Interview with Basanta - Politburo Member of the Central Committee Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist)

1 – How is the recent situation concerning the two line struggle in your party? Have any of the most important contradictions been solved? (Here you can describe the whole situation about the positions of each side, on which we already have a general idea, but also underline the points that are agreed on.)

For a communist party, the two-line struggle is the source of its life. As an object does not exist without contradiction in it, a communist party too does not exist when there is no two-line struggle. However, the two-line struggle does not always have the same level but varies depending upon the content of the issues involved in it. The two-line struggle in our party has sharpened mainly after the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly, which established the federal democratic republic of Nepal. Monarchy has been abolished from Nepal but not feudalism. Nepal is still a semi-feudal and semi-colonial country. External intervention is in the rise. The essence of the ongoing two-line struggle is centred on how to understand this situation and whether to continue with status quo i.e. the semi-feudal and semi-colonial condition beautified by cosmetics of the democratic republic or continue struggling to establish People’s Federal Republic in its place.

A few months before, when our CC meeting had just started, chairman Prachanda brought about a long interview in which he revealed so many things on the questions of line. In that interview he categorically said that there is no need now to make a new democratic revolution in Nepal, because the gap between the new democratic revolution and the socialist revolution has narrowed. The major part of it has already been accomplished and the rest can be accomplished when the socialist revolution comes in the agenda. He added that the major task before the party was to develop productive forces by creating conducive atmosphere for the donor countries. This way, he does not even stand in favour of national economy and the national bourgeois. In fact he has been integrated in the imperialist system. Dissolution of the people’s power, submission of the PLA into the hands of Nepal Army through a kind of coup on April 10, 2012, returning of land to the landlords, signing of anti-national treaties like BIPPA and other shameful treaties on water resources with India etc. have made Prachanda-Baburam clique stand in service of Indian expansionism, the regional watchdog of the US imperialism, and their puppets in Nepal. Through this process this clique has betrayed the nation and the class as well.

When the leaders nakedly surrender before imperialism and their running domestic agents, then the two-line struggle does not remain an issue of the party alone. Rather it becomes an issue of the nation and the entire oppressed people as a whole. It must be taken to the masses so that their anti-people and anti-national crimes could be unveiled. Hence, the two-line struggle which we are taking to the masses now is an ideological and political campaign to make the entire oppressed class, nation, sex and region stand by the side of revolutionaries and expose the right revisionists who betrayed the nation and people in the garb of Marxism.

The last Central Committee meeting has taken up a method to deal with organisational problems. First, no committee at any level will take decisions on the basis of majority and minority and second, if there is no unanimity then either ideological group will have right to organise their separate committee meetings, take decisions and implement in their own. In other words, every ideological group in our party is free to take decisions and implement them in practice. Democratic centralism is not active in our party now. The line struggle in the party is now openly taken to the masses. We think the synthesis of this whole process will equip us with deeper ideological grasp to lead the revolution forward.

2 – How is the situation with the People’s Liberation Army? Has the army been dissolved now?

When the formation of People's Liberation Army, Nepal was declared from its first conference in 2000, Chairman Prachanda had said that that PLA would be such a militant strength of the world proletariat that will prevent counter-revolution in the twenty-first century. Surprisingly, after 12 years on April 10, 2012, the "Supreme Commander" of the PLA, chairman Prachanda ordered the Nepal army to stage a coup against the very PLA he gave birth to by encircling their camp and forcing them to surrender. He claimed that it was a bold decision taken on his part but in fact it was a cowardly decision of capitulation before the imperialism, expansionism and various shades of reaction.

3 – How is the content or reflection of the two line struggle concerning the international relations of the party? What do you think about the critics of for example the Communist Party of India (Maoist)? Or other organisations who have similar positions?

Before the two-line struggle surfaced, the international communist movement was critical of our party line. Some parties criticised our party in open, just for example the Communist Party of India (Maoist), Communist Party of Iran (Marxist-Leninist-Maoist), Revolutionary Communist Party of USA etc. and some others placed their critical opinion internally. However, except a few revisionist parties most of the revolutionaries were critical of the line we had adopted then. But when the two-line struggle surfaced in our party the revolutionaries all across the world have shown ideological support to the revolutionary line and the revolutionary faction led by comrade Kiran. The criticism that came from various revolutionary parties was basically correct. And some of them were based on subjective understanding of the situation. However, those criticisms were helpful for our fight against revisionism and defence of revolution and revolutionary line.

4 – How does the opposition consider the Rolpa Congress in 2005? Has it played any role in the present situation?

Our party had held a Central Committee meeting, not the Congress, at Chunwang in Rukum, not Rolpa, in 2005. We adopted a new tactic of the democratic republic from that very meeting. We said it was a tactical shift. It was definitely a turning point from which we took a path of the Constituent Assembly and it has made us arrive at this point. Definitely, the Chunwang line has to do with the present situation to develop. But Chunwang too did not emerge from vacuum. So, we have to have a thorough summation of the past, which we have not done till now. In order to have a rich summation I think we must focus on the Chunwang Meeting, the Second National Conference and even before. And also we have to sum up our position on "The development of democracy in the twenty-first century".

5 – What does the opposition think about having a Party Congress? Is the fact of not having held a Congress for many years, one of the reasons that support the bureaucratisation inside the party?

Of course, not having a party congress for quite a long time, 20 years, is one of the reasons that support bureaucratisation inside the party. But, this is not the only and the principal reason. The main reason behind the present condition to happen is the ideological and political degeneration on the part of main leadership. Party congress can be helpful to resolve the problem and it should be regularised too. But, party Congress is not possible at present, not because we don't want it to happen, but because there is no conducive environment required to organise a thorough discussion on the questions involved in the two-line struggle.

6 – Do you think that the conflict can be solved without any split in the party? To what extend does the opposition would risk that?

It is the revolutionaries who want a strong party to make revolution. The revolutionary strength primarily is measured by the correctness of ideological and political line and secondarily by the dimension of organisation and material strength they have. Therefore, the revolutionaries must have a principal thrust in building a correct ideological and political line and then a correct organisational line that helps unite more in the party to strengthen its material base.

Chairman Mao has very explicitly shed light on who is the real splinter. He said they are the splinters who deviate from Marxism. The right revisionists deviate from the strategic vision of socialism and so they are the splinters. In this sense, Prachanda-Baburam clique is the splinter. Now we are waging a sharp two-line struggle to defend and develop a correct line. As a consequence, it is bringing about transformation in the comrades and strengthening the revolutionary pole. With the development of situation, the revolutionaries will reorganise and consolidate a revolutionary centre to lead the revolution forward and the revisionists will go after their way in the service of imperialism. Marxism and revisionism cannot go side by side for long in a communist party.

7 – What is the content of the definition of a 21st Century Socialism? What do both sides think about that?

Democracy of the 21st century is a new concept that our party had put forward in 2001. It is indeed a political methodology suggested to practice in the new democratic or socialist society to prevent counter-revolution. It focuses on a few points. First, it proposes to develop a political mechanism that ensures people's supervision and control in all the three fronts of party, government and army after the revolution has been completed. Second, multiparty competition should be guaranteed. Third, the main leadership should not involve in running day to day politics but should engage in the ideological and political works. Fourth, even the second and the third rank leaders should participate in the government not in recurrent but in rotational basis. Fifth, PLA should be small in strength but sufficient enough to train the masses and must not cut off its relation with them by stationing in the barracks etc. It suggests that it should be practiced in both new democratic or socialist society.

In the situation when revolution has not been completed and PLA has been dissolved the questions raised in the first, third, fourth and the fifth point do not have any sense at present. The remaining second point, the multiparty competition, has been extremely useful for Prachanda-Baburam clique, which is dressing in to practice parliamentary politics under the imperialist system. Therefore, the revisionist clique led by Prachanda and Baburam lauds it too much because it has been a useful tool for this clique to confuse the people and allure them towards multi-party system.

The revolutionary faction led by comrade Kiran has not comprehensively summed up this concept after two-line struggle broke out in our party. In general, we still think that this concept can help a lot to stop restoration of capitalism by the revisionists hiding in the communist party and the PLA can be saved from bureaucratization to defend revolution. But, this concept too divides into two. We can reach to a correct and comprehensive synthesis only after we accomplish new democratic revolution and put this concept into practice.

8 – When the CPN (Maoist) made the 12-point agreement and thereafter we supported almost every step of the CPN (Maoist) concerning the very useful manoeuvre of elections and the content of the agreement about how the arms would be kept and etc. We thought that it was riskful, but the bourgeoisie/imperialism would always present occasions to take up arms again, and it did so. Many times indeed. But the UCPN (M) insisted on keeping with the agreements, which were already broken by the other side (bourgeoisie) of the agreement, and which were not serving the revolution any more. What was the reason for this? Looking back from today, we are reconsidering our position concerning this. What would you say?

Adoption of democratic republic as a tactic from Chunwang meeting in 2005 and the 12-point agreement that followed with Nepalese parliamentarian parties in Delhi have had an important role to play in this whole process. In the meeting it was unanimously agreed that this very tactic would help create a strong revolutionary base in the cities, a necessary precondition for people's insurrection to seize central power. We came to the cities to consolidate our strength. But, whatever we had gained during tumultuous ten years of people's war has gone out of our hand now. Recently chairman Prachanda has revealed what he had agreed with Indian expansionist ruling classes in Delhi before reaching 12-point agreement. In an interview to an Indian newspaper, The Hindu, on 16th of April, 2012, he says, "The journey that began in Delhi with the 12-point agreement has now arrived at a conclusion." He gave this interview to The Hindu right after he ordered the Nepal army to stage a coup against the PLA in the cantonments. It reveals the fact that Prachanda-Baburam clique had surrendered before their expansionist masters to get the 12-point agreement signed with parliamentarian parties.

Prachanda-Baburam clique said that it was a tactic to accomplish revolution. But it has been proved now that it was a tri-partite grand strategy that the Indian ruling classes, Nepali parliamentarian parties and the Prachanda-Baburam clique had designed to bring the Nepalese revolution to an end. It shows Prachanda and Baburam not only lied before the Nepalese toiling masses and the world proletariat but also conspired against them.

9 – The CPI (Maoist) criticises you, beside many other points, with not considering the position of the bourgeoisie in the correct way. As far as we understand, they say that the UCPN (Maoist) has put too much emphasis on the fight against feudalism (liquidation of the monarchy etc) but it has not with the bourgeoisie in the correct way, which has caused a never-ending agreement with the bourgeoisie. What do you think on this?

This is very important and timely question. Personally I think comrades of the CPI (Maoist) have raised their finger at a correct point. Although, our ideological faction led by comrade Kiran has not yet reached to a comprehensive synthesis, this is one of the political issues upon which the ongoing two-line struggle has rooted.

The new democratic revolution has two aspects, anti-feudal and anti-imperialist. These two aspects are inseparably integrated. But, in our party there were some differences in understanding this relation from the very beginning. Baburam, unlike other leaders, used to emphasize more on the struggle against monarchy than on the struggle against external intervention. Masses used to understand this as a pro-Indian stance. In addition to this, he had a wrong position that there should be a sub-stage of democratic republic prior to new democratic revolution. When the Phuntiwang CC meeting held in 2004 decided to intensify people's war with a slogan of national independence, Baburam seriously opposed this position. Consequently, the two-line struggle sharpened and attacks and counter-attacks like pro-Indian and pro-King between Prachanda and Baburam followed. Party reached at the verge of split. But, not later than one year in 2005 Prachanda and Baburam both stood dramatically at one point in Chunwang with a new tactic of democratic republic. In fact it was a big political victory for Baburam over Prachanda. Baburam, in that very meeting, said that he was absorbed in Prachanda and for the whole of his life he would never challenge but help him as a second man.

Now, we have arrived at the present scenario. Ever since Chunwang meeting, Baburam's line is leading our party. Now it is explicitly clear that it was not Baburam who was absorbed in Prachanda in Chunwang meeting but it was Prachanda who was absorbed in Baburam. When both of them agreed to adopt democratic republic as a tactic in form and the strategy in essence it was obvious for this clique to put emphasis on the fight against monarchy and have a long term compromise with Indian expansionist ruling classes and their puppets in Nepal.

10 – Don't you think that opposition was too late to understand party's sliding towards wrong direction?

It is not that we did not smell any wrong with our party leadership. We believed him more than necessary. It was our weakness. We are not too late but we were late too. Still we think it is a secondary aspect. The principal aspect is that revolution has been rescued from a big danger of right liquidation. When we were certain that revolution was in danger we raised finger against both line and leadership. In the long course of sharp two-line struggle we have a team of tested leaders and cadres and our revolutionary line is developing. Ultimately, Marxism will prevail over revisionism and the New Democratic Revolution will triumph in Nepal.

Interviewed by MLCP, Turkey

Basanta

Politburo Member of the Central Committee

Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist)

LEFT PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS ON CASTE

SANTOSH RANA

The producers produce the wealth of society and it is expropriated by the exploiting classes. This is a general feature of all class societies. However, the mode of expropriation of surplus is not same in all class societies.

Caste is a specific feature of Indian society. Indian feudalism took the specific form od caste-feudalism in which the specific role assigned to a person in social production is determined by the Varna or Jati in which he or she is borne. It does not allow individual mobility. Only the higher Varnas had the access and right to education and thus had the monopoly over the production process while the lower Varnas, later divided into hierarchical strata had to bear the burden of labour. Even when there was no private ownership of land and other means of production, the upper Varnas could expropriate the surplus through their control of the state. After the system of private ownership was introduced, the upper castes monopolised the ownership of land and other means of production. Fpr millenniums, the contradiction between the upper caste landlords and the low caste peasantry remained the motive force in the development of society. The lower castes have, in course of time tried to evolve new religious practices to get rid of Brahminical domination. When Christianity and Islam arrived in India, their message of universal brotherhood and equality attracted the lower castes and many people were converted. However, the institution of caste was strong enough to continue even among the converted people. In India, someone can change his religion in a day, but it is not possible to change his caste in thousand years. Sometimes, whole castes or parts of them are found to move up or down the hierarchy but there is no scope for individual mobility.

Capitalist relations of production started developing in India even before it was colonized but that process was thwarted due colonial plunder. The British colonialists encouraged the formation of a class of from among the upper castes (mainly Hindus) some of whom were compradors of East India Company. Ruthless plunder by the British and the landlords turned India into a land of permanent famines. Mediaval India reached her excellence on the basis of a well planned combination of agriculture and handicraft. Colonial plunder destroyed both of them. Thus the home market was destroyed and with it, the opportunities for development of capitalism. The capitalist class that was born was bound to be dependent on imperialism not only for capital and technology but also for market. The big capitalists in to-day”s India are big enough even in global scale but have not overcome this dependent character.

I read Marx’s observation that “Caste is the greatest integument to India’s progress” in the sense that caste, in all its manifestations has to be abolished for all-round development of democracy. Some of the sanctions of caste like that against inter-dining and untouchability have lessened to some extent in the sixty years after independence. Industrialisation and migration of labour force has caused it. But in case of marriage, endogamy is still the rule, some exceptions being found among the middle classes. But as far as the participation of the people in social production is concerned, the low castes are still engaged in labour-intensive low-paid jobs. Due to the policy of reservation for SC and ST during the last sixty years a small section among the SCs and STs have got entry into middle class jobs but this has not changed the overall picture. Actually the backlog of two thousand years cannot be cleared by affirmative policy of sixty years and that too, taken half-heatedly. Moreover, other democratic steps like land-reform and universal education and health-care have no been taken.

How long to continue with the policy of reservation is a question frequently asked. The logical reply to this question is that reservation should continue as long as the lower castes, tribes and religious minorities are not adequately represented in all spheres of social activity. The reservation policy in India has been obstructed by the government and the judiciary. The verdict in Balaji case is the most glaring example. A powerful mass movement should be built to ensure that Scs, STs, OBCs and religious minorities get reservation in proportion to their share in the population.

There is a misconception prevalent among certain quarters that abolition of caste-based discrimination will automatically lead to a class-less society or a society without exploitation. This is a totally wrong view. Abolition or weakening of caste will encourage the growth of capitalist relations of production and the polarization of society into two great warring classes-the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. There is a complaint from Left circles that the upper sections among the Dalits and Adivasis have been more benefited from the policy of reservation. The observation is correct but why should a Marxist complain about it ? If the Adivasis are polarized into Adivasi bourgeoisie and Adivasi proletariat. A Marxist should accept it as the maturing of condition for a socialist revolution.

After the Mandal Commission was formed in 1978,the Commission went to different states and sought their opinion. The CPI(M)-led government in West Bengal formed a one-man committee and within a month, it gave its report that “ there are no backward classes in West Bengal”. This reflects a total lack of understanding of Indian society on behalf of the CPI(M) and even after their setback in West Bengal, there is little evidence that they have rectified their mistakes. The Marxist-Leninist groups, in general, have a better understanding of the situation and have mobilized the Dalits and Adivasis against caste-oppression and state-terror. But, they too, have failed to take up the issues of reservation. The need of the hour is that the M-L forces should join hands to build a country-wide movement with the demand of proportionate reservation for SCs,STs, OBCs and minorities and raise their voice against the 50% ceiling imposed by the Supreme Court. To start with, they may unitedly raise their voice for implementation of recommendations of Ranganath Mishra Commission recommendations.

At the end, it is necessary to reiterate that the struggle for reservation is only a part of the general struggles and other important issues like struggles for land reform and against eviction, for remunerative prices of agricultural produce and against anti-labour policies of the government. Actually, these struggles are complementary to each other and they should be combined with the aim of building a new democratic India.

THE SOCIALIST REVOLUTION AND THE RIGHT OF NATIONS TO SELF-DETERMINATION

V.I. Lenin

1. IMPERIALISM, SOCIALISM, AND THE LIBERATION OF OPPRESSED NATIONS

Imperialism is the highest stage of development of capitalism. Capital in the advanced countries has outgrown the boundaries of national states. It has established monopoly in place of competition, thus creating all the objective prerequisites for the achievement of socialism. Hence, in Western Europe and in the United States of America, the revolutionary struggle of the proletariat for the overthrow of the capitalist governments, for the expropriation of the bourgeoisie, is on the order of the day. Imperialism is forcing the masses into this struggle by sharpening class antagonisms to an immense degree, by worsening the conditions of the masses both economically – trusts and high cost of living, and politically – growth of militarism, frequent wars, increase of reaction, strengthening and extension of national oppression and colonial plunder. Victorious socialism must achieve complete democracy and, consequently, not only bring about the complete equality of nations, but also give effect to the right of oppressed nations to self-determination, i.e., the right to free political secession. Socialist Parties which fail to prove by all their activities now, as well as during the revolution and after its victory, that they will free the enslaved nations and establish relations with them on the basis of a free union – and a free union is a lying phrase without right to secession – such parties would be committing treachery to socialism.

Of course, democracy is also a form of state which must disappear when the state disappears, but this will take place only in the process of transition from completely victorious and consolidated socialism to complete communism.

2. THE SOCIALIST REVOLUTION AND THE STRUGGLE FOR DEMOCRACY

The socialist revolution is not one single act, not one single battle on a single front; but a whole epoch of intensified class conflicts, a long series of battles on all fronts, i.e., battles around all the problems of economics and politics, which can culminate only in the expropriation of the bourgeoisie. It would be a fundamental mistake to suppose that the struggle for democracy can divert the proletariat from the socialist revolution, or obscure, or overshadow it, etc. On the contrary, just as socialism cannot be victorious unless it introduces complete democracy, so the proletariat will be unable to prepare for victory over the bourgeoisie unless it wages a many-sided, consistent and revolutionary struggle for democracy.

It would be no less mistaken to delete any of the points of the democratic programme, for example, the point of self-determination of nations, on the ground that it is “infeasible,” or that it is “illusory” under imperialism. The assertion that the right of nations to self-determination cannot be achieved within the framework of capitalism may be understood either in its absolute, economic sense, or in the conventional, political sense.

In the first case, the assertion is fundamentally wrong in theory. First, in this sense, it is impossible to achieve such things as labour money, or the abolition of crises, etc., under capitalism. But it is entirely incorrect to argue that the self-determination of nations is likewise infeasible. Secondly, even the one example of the secession of Norway from Sweden in 1905 is sufficient to refute the argument that it is “infeasible” in this sense. Thirdly, it would be ridiculous to deny that, with a slight change in political and strategical relationships, for example, between Germany and England, the formation of new states, Polish, Indian, etc, would be quite “feasible” very soon. Fourthly, finance capital, in its striving towards expansion, will “freely” buy and bribe the freest, most democratic and republican government and the elected officials of any country, however “independent” it may be. The domination of finance capital, as of capital in general, cannot be abolished by any kind of reforms in the realm of political democracy, and self-determination belongs wholly and exclusively to this realm. The domination of finance capital, however, does not in the least destroy the significance of political democracy as the freer, wider and more distinct form of class oppression and class struggle. Hence, all arguments about the “impossibility of achieving” economically one of the demands of political democracy under capitalism reduce themselves to a theoretically incorrect definition of the general and fundamental relations of capitalism and of political democracy in general.

In the second case, this assertion is incomplete and inaccurate, for not only the right of nations to self-determination, but all the fundamental demands of political democracy are “possible of achievement” under imperialism, only in an incomplete, in a mutilated form and as a rare exception (for example, the secession of Norway from Sweden in 1905). The demand for the immediate liberation of the colonies, as advanced by all revolutionary Social-Democrats, is also “impossible of achievement” under capitalism without a series of revolutions. This does not imply, however, that Social Democracy must refrain from conducting an immediate and most determined struggle for all these demands – to refrain would merely be to the advantage of the bourgeoisie and reaction. On the contrary, it implies that it is necessary to formulate and put forward all these demands, not in a reformist, but in a revolutionary way; not by keeping within the framework of bourgeois legality, but by breaking through it; not by confining oneself to parliamentary speeches and verbal protests, but by drawing the masses into real action, by widening and fomenting the struggle for every kind of fundamental, democratic demand, right up to and including the direct onslaught of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie, i.e., to the socialist revolution, which will expropriate the bourgeoisie. The socialist revolution may break out not only in consequence of a great strike, a street demonstration, a hunger riot, a mutiny in the forces, or a colonial rebellion, but also in consequence of any political crisis, like the Dreyfus affair,1 the Zabern incident,2 or in connection with a referendum on the secession of an oppressed nation, etc.

The intensification of national oppression under imperialism makes it necessary for Social-Democracy not to renounce what the bourgeoisie describes as the “utopian” struggle for the freedom of nations to secede, but, on the contrary, to take more advantage than ever before of conflicts arising also on this ground for the purpose of rousing mass action and revolutionary attacks upon the bourgeoisie.

RESOLUTION ADOPTED AT THE CONVENTION ON IMPLEMENTATION OF RANGANATH MISHRA COMMISSION IN KOLKATA ON 9 APRIL 2012

The religious minorities in India are victims of deprivation, discrimination and suppression. If democracy is to be meaningful, all communities must get equal opportunities in all spheres of life and the discrimination against the minorities must be abolished. The Sachar Committee had brought out an objective picture about the condition of the Muslims in the country. The Ranganath Mishra Commission has dealt with the problem of all minorities. It should be noted that the Ranganath Mishra Commission has not treated only the Muslims, Christians and Buddhists as minorities but also has treated the Hindus as minorities in the states of Jammu and Kashmir, Nagaland, Mizoram and Lakhadiv.The Commission has recommended several measures for upliftment of minorities.

The Commission submitted its report before the Central Government in 2007. But it is unfortunate that neither the Central Government nor any state government has taken any step towards implementation of recommendations of the Commission. This convention is putting forward the demand to implement the recommendations of the Ranganath Mishra Commission .It is also resolving to build a state-wide movement with the above demands and co-ordinate this movement with similar movements in other states.

The recommendations of the Ranganath Mishra Commission are manyfold. It is natural that its implementation will be a long-drawn process even if the government has the best of intentions. Keeping this in mind, this convention is putting forward the following immediate demands. These demands will also test the intentions of the government.

1. Reserve 15 % of jobs and seats in educational institutions under central government ( 10 % for Muslims and 5 % for other minorities.)

2. In the states, reserve jobs and seats according to the share of the minorities in the respective states. In West Bengal,reserve 30 % of jobs and seats for the minorities (25 % for the Muslims and 5 % for other minorities)

3. Those communities among minorities whose Hindu counterparts have been treated as SC or ST should also be treated as SC or ST. For example, the Rajbanshis are treated as SCs in West Bengal. But those Rajbanshis who have been converted are not treated as SCs. They,too, should be treated as SCs. There are many such examples in the country.

4. All minorities, except those who will be classified as SC or ST should be treated as OBCs. While giving them reservation, the economically weaker sections among them should get the preference. But if the quota of reservation is not fulfilled by candidates from lower income groups, then those reserved seats should be opened to minorities of higher income groups..And, under no circumstances, should they be opened to majority community.

In order to build a state-wide movement with the above demands, this convention is appointing a Preparatory Committee in the name of SANJUKTA SANKHYALAGHU SANRAKHAN MANCHA. The names of the members of the committee are given below.

This convention is empowering the Preparatory Committee to make arrangements for a demonstration in Kolkata on 7th May 2012. The Preparatory Committee will organize campaigns in the districts, The expenses of the movement will be borne through collections from friends and well-wishers.

Members of the Committee
Miratun Nahar
Ayesha Khatun
Santosh Rana
Vaskar Nandy
Dilruba Sarkar
Tezarat Hossain
Manisha Banerjee
Khidir Bux
Md Tajmul Haque Dulal
Idris Ahmed
Akram Hossain
Abul Hossain
Taufiq Alam
Munshi Abul Kashem
Debashis Chowdhury
Fireze Hossain
Saleha Begum
Abdus Sukkur
Anwar Hossain
Samudra Dutta

Hurtling towards Disaster: Climate Change at Durban

Dear all,

Joshi-Adhikari Institute of Social Studies is organising a talk on "Hurtling towards Disaster: Climate Change at Durban" on 2nd March 2012 at 5 pm.

Noted Journalist and activist Praful Bidwai will deliver the talk and Dr. Rohan D'Souza from Centre for Science Policy, JNU will be the main discussant. You are invited to attend the talk at Joshi-Adhikari Institute, 4, Windsor Place, (near Hotel Shangri La, Ashok Road), New Delhi.

Dr. Ajay Patnaik

Director, JAISS

Contact Persons: Dr. Subodh Malakar (9868898103), Dr. Bishwanath Thakur (9868087981), Vineet Tiwari (9818175205)

Criminal, Inhumane, Warmongering, and Illegal Sanctions on Iran

Statement by the Party of Labour of Iran (Toufan) on The Criminal, Inhumane, Warmongering, and Illegal Sanctions on Iran

On Monday January 23, 2012, the foreign ministers of the imperialist European Union countries decided in Brussels to extend the economic sanctions on Iran by putting sanctions on Central Bank of Iran and by freezing the assets of the Iranian people in Europe. In order to inflict a heavy damage on the economy of Iran, they decided to place an embargo on the export of the Iranian oil to Europe.

To impose economic blockades on and to cause hunger in Iran are acts that are internationally illegal and are crimes against humanity.  Imperialists want to impose their sinister, plundering, and domineering intentions on Iran and on their “axis of evils” by creating another Iraq and a second Gaza Strip. By punishing Iran, the imperialist countries want to teach a lesson to Non-Allied countries and to those who do not submit to their dictates.

In the past, the imperialists try to justify their crimes by passing illegal resolutions in the UN Security Council. But they imposed sanctions against Iran today without any UN authorization.  The sanctions are plots by a gang of international plunderer against a UN-member state and are against the UN Charter.  The US and EU sanctions against Iran lack any legal basis on the international arena. The US imposes on countries of the world the decisions made in the US Congress and pretends that the decisions are made by the international community. The illegal and bullying actions against Iran show the hegemonic and despotic nature of the US imperialism.

While the foreign minister of Russia, Sergei Lawrow, stated that the “unilateral actions are useless”, he added that there was no reason to make any decision in addition to collective decision by the UN Security Council. The deputy foreign minister of the racist government of Israel, Danny Ajalon, claimed in a press interview that “These sanctions have reduced the threat of war”.  Coming out of the meeting that made warmongering and threatening decisions on Iran, Ms. Catherine Ashton who is in charge of the EU international relations and the foreign minister of Sweden Mr. Carl Bidlt claimed that the basis of their work was to appeal to diplomacy and negotiation!

The imperialist powers clearly lie when they claim that they recognize the legal and indisputable right of Iran to enrich uranium. The fact is that they have monopoly in producing nuclear energy.  The recognition of Iran’s right to produce nuclear energy is to break the imperialist monopoly.  In a deceptive psychological war, the major powers warn the world about Iran’s nuclear bomb, but they have not disclosed any document to show the existence of this bomb. German foreign minister Guido Weserwelle shamelessly said that “We cannot accept Iran developing nuclear weapons” and that “This is not a security problem for region only but it will disrupt the world security”.  Wow! The non-existence Iranian nuclear bomb disrupts the security of the entire globe but many hundred known or secret warheads in the hands of American, British, French, and Israeli warmongers are nor dangerous for the world security! Apparently, there are good and bad atomic bombs! The arguments given by the representatives of the imperialist powers are fierce, threatening, and sickening.

The history of economic sanctions shows that the ordinary people of the countries on which the sanction were imposed suffered the most by the sanctions. In Iran, the inflation is rapidly rising, shortage of medicine and medical equipments is already felt, and particularly the patients with heart problems are under attack because the companies making the equipments are under the US sanctions and cannot export their products to Iran. This is not a concern for the imperialist powers. It is not important to the US President Obama and his Iranian allies if millions of people are slaughtered in the war. Also, the sanctions on Iran give an excuse to the authority of the Islamic Republic to increase the suppression of the anti-imperialist and democratic forces in Iran.

The imperialist powers think that if their sanctions cause widespread hunger in Iran, then the people will rise up and install a Western puppet regime. This is a miscalculation because the history of the Iran shows that Iranian people have always rejected submission to any forces allied to foreign imperialist powers. The Iranian masses have no feeling except disgust and hate towards sellout, spies, and for those who carry out terrorist operations in Iran.

The fact is that the imperialists’ actions against Iran are not for eliminating the Iranian nuclear bomb. Such a bomb does exist. Iran holds a key geo-political position in the Middle East region and is the center of entangled world contradictions. To control Iran is to control an entire strategic region with enormous energy resources that the US desire to plunder for decades. Strait of Hormuz is a valve for export of oil to four corners of the globe. The US imperialists wish to have control over this oil valve. The presence of the US forces in the region is a danger for the world security and is a threat particularly to the security of the Middle East. The propaganda about Iranian atomic bomb, the bomb that does not exist, is justification for aggression on Iran and for domination of the region, and Islamic Republic’s capitulation to imperialists’ demands will not change the imperialists’ nature of following their domineering goals.

The Party of Labour of Iran (Toufan) believes that the economic sanctions on Iran act against the masses and are inhumane. We take the imperialists, particularly the US imperialists, responsible for the suffering and misery these sanctions will cause. The sanctions on Iran are illegal, warmongering, and unjustifiable.  Our Party strongly condemns the imperialist sanctions, embargoes, and threats against the Iranian masses.  We believe that every progressive, human-loving, and patriotic Iranian must take stand against the sanctions and against the imperialist-Zionist warmongering threats, and must draw a sharp line to separate enemies from the people.

The regime of the Islamic Republic of Iran is a reactionary and Mafia-style capitalist regime. The regime of Iran has lost all its legitimacy, and the overwhelming majority of the Iranian masses are disgusted by the regime. The task of overthrowing this criminal regime is on the shoulders of the Iranian masses. The regime change by the imperialist invading forces will be for the purpose of colonizing the country and looting the resources of the nation. The imperialist powers have never supported and will never support the freedom-loving and democratic forces anywhere in the world. Their talks about freedom and human rights are nothing but smokescreens for their criminal actions, and Iraq, Libya, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan … are testimonies to this. Hypocrisy is written on their foreheads.

The Party of Labour of Iran (Toufan)

January 23, 2012.

Present International and National Situation and Our Tasks

Present International and National Situation and Our Tasks  

• Deficit reduction has become the mantra for big finance and the super monopolies since they were bailed out after 2008 by huge state funds, causing the huge deficits in the first place. This has resulted in drastic and inhuman cuts in welfare and large-scale and rising unemployment. Health, education, food availability, pensions and other welfare measures have been badly affected. In plain terms it means that the burden of the crisis caused immediately by deregulated finance has been pushed on to the shoulders of the working and middle classes. This story repeats itself all over the US, Japan and Europe, the core area of world capitalism. Nowhere in this area will finance capital allow the reinstatement of regulations that were in place before the triumphal march of finance capital. The sharp decline in the rate of profit in manufacturing forces capitalism to financialise and more unbridled speculation will hasten it to its doom sooner than later.
• Core capitalist countries and their multinational monopolies still control world production by producing very high-tech items and designs in their own countries. The rest of production is contracted out to peripheral countries according to the availability of cheap unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled labour. Eastern Europe and the leading ASEAN countries have the skilled and semi-skilled labour to produce the intermediate products that are then sent mainly to China to become finished products through largely cheap and unskilled labour.
• Although the lion’s share of the profits from such a process goes into the coffers of the multinationals, the monopolies have also to share a part of the profits with powerful peripheral (national-comprador) monopolies. This has given rise to strong middle income countries such as China, India, Brazil, South Africa, etc. These countries have more or less small home markets and depend on cheap labour to export raw materials, services, and manufactured goods. The shrinkage of markets due to the crisis has affected these countries in accordance with how much they have opened up to foreign capital and its commands. The Chinese and the Indian state still retain some restrictions on foreign capital and have saved themselves to a certain extent from the full impact of the crisis. But their GDP growth and, especially, their growth in manufactures have slowed down.
• In India, the ruling classes appear divided over what is termed “the next generation of reforms”. The dream team of the Bretton Woods twins (i.e. US imperialism) headed by Manmohan Singh and its cohorts consisting of Pawar and others are trying to press full steam ahead towards deregulating the entry and exit conditions of imperialist capital, changing the labour laws for such entry, curtailing the social wage and privatisation. On the other hand, there are forces that would appear against such moves or at least to be more cautious about them. This division is also reflected to some extent in foreign policy initiatives such as on Iran, China, Pakistan, Afghanistan, the Doha round, etc.
• The world economic crisis and the shifting of its burden onto the working people throughout the world have provoked widespread resistance struggles. In countries such as the US, Spain, Greece, Italy and France, these struggles have achieved a qualitatively new dimension by bringing forward capitalism as the enemy, a position that is unprecedented for the last half century or so. The OWS in the US is in the forefront of this development, but the Greek and Spanish movements are not very far behind. The working classes in these countries are yet to fully mobilise behind this development, but the struggles in Wisconsin, Oakland and New York promise greater things to come. But as of now, the anti-capitalist struggles are the arena for ideological struggle on what is to be done and how. The failures of the actually existing socialisms of the last century are still roadblocks on the way to clear understandings. Without a thorough overhaul of our ideas on socialism, the working class movement cannot move forward towards world-wide victory.
• In India, the contradictory tendencies within the ruling classes have not proceeded to the extent of any splits or even the full identification of specific forces in contention. But it is clear that in the political arena, these tendencies and the rise and consolidation of various kinds of regional forces have weakened the ruling class parties, mainly the two big ones, considerably. This has created grave instability and opened up spaces for the workers and the poor and lower middle classes to consolidate the innumerable ongoing struggles against, in essence, capitalism and imperialism.
• With its limited strength, the party and other unofficial left parties and formations, must abjure the kind of left adventurism practiced by the CPI (Maoist) and lead mass struggles on class and identity issues while uniting as and when possible with all forces, including regional forces and parties, NGOs and others. Imperialism must be the focus of our struggles and all forces which oppose particular imperialist policies without being against all such policies in any thoroughgoing manner should also be united with on issue to issue considerations. Only such a policy can unleash the mass struggle on a national scale.
• All forces to the left of the official left parties must build up close unity leading to possible mergers. But such mergers are still quite rare and unstable. While our unions and unions in which we work have begun to federate with the NTUI, we have discovered that this federation is a heterogeneous body combining industrial workers, rural and informal workers. Large non-party left forces are active in it, although some undesirable NGO-type elements are also there. Mutual learning among these powerful working class forces and struggling steadfastly against alien elements could deliver both a strong working class movement and a firm left unity.