at the moment suddenly leapt into the limelight of publicity. The old camp followers of reaction who in the past never cared a straw for the welfare of the down trodden Nepalese are come with eyes full of tears and are showing unusual concern for them, so much so that the air is thick with talks of political reforms in the state for which external pressure, particularly that of India is being evoked. But all these sudden outbursts of attention all these tears and concerns are manifestations of a fearful mind working at the prospect of being overwhelmed by superior forces of communism which is surging ahead from the North. There is no doubt that these people are being compelled by developments in the Far East to cast their thought on Nepal. How Nepal will fare in the context? Is it a manifestation of a sincere desire on the part of the outsiders to uplift the lot of the poor Nepalese or is it a mere crocodile tear shed in a game of power politics and another device to hoodwink the people in furtherance of the imperialist cum feudal interests? All these questions raise issues, which should be probed into deeper with wide eyes in all their precautions and re-repercussions. It becomes us at the hour also to be alert and save the situation from being complicated further, so that the interested parties do not waylay the people and deviate them into the risky path of reconcilement.

Nepal is a country of the Himalayan region on the border of the great Chinese Republic. Apart from its buffer like situation between India and China its importance lies in the fact that either parties can use it as a springboard for offensive and defensive purposes. With that characteristic it has the same importance in international politics as Indo-China, Siam, Afghanistan or Iran has for the world powers. It is natural therefore that the powers who have been so long directly or indirectly keeping Nepal as a semi-colony under the management and proprietorship of the local autocracy should be alert about its threatened position and developments. The very line of military preparations runs through its territory and to all intents and purposes their interest demands that with an all-strong base of regional defense the peace and security of this area is also guaranteed. 

 The powers cannot afford to see Nepal embroiled in anything, which will pave the way for mass uprising. They know that if the present discontent accentuates and suppression of civil rights continues there will emerge a condition favorable to the rise and growth of communism in their midst. In order to take the ground immune from influences of communism and preventing the situation getting out of their control they are prescribing remedies which though not effective to cure the ills do at the same time create a belief that the rulers have taken upon themselves the task of pursuing a progressive and responsible policy of administration. The good will thus obtained by the rulers will certainly be used to meet the challenge of communism by corrupting the average citizen of the country.

 It is argued that there is already a pressure of communist ideology in Nepal and this is creating a situation wherein people are likely to be drawn into accepting its methods and into working for its ultimate goal. Although the policy of the government in refusing modest reforms is being made responsible for the situation, it is nevertheless true that the advocates of reforms In Nepal shun every sincere and real attempt at improving the very bestial condition of the masses in preaching the need for enlightened despotism in the state.

The main problem for all the reactionary politicians today is to check the rising tide of popular discontent, which is engendering the communist upheaval undermining the very basis of property and all its traditional and conventional values and ethics. They are seeking guarantees to that effect in order to stem the prospect of revolutionary upsurge of the people and all sorts of allies are being propped up and nurtured. These allies cannot be the persons following a naked policy of feudal barbarism, for that way lies the ruin and dilapidation of the vested interests as a result of the commotion it sets forth in the wake of mass uprising. As is clear from pronouncements of the interested persons what they endeavor is to introduce & change so that under a democratic semblance the status quo is preserved. Obviously through the adoption of this policy the interested parties want to check the further deterioration and accentuation of poverty and it advocates conciliation towards the demands of the middle class. In that context repression of the reforms movement, which is confined to a small section of the lower middle class, is also ruled out of order. Naturally the allies are the bourgeois democrats who will share power with the feudal aristocracy without in any way allowing the mass of the people to enjoy civic nights. We cannot forget that all this talk of reforms which means sharing of power jointly by the Rana autocracy and their collaborators will cloud the main issue of popular emancipation in Nepal. Those reforms, which come as an antidote to communism will as our experiences of the past fifty years shows be in their very nature such as will only prolong life of feudalism with slight alterations in its structure. This is the shape of things to come which in the final analysis emerges in the picture. The very fact that solicitude was borne of an emergency in the wake of the threatening communist uprising bespeaks its character and design behind the move. It is obviously to fortify the situation so that the democratic movement is easily sabotaged to get itself localized outside the fringe of the class barrier of the property less that the reforms are being suggested and the Ranas are asked to work them out for the mutual benefit. According to the authors of the plan the prospect of communism may be combated in the following ways so far as Nepal is concerned: -

(1) By increasing the military and police strength of the present Government of Nepal which being a feudal and reactionary institution is the greatest enemy of communism,

(2) By asking the rulers to appease the vocal sections of the people now clamoring for freedom and liberty so that they do not reach a point of exhaustion and disappointment to let themselves be influenced by ideas of communism in the event of frustration,  

          It is a step towards the second measure that the political reform is being suggested. The problem is to create a vanguard against communist and military measures alone are deemed insufficient to cope with the mounting penetration of this ideology. If the present sent tone and content of the democratic struggle in Nepal were made subservient to the class interest of the opponent section, the purpose of the feudal cum imperialist reactionaries is fulfilled. A certain writer has gone even to the extent of naming a particular party for a deal to be struck with by the men in saddle in Katmandu. That this deal is not to take into account the over all need for the redemption of the poor plight of the people is clear as appears from his following observation, "It is, however, necessary now to consider the question as to whether the present Government of Nepal is in a position to become impregnable bastion against the tide of communist propaganda, for it is needless to point out that military alliance or under standing alone will not deviate the so called Red infiltration. The present ruling authority may not be reactionary as it is supposed but the fact remains that it is not as liberal or democratic as the situation in Nepal demands. In the present set up of the world no government can survive communist propaganda and offensive unless it commands popular support. The existing Ranacracy of Nepal constituted as it is both unpopular and outmoded as the rising strength of the Nepal Democratic Congress would indicate."

"The popular movement for democratic reforms had been, steadily growing despite official disfavor and repression. There was some talk of constitutional reforms lately and even a constitution was drawn up to satisfy the demand of the Nepal Democratic Congress, but this has been shelved for the present despite popular opposition."

          Two things in this observation stand to expose the real motive of the author in expounding and pleading for democracy in Nepal. That it is only an eyewash tactics to conceal his antagonism of popular government is evident from the fact that his stand is anticommunism rather than pro-democracy and pro-people and whatever he pleads does not issue out of any consideration for reforms for the sake of popular emancipation. We could not have expected a better solution either, for his main objective is to achieve greater measure of agreement and harmony amongst the various sections of vested interests on the issue of fighting communism. He wants the Ranas to fight communism with the so-called liberal Nepal Democratic Congress and the only question to solve for him is to enlist their support on an agreed basis. But by offering the same 1948 constitution as the solution and bringing in the reactionary almost non- existent organization of the Nepal Democratic Congress as an ally to be wooed in order to work them out, he condemns his own stand vis a vis the popular demand for political rights and social and economic amelioration.

If the vocal section of the Nepalese people as represented by the handful of the so called Nepal Democratic Congress is to be taken into account the boundary of democratic movement can be seen hardly surpassing the group of the disgruntled members of the Rana autocracy and its class of parasites whose ambition is to wreak vengeance and effect restoration through a fake democratic movement. If appeasement of this element is the sole aim then democracy will be meaningless for a vast majority of the Nepalese people. It will only mean sharing of power between the two sections of the Ranas and their flatterers. But it will bring  appreciable changes in the structure of government. Whatever may be the alternative for a refusal to line up in such a setup the Nepalese people do not feel enthusiastic about the future evolved on this basis.

Unless there is a thoroughly representative people's government Nepal's ills are not going to be cured. Nothing short of real transfer of power to the people will usher in such a government of the people. But the political leadership represented by the vocal section of the disgruntled reactionaries is at the present time content with the dose of reforms, which will give nominal liberty to the people. The agitation is directed to demand the implementation of fake reforms. It is more or less in the nature of a family quarrel. Its cessation and compromise will not take the people an inch dearer to the goal.

India comes in the picture because of geographical contiguity and her historical and cultural and racial ties with Nepal. As Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru openly declared in his recent statement before the Parliament Nepal is geographically a part of India and anything happening in that region is likely to send its repercussion to all over the territories of the Indian sub-continent. But are India's fears as to the likely use of Nepalese territory by the communists justified even as a remote possibility? It is not fair to attribute to the Chinese People's Republic a policy of aggression. India's fear can be justified if only communism were to be defined as an expansion of the Russian sphere of influence. I am sure such as an unrealistic and fantastic suggestion is not being made. It may be correct to say that a communist Nepal will allow bases of operations for the Indian communist as we Nepalese democrats have been enjoying all facilities of work in India and let India take her own precautionary measures to counteract this factor but to deny to Nepal to form a government of its choice for fear of producing unfavorable reactions in India is not only denying the Nepalese people their sovereign rights but also unwise in the larger interest of international democracy. It is hoped that the radian leaders will always exercise their pressure on Nepal for the welfare of the Nepalese people and not for any advantages for themselves and reactionary forces. Without prejudicing India’s high stakes in Nepal let it not be forgotten that a people's Nepal free from the clutches of the reactionary Ranas of either camps will become the surest guarantee against any invasion of India. If  Indo-Nepalese friendship were to rest on a solid foundation, there is a greater need for a common approach to questions of democratic rights and conceptions by the two parties.

This presupposes a sympathetic understanding of the Nepalese situation by the neighboring countries. Because there is no intermediary class of people m between the aristocracy and the suppressed masses democracy will bear a meaning quite different from that conceived in ordinary condition of middle class dominated society. This makes further the character of our struggle extremely progressive. The Nepalese people feel not only the urge for freedom in order to gain civic rights but at the same time interpret them in terms of substantial economic advantages. In other words liberty will not only mean equal opportunities but equal distribution of wealth as well on the basis of work. Any transfer of power hands, if this urge for equalization of property is to be considered, will preclude all attempts at creating a new complication the type found in capitalist society, which maintains the status and tightens the grips of forces so far lying dominant in the field. We have simply no mind to fall into a position to face ever and fresh issues when the old issues are simple enough to handle freedom from the oppressive Rana rule will not be allowed to detete into assuming forms of ferocious shackles, which will be the result if the feudal forces are allowed to continue under the old status. The people will certainly use the power they snatch from the feudalists in order that the tentacles are destroyed and no fresh barrier comes to prevent their natural growth into prosperity. 

In their quest for real freedom the Nepalese will encounter combined opposition of the world vested interests with which the Rana and allied aristocracy of Nepal is interlinked through its external investment. But the same makes them a staunch enemy of the international capital, which is propping up the Nepalese feudal rulers.

Gradualism is a specific feature of a democratic capitalist society. Where an aristocracy under proprietary rights as in Nepal holds feudalism reigns supreme and powers any scheme of gradual transfer of power has simply no place. It does not fit in with such a texture for feudalism faces a total collapse when once it allows a little ground for the anti-feudal forces to operate and therefore it is always with a spirit of resistance that all views advocating changes in the structure are considered.

Feudalism does not know liberalism. Liberalization will kill it. Either it liberalizes or goes or it resists and stays. Any plan drawn to preserve it in a liberalized form is full of deceits and its effect will be to divert the channel of democratic agitation to a wrong end, to an end, which will produce exactly the opposite results. It may give a false appearance to lull the fighting spirit of the people into submission to the old order by promises of redemption but it will ultimately mean betrayal of their interest. We do not mean to invite chaos and disorder but anti-communism is no solution for the Nepalese problem if the status quo is to continue and the existing property relations which divides the ruling Ranas from the exploited mass is not to be disrupted for the betterment of the latter. It will strengthen the hands of the feudal o1igarchy, weaken the resistance of the people and delay their emancipation. Anti-communism as applied to Nepalese condition will be definitely anti-people and anti-democratic. 

It must be admitted that the Nepalese people's fight for liberty is organically connected with the national liberation struggle of the Asiatic people which is equally related to the emancipatory struggle of the exploited classes of the industrial and capitalist countries. We cannot remain blind to this aspect of the problem and assist those who are out to exploit our movement for the preservation of their vested interest by raising the bogey of communism, which clouds the main issue of liberation. 

Anti-communism comes in the garb of democracy without, however, effecting real changes in the social structure. On final analysis there is, therefore, no choice between the type of autocracy as it exists and the type it would exist under under the form envisaged by the authors of the anti-communist plans. One would be the only slightly altered form of the other in a novel dress designed to be able to throw dust into people's eyes as to its real intention. We cannot differentiate the one from the other. If there is a difference it is of appearance only and not of reality. What one wants to achieve by naked force the other achieves by stealthy means under a semblance of democracy. Both have a single aim of perpetuating the slavery of the people. But anti-communism as it comes under a subtle form and with false promise of redemption has more dangerous tendencies and is to be all the more detested and resisted. 

Some people are apt to be misled by the fact that the authors of the anti-communist plan have been at the moment the democracies of the west. But we must know that their authorship alone of all the factors makes the idea too dangerous to swallow. Those who control the destiny of these democracies have never made a secret of their reactionary views, and have always shown an uncompromising hostility to anything done towards granting real powers to the people. In their own country the people continue to be as much enslaved and deprived of actual rights and economic advantages as in the colonies and medieval countries. Today when the very institution of property is threatened, they are least expected to base their policy on principles of democracy which means to turn upside down the very basis of their powers and privileges. Their allies, therefore, today as of yesterday are the reactionary anti-democratic elements. The anti-communist front will certainly include in its fold such interests and regimes as have tended to be actually anti-democratic. Anyone acquainted with the trend of foreign policy of the Anglo-American Powers cannot have the illusion that they mean otherwise. If they have supported the barbarous rulers of Arabia, there is no reason to suppose that they will have any other policy towards Nepal whose condition does not differ very much from that of medieval looking Arabia. With what they have done in Korea, Indo-China, Iran, Afghanistan and other countries of the East where tyrants and authoritarian regimes are bolstered up as against the mass of the people struggling for liberty, we cannot but conclude that the Rana rulers or any other reactionary rulers will receive utmost support in their hands. The Ranas or men of their ilk are the best defenders of the social order, which functions in conformity to imperialist interests and the Anglo- American Powers have to preserve them for their own sake.

Anti-Communism is the rallying ground of all the parties of vested interests on an international front, where the autocratic Ranas or their kinsmen will play an important role as the common enemy of progress. As they happen to be the only guarantee against Nepalese democratic forces, the attempt will be to strengthen their hands. Even If they have to be pulled, efforts will be made to replace them by equally reactionary elements, by those who will pursue an anti-people policy of administration. No reforms will be entertained which will change this fundamental factor. He will be living in a fool's paradise if anyone believes in being able to obtain sympathies of the western Powers for the people's struggle in Nepal. That will be never forthcoming. But at the same time attempts will be made to pass the Ranacracy or in the alternative King Tribhuwan's autocracy in a new garb as an embodiment of liberal changes, a factor which is well in evidence. The Nepalese people should be aware of treading on a dangerous path of accepting these in their face value. Anti-communism in the hands of the feudal cum capitalist class cannot but be an instrument of feudal and imperialist exploitation and a veritable measure to perpetuate and fortify their position in the old social order. 

* The above four chapters were written exactly six months before the present changes were introduced in Nepal in the middle of February last year.