Philippines Peace Talks: "Reality Check"

By CAROL PAGADUAN-ARAULLO
Streetwise | BusinessWorld

The resumption of formal peace negotiations between the Philippine government (GPH) and the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP) in Oslo from Feb. 15-21 almost ended in a cliffhanger with the two sides unable to agree on certain key points in the Joint Statement well over the original 3 p.m. timetable for the closing ceremonies. The Joint Statement was finalized at 7 p.m. after more hard bargaining, with the two panels both keenly aware of the ominous implications of not coming up with one at the same time holding fast to what each side deemed to be non-negotiable positions.

It is no mean feat what with clear-cut agreements on steps to bring the negotiations forward. At the same time any impression created in the media by government press releases that the 18-month timetable for arriving at a final peace settlement is a shoo-in and that the NDFP has softened up and is willing to sign a peace accord short of ensuring that basic reforms are put into place must be corrected with a reality check.

The closing statements of the two negotiating panel heads indicate the difficulties that lie ahead as the negotiations hunker down to the implementation of the Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law (CARHRIHL), the substantive points on socio-economic reforms, and preparing the ground for talks on political and constitutional reforms while effecting the protection of JASIG for negotiators, their staff, consultants as well as other resource persons.

It is not just mistrust but the wide chasm that has to be bridged in perspectives, understanding of the problems, and preferred modes of resolution that will make arriving at agreements more difficult than the GPH panel seems to recognize and broadcast to the public.

As we see it, the 18-month timetable can only be achieved if the Aquino administration musters its political will to forge agreements that will resolve the roots of the armed conflict, including addressing the problem of landlessness, industrialization, US/foreign domination and control of the economy, etc.

In essence, these are agreements that will benefit the people as against the vested interests of those who are already in power and benefit the most from the iniquitous social and economic system.

Wikileaks 112456: Indian officials take tougher stand on Nepal Maoists

112456 6/18/2007 13:21 07KATHMANDU1197 Embassy Kathmandu SECRET//NOFORN 07KATHMANDU1112|07KATHMANDU1197 "VZCZCXRO8272OO RUEHCIDE RUEHKT #1197/01 1691321ZNY SSSSS ZZHO 181321Z JUN 07FM AMEMBASSY KATHMANDUTO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 6311INFO RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING PRIORITY 5863RUEHLM/AMEMBASSY COLOMBO PRIORITY 6169RUEHKA/AMEMBASSY DHAKA PRIORITY 1399RUEHIL/AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD PRIORITY 4194RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON PRIORITY 5468RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI PRIORITY 1610RUEHCI/AMCONSUL KOLKATA PRIORITY 3602RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC PRIORITYRUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK PRIORITY 2784RHEFDIA/DIA WASHDC PRIORITYRHMFISS/CDR USPACOM HONOLULU HI PRIORITYRUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC PRIORITYRHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC PRIORITY" "S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 02 KATHMANDU 001197

SIPDIS

NOFORN SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/18/2017 TAGS: PREL, PGOV, PTER, KDEM, MARR, IN, NP SUBJECT: NEPAL: INDIAN OFFICIALS TAKE TOUGHER STAND ON MAOISTS

REF: KATHMANDU 1112


Classified By: Ambassador James F. Moriarty. Reasons 1.4 (b/d).


Summary
-------

1. (C) On June 15, Indian Ambassador Shiv Shankar Mukherjee confirmed to the Ambassador that the Government of India had taken a tougher line on Maoist abuses. Mukherjee's recent visit to New Delhi had coincided with the visit of Communist Party of Nepal - United Marxist Leninist General Secretary Madhav Kumar Nepal. According to Mukherjee, who sat in on a June 6 meeting between Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee and MK Nepal, the Foreign Minister had expressed concern that the law and order situation in Nepal continued to deteriorate and Maoist abuses had gone unpunished. Moreover, Foreign Minister Mukherjee had been categorical in his discussion with MK Nepal that the Maoists should not be integrated into the Nepal Army. Ambassador Mukherjee asserted that the GOI would not tolerate continued attempts by the Maoist splinter Janatantrik Terai Mukti Morcha (""People's Terai Liberation Front"") (JTMM) to derail the Constituent Assembly election. He agreed that the Maoists had not showed a true commitment to joining the political mainstream.

Wikileaks 79370: Crunch time in Nepal?

79370 9/22/2006 11:26 06KATHMANDU2587 Embassy Kathmandu SECRET//NOFORN "VZCZCXYZ0064OO RUEHWEBDE RUEHKT #2587/01 2651126ZNY SSSSS ZZHO 221126Z SEP 06FM AMEMBASSY KATHMANDUTO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 3260INFO RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING IMMEDIATE 4805RUEHLM/AMEMBASSY COLOMBO IMMEDIATE 5034RUEHCP/AMEMBASSY COPENHAGEN IMMEDIATE 0329RUEHKA/AMEMBASSY DHAKA IMMEDIATE 0184RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON IMMEDIATE 4428RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI IMMEDIATE 0264RUEHNY/AMEMBASSY OSLO IMMEDIATE 0245RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO IMMEDIATE 0988RHHMUNA/CDR USPACOM HONOLULU HI IMMEDIATERHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC IMMEDIATERUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC IMMEDIATERHEFDIA/DIA WASHDC IMMEDIATERUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC IMMEDIATERUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK IMMEDIATE 1963" "S E C R E T KATHMANDU 002587

SIPDIS

NOFORN SIPDIS

DEPT FOR S, P, AND SCA FROM THE AMBASSADOR

E.O. 12958: DECL: 09/22/2016 TAGS: PGOV, PREL, PTER, IN, NP SUBJECT: CRUNCH TIME IN NEPAL?

Classified By: Ambassador James F. Moriarty, reasons 1.4 (b/d).

1. (S/NF) It looks like we're getting to crunch time here in Nepal. The Maoists are still stringing along talks with the GON, hoping that the GON will follow up on its past four months of unilateral concessions by caving in and allowing an armed Maoist movement into an interim government. The Prime Minister assures me that he has no intention of doing that. If he does not, then the Maoists appear intent on organizing during the month of October massive public demonstrations designed to pressure the GON into putting the Maoists on the path to power. If the government still refuses to cave, the Maoists, according to a number of pretty good sources, seem ready to move in November to a campaign of urban violence, using the demonstrations as cover. Again, the goal of the violence would be to intimidate the government into handing over the keys to power.

Wikileaks 5730: US-Indian cooperation and military assistance to Nepal

5730 2/14/2003 5:16 03KATHMANDU 280 Embassy Kathmandu SECRET//NOFORN 02 NEWDELHI6938|03 NEWDELHI 267|03NEWDELHI641 "This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available." "S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 04 KATHMANDU 000280 

SIPDIS

NOFORN

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/13/2013 TAGS: PGOV, PREL, PTER, IN, NP, India Relations SUBJECT: US-INDIAN COOPERATION AND MILITARY ASSISTANCE TO NEPAL

REF: A. A. 02 NEW DELHI 6938 B. B. NEW DELHI 267 C. C. NEW DELHI 641


Classified By: DEPUTY CHIEF OF MISSION ROBERT K. BOGGS. REASONS: 1.5 (B AND D)

1. (C) Summary: US security assistance to Nepal has brought the ancillary advantage to the US of providing a new arena for fruitful US-Indian dialogue and collaboration. Top Indian diplomats in Kathmandu clearly appreciate not only US support for common US-Indian security objectives in Nepal, but also the unprecedented frequency and candor of our bilateral discussions of Nepal-related issues. Indian military intelligence officers in Kathmandu, however, are openly and persistently uncomfortable with US sales of lethal equipment -- and M16s in particular -- to the Royal Nepal Army. The following describes a recent discussion with Indian civilian and military officers that provides some insights into varied Indian attitudes toward US security policy here. Embassy Kathmandu remains convinced that US and UK arms sales to Nepal -- although modest in quantity and basic in technology -- have played a disproportionately influential role in persuading Maoist leaders to agree to a cease-fire and negotiations with the Government of Nepal (GON).  We believe our security assistance policy remains valid, and that it offers a continuing opportunity to reinforce growing US-Indian mil-mil cooperation and engender greater bilateral confidence. Positive Indian involvement clearly is key to any longer-term resolution of Nepal's political and security problems, so it is important that US diplomacy with India accelerate along with our security assistance to this beleaguered kingdom. End summary.

The Hindu: In Nepal, ‘India’s Frankenstein’s monster’

[Reposted from The Hindu.]

 

‘We need to to keep the Indians in lock step with us'

“New Delhi seems oblivious to how close the Maoists are getting to victory here. That makes sense: New Delhi godfathered the working relationship between the Maoists and the Parties and doesn't want to acknowledge that it might have created a Frankenstein's monster. Moreover, India's Marxist party (a key supporter of the governing coalition) has proclaimed that everything here is going just fine. In that context, I hope that a discussion on Nepal will feature prominently in future conversations with senior Indian leaders.”
That was James F. Moriarty, U.S. Ambassador to Nepal, writing home to the State Department, in his cable headlined “Crunch time in Nepal?,” dated September 22, 2006 (79370: secret/ noforn).

“We need to do more to keep the Indians in lock step with us,” the cable goes on. “I coordinate closely with my Indian counterpart here and in private he pushes the exact same message I do: that the police need to enforce law and order and that the GoN [Government of Nepal] should not let armed Maoists into an interim government.”

“I was more than a little annoyed to find out, however, that the Indian Embassy had complained to the PM's office about our training activities with the Nepal Army….” This last one was “the incident” which “underscored the fact that, while worried about current trends, New Delhi seems “oblivious to how close the Maoists are getting to victory here.”

“The next few months will go a long way to determining whether the Maoists have any intention of coming in out of the cold, or whether their only goal is absolute power. Up until now, all signs point to the latter. I continue to fear that a Maoist assumption of power through force would lead to a humanitarian disaster in Nepal. Just as important, a Maoist victory would energize leftist insurgencies and threaten stability in the region. It thus behoves us to continue to do everything possible to block such an outcome.”

Cables from the U.S. Embassy in Kathmandu from 2003 onwards showed a nuanced, sometimes changing, assessment of the role of India and its diplomats in Nepal. The shifts were linked to unfolding events in Nepal, to the personal readings of the cables' different authors, and to India's own changing role.

The Hindu Newspaper: World Bank rep and Nepal Maoist leader as ‘lunch pals'

[From The Hindu newspaper, a revealing look at American diplomacy regarding Nepal as seen through the Wikileaks cables.]

“The local World Bank rep is so fed up with the corruption in the system that he has become a frequent lunch pal of the Maoist supremo.” That was James F. Moriarty, Ambassador to Nepal, writing home in frustration on September 22, 2006.

The cable, running to several pages, was headlined “Crunch time in Nepal?” (79370: secret/noforn). While showing annoyance at the diplomacy and assessments of other western nations, and India and China, he gives Washington his own take on the situation. On the Maoists' drive to power in Kathmandu, he wrote: “The good news is that the Maoists are doing much of this through bluff. They have relatively little popular support, and they have nowhere near the military capability to take on the government's security services in an open fight.”

He did add that “the bad news is that the bluff may work,” but stressed that the Maoists had “relatively little popular support.” Less than 20 months later, the Maoists found quite some popular support in the April 2008 polls for a new Constituent Assembly. They won half the seats chosen in the ‘first-past-the-post' system and 30 per cent of the votes for seats under the proportional representation system. In all, they took 220 of the 575 elected seats, becoming the No. 1 political party. The nearest rival, the Nepali Congress, got 110, or half the number the Maoists did. Four months later, Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal, known also as Prachanda, was the Prime Minister of Nepal.

In September 2006, however, Mr. Moriarty was convinced it could be otherwise. It was the other nations, he complained, that were pushing in the wrong directions. “The diplomacy here is getting complicated. The Europeans are all over the map with respect to recent developments. The Danes and Norwegians (who have some clout here because of their aid programs) are convinced that lasting peace is just about ready to break out and push the GoN [Government of Nepal] to be as accommodating as possible. The Brits, in contrast, seem convinced that the Maoists will soon be coming into power and are trying to convince themselves that that might not be so bad. The Chinese seem primarily interested in pushing Tibet issues with the weak, frequently ineffectual GoN. The local World Bank rep is so fed up with the corruption in the system that he has become a frequent lunch pal of the Maoist supremo. I'm trying to push back here on some of this, but it would help if the Department could have a serious, high-level discussion with the Brits on Nepal. We might also want to look at a demarche to the Europeans and others (reminding them that the Maoists are not just agrarian reformers and seem to want power rather than peace).” As it turned out, “The Brits” had made the better call.

Among the things Mr. Moriarty believed needed to be done was “brow-beating.” As he put it: “Brow-beating: Ultimately, decisions made by Nepalis will determine whether this country goes down the path toward becoming a People's Republic over the next couple of months. That said, we need to increase the possibility that the leaders here will make the right decisions. I've been meeting regularly with the Prime Minister, urging him (so far unsuccessfully) to use the police to enforce law and order and bucking him up to stick to his bottom line of not letting gun-toting Maoists into the government (with greater success so far).”

Second Toronto Nepali Film Festival

www.tnff.ca

Saturday March 12, 2011
Innis Town Hall, U of T, 2 Sussex Ave. (at St. George St.)

The one-day film festival will feature nine extraordinary films highlighting contemporary narratives of Nepal. The program includes documentary, fiction, shorts and experimental films from Canada, Nepal, Switzerland and the UK.  There will also be a dance performance and a food stall selling delicious Nepali cuisine. All films are in English or with subtitles.

Screening Schedule:

Session A: $ 10

 

11:30 – 12:30 The Last Race

In Three Years

 

12:40 – 1:35 Vhando

The Rat Hunters

 

1:35 – 2:05 Q&A w/ Filmmaker Pradeep Kumar Sharma

 

2:15 – 3:40 In Search of the Riyal

 

3:40 – 4:00 Q&A w/ Filmmaker Kesang Tseten

 

 

Session B: $20

 

4:45 – 5:43 Pooja

 

5:55 – 6:47 The Struggle Within

Forgive! Forget Not!

 

7:00 – 8:35 Sherpas: The True Heroes of Mount Everest

 

8:35 – 9:00 Q & A w/ Filmmaker Hari Thapa

 

9:30 - 10:15 Dance Performance: Deepali Lindblom and Swechchha Pokharel

Full Day Pass: $25

 

TNFF Gold Pass: $50

(Includes both sessions, T-shirt, food and reserved seating)

Public Event in Toronto on Nepal

Wednesday, March 2nd, 2011
 
Time: 7-9 pm
 
Where: OISE (252 Bloor Street West), Room 5280, Toronto

In 1996 the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) began its people’s war against the existing tyrannical monarchist regime with the support of the majority of people in Nepal. In 2005 as part of a seven-point agreement with other opposition parties the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) helped launch a people’s revolt in Kathmandu which led to the ouster of the monarchy and declared a ceasefire. Subsequently the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) entered the parliamentary process to write a constitution that fulfills the political, economic and social aspirations of the peoples of Nepal. This panel seeks to examine the political developments that have taken place in Nepal in the last 6 years and to discuss the on-going revolution in Nepal.

Speakers:
Wendy Glauser and Dhruv Jain: In May-June 2010, Wendy, a free-lance journalist, and Dhruv, a doctoral student at York University, visited Nepal and spoke to a variety of Party activists, officials and ordinary people to study the political situation and the quality of livelihood of ordinary people in the years since the ceasefire. They were also able to spend three weeks in former Maoist strongholds in the districts of Kalikot and Rolpa.

Noaman: In December 2010 Noaman, a doctoral student at the University of Toronto, reported on the 18th National Conference of the All-Nepal National Independent Students Union (Revolutionary) in Kathmandu, Nepal for the Basics Community Newsletter.

Sponsors: PRAC-Toronto, OPIRG-Toronto, Canada South Asia Solidarity Association, ILPS - Canada

Toronto community group condemns life-sentence for Dr. Binayak Sen

Group also condemns state atrocities and criticizes filing of false charges against Dr. Ilina Sen

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE  -  Free Binayak Sen Campaign, Toronto Chapter

There has been world-wide condemnation of the sentence of life-imprisonment for sedition handed out to noted human-rights activist and physician Dr. Binayak Sen, along with two other accused, on Dec 24th, 2010, in the town of Raipur in central India. He was accused of collaborating with “anti-state forces”.

Dr. Jonathan Fine, founder of Physicians for Human Rights in Cambridge (MA), was in the court premises in India during the verdict. “I could not help crying when speaking with Binayak’s wife before and after the verdict was declared,” he said. According to Nobel Laureate economist Amartya Sen, “…the whole thing seems a ridiculous use of the laws of democratic India”.

Dr. Sen was awarded the 2008 Jonathan Mann Award for Global Health and Human Rights. Internationally celebrated for his work on behalf of the poorest and for his defense of human rights, Dr. Sen has been persecuted by the central Indian state of Chhattisgarh for speaking out against the violence perpetrated by the security forces and by the state-backed militia, Salwa Judum.

In the latest attack on Dr Sen and his family, on January 25, 2011, Dr. Ilina Sen, the wife of Dr. Binayak Sen, and a well-known Professor of Women’s Studies at Mahatma Gandhi International Hindi University, was also charged by the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) that she did not inform the local police about non-Indian scholars that were participating in a women’s convention at the University.

On Friday, February 5, 2011, the Free Binayak Sen Coalition – Toronto Chapter presented the Consul General of India Ms. Preeti Saran with a petition signed by over 200 local Indians and Canadians condemning Indian state action against Dr. Binayak Sen. However no official at the Consulate was present to take the petition. The group waited for 3 hours and in end left the petition at the reception. This shows the lack of Consulate engagement with the community. These signatures had been collected in just one week. Over thirty University faculty from across Canada (from the University of Toronto, York University, Ryerson University,
University of Manitoba, Queen’s University, and the University of Ottawa) signed the petition.

The petition promised that the Toronto Chapter would continue to publicize the issue. The Toronto Chapter informs the Consul General that Indians and Canadians are deeply concerned about Indian state atrocities. The Consul General could not make time to meet with the Coalition and discuss their concerns. The Toronto Chapter will not sit idle.

Contact: Nishant Upadhyay Monday, February 7, 2011
Email: kneeshant@gmail.com
Cell: (647 884 5065)

“A big storm is imminent”: 21st century communism in Nepal

Noaman G. Ali, BASICS Community News Service, Canada

“We are ready to convert academic institutions into barracks. And ourselves into soldiers,” says Ramil Bhum, a student leader from Nepal’s far-west region of Seti Mahakali.
 

Sitting on the grass outside a large hall of Tribhuvan University on the outskirts of Kathmandu, Bm is surrounded by a group of international observers, of whom I am one. We’ve been invited to observe the 18th national convention of the All-Nepal National Students’ Union (Revolutionary), or ANNISU-R.
 

With 1.4 to 1.8 million members, there is no doubt that ANNISU-R is the largest, best-organized and most militant of students’ unions in this poor, land-locked country of 30 million. It is a mass organization of the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), the country’s largest political party.
 

“A big storm is imminent in Nepal,” says Krishna Bahadur Mahara, a Maoist leader, sitting with us now in the large conference room on the roof of his party’s headquarters. “Our party is not confused about our immediate and ultimate goals. Our immediate goal is the people’s federal republic, then socialism, then communism.”
 

Communism? Conventional wisdom in the West is that communism means tyranny, mass murder, inefficient economies, and perpetually grey skies. It’s good in theory, bad in practice. If anyone speaks seriously of communism, it’s usually a member of a small and marginal group.
 

Yet, the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) and its associated mass organizations count millions of farmers, workers, students, small-business owners and many more as members. Millions more support the party indirectly. Why?

Some research issues in contemporary revolutionary movements: the context of Nepal

by Mukti Nepal

The context of Nepal :

Nepali revolutionary movement has been widely accepted as an exemplary movement in the application of Marxism today. It has passed through decades-long educational/preparatory/nonviolent movement and recently through a decade-long violent movement. For the last five years, since the communist party of Nepal (Maoist) entered a Peace Deal (confinement and dismantle of the revolutionary army and participation in the mainstream politics through the promulgation of a new constitution and through the abolition of monarchy) in the mediation of the United Nations and the government of India, the movement looks to have become relatively stagnant.
 

During this peace period, the CPNM has tried to bring political economic changes through a top-down approach. During this period, CPNM established itself as the largest ruling party in the country, ran the government for less than a year and voluntarily got out of the government owing to the issue of insubordination by the old monarchy-oriented army. The government led by this party was able to remain free from corruption charges and was able to bring minor but pro-people changes in the education and health sector and to give a significant relief to some farming population (freed from the outstanding bank loans, for an example). It was not, however, able to institutionalize structural changes nor was able to make people feel significant changes in the economic life. It was largely also not able to withstand the pressure from the opposition to return the properties (the land and houses) seized during the violent Peoples’ War, nor was able to even keep its grassroots parallel government structures established during the violent War. On the other hand, it appears to be able to save part of its militia in the form an organization called the Young Communist League. However, be it in tactical terms, the party does not seem to be able to defend the legitimacy of the violent War in the official papers or peace agreements and examples exist to blame the party leadership not to be adhering to some traditional concepts and jargons of Marxism Leninism Maoism. This non-adherence has been reflected in various speeches, writings and even in the draft constitution submitted to the constituent assembly by the party. The party is claiming to establish a new model of revolution.

 

UCPN(M): Constitution of the People's Federal Republic of Nepal (draft English translation)

Now available in a draft English translation: the Constitution of the People's Federal Republic of Nepal as proposed by the United Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist).

Nepal News described the constitution when it was originally released in 2009:

Maoists unveil their proposed constitution for federal Nepal

Dr Baburam Bhattarai, who heads a committee formed by his party, Unified CPN (Maoist), for determining the party’s vision on democracy has unveiled the party’s draft proposal through his personal website.

The Maoists’ draft maintains liberal stance on fundamental rights of the people such as freedom of expression, right to form political parties, right to assembly, among others. The draft divided into 21 parts and 145 articles authorises the state governments to form paramilitary force or militia but the national army would be formed after integration between the People’s Liberation Army and Nepal Army.

The party has proposed an Audit Commission as the highest auditing body of the country in place of the Office of the Auditor General. The Women’s Commission and Dalit Commission as the constitutional bodies of the country have been removed and three new commissions have been proposed – inclusion commission, development commission and inter-state relation commission.

The party has proposed a three-tier judiciary- Supreme Court, State Court and local courts. Besides, a separate constitutional court has been proposed to look into disputes on constitutional issues.

According to the draft, executive power of the government should rest with the President while daily administration should be run by the prime minister and council of ministers. Three assemblies have been proposed – 75 member national assembly and 245 member house of federal representatives. The 13 states proposed by the party will have 25 to 35-member state assemblies. All representatives will be elected through mixed election system.

The Maoist party in the proposed constitution has accepted most democratic values such as human rights, press freedom, periodic elections, rule of law, multi party system, supremacy of judiciary etc.

From the Ivory Tower the Himalayas Cannot be Seen

Addressing academic depictions of Nepal's Maoists on the ground

by Noaman G. Ali / December 12, 2010, Kathmandu

Reporting for basicsnews.ca

Noaman Ali is the Assistant Editor / Vice Chairperson of BASICS Community News Service. This article was written directly from Nepal, on the second day of the 18^th National Convention of the All Nepal National Independent Students' Union (Revolutionary).
 

"No, we do not accept that," says Prabha Kini, lecturer of sociology at Tribhuvan University. She is referring to an academic article that argues that the Nepali Congress and  Communist Party of Nepal (United Marxist-Leninist) or, UML, relied upon the heavy-handed oppression of landlords to gain votes.

These two parties are considered to be the leading status quoist parties in Nepal, in opposition to the revolutionary Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist).

"Yes, this is true," say our Maoist student handlers -- one a student of law, another a student of agriculture and the third a student of public health. They are referring to an academic article that argues that cadres of the Maoists used force to prevent free campaigning of Congress and UML in certain districts.

The stark contrast in the reactions to academic articles on Maoists could not be more surprising.

I am in Nepal as one of many international observers of the 18^th national convention of the All Nepal National Independent Students' Union (Revolutionary), or, ANNISU-R. This student union is associated with the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist). After a People's War that lasted from 1996 to 2006, the Maoists put down their arms, became a legal party and have since been attempting to further the revolution through establishing a new and more just constitution.

I have with me an academic book on the Maoist insurgency, from one of the most reputable scholarly presses in the world that I picked up from the University of Toronto's library the day before I left for Nepal. The Maoist Insurgency in Nepal: Revolution in the twenty-first century is edited by Mahendra Lawoti and Anup K. Pahari, and published by Routledge. I figured I would test the reactions of various Nepalis to contentious arguments in the book's various articles.