Interview of Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) leader Prachand by Anand Swaroop Verma

普拉昌達接受阿南德·斯瓦茹普·沃爾瑪采訪（上）

29 July 2006

Q. Did you ever anticipate that within 10 years of initiating the People's War it would reach such a great height?

問：您有沒有預料到人民戰(zhàn)爭在10年中會發(fā)展到這么高的水平？

A. I would like to tell you that towards the last leg of our preparations for launching the People's War, we did discuss about the progress sequence of Nepalese People's War. The pace of its progress was thoroughly discussed and finally, we reached at the conclusion that contradictions existing within the country and the prevailing external situation combined together to facilitate the speedy progress of the People's War.

答：要知道，我們在進行發(fā)動人民戰(zhàn)爭的最后準備時，就探討了尼泊爾人民戰(zhàn)爭的進程問題。我們充分討論了戰(zhàn)爭進程，最后得出結論，國內(nèi)矛盾和國外形勢一起加速了人民戰(zhàn)爭的進程。

Q. Some people opine that the timing of your starting an armed struggle was wrong since the objective situations were not ripe at that time. After the dismemberment of Soviet Union in 1990, the communists, all over the world, were feeling let down and post-1990 the imperialist forces were gaining ground. Was it the right time to launch People's War?

問：一些人認為你們確定發(fā)動武裝斗爭的時間是錯誤的，因為當時的客觀條件并不成熟。蘇聯(lián)在1990年解體以后，全世界的共產(chǎn)主義者的情緒都很低落，而且90年代后期帝國主義勢力正在擴張。在那時發(fā)動人民戰(zhàn)爭的合適嗎？

A.    True, the conditions at that time, were really adverse. Post-Soviet Union dismemberment, the imperialist forces were celebrating the demise of communism. On the other hand, Peru's Maoist revolution got a severe blow with the arrest of Com. Gonzalo. Thus the international scenario was really very unfavourable for our action. But when we analyzed the situation, we found that within Nepal people's aspirations had got a fillip after the 1990 pro-democracy movement and they were under a false hope of improvement. In order to remove this false sense of hope, we even entered the parliament and for three years tried to explain to the masses that post-1990 agreement was not the real agreement, it was not in the interest of the people. We repeated the same inside the parliament also. We told people that they have been betrayed. Thus after three years of continuous campaigning, we found that conditions, within Nepal, were getting conducive for launching People's War. All the work undertaken by us during the parliamentary sittings and debates convinced us that conditions at the national level were quite ripe for the launching of the People's War. Though it is true that, at the international level, conditions were not as favourable but then this was exactly the time when our valor was needed to be tested. We thought that if we could move forward by using our internal conduciveness to remove the general sense of despair spreading fast throughout the world, then we can contribute a bit towards bringing some change in the prevailing situation. Moreover, it was our well thought-out strategy. We are convinced now that our strategy was right. By initiating People's War amidst trying conditions we got an opportunity to show that revolutions are not dead. We could tell the world that 21st century will again be a century of revolutions.

答：是的，當時的條件的確不利。蘇聯(lián)解體后，帝國主義正慶祝共產(chǎn)主義的滅亡。另外，秘魯毛主義革命由于岡薩羅同志的被捕而遭受嚴重挫折。因此，國際形勢對于我們的行動確實非常不利。但是，當我們分析了形勢后，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)在尼泊爾國內(nèi)，人民在1990年民主運動后革命熱情調(diào)動起來了，而他們又受騙了，認為生活會改善。為了消除群眾的錯誤認識，我們不惜參加議會，3年中我們努力向群眾解釋，1990協(xié)議不是真正的協(xié)議，它不能代表人民的利益。我們在議會中也反復強調(diào)。我們告訴人民他們被出賣了。于是，經(jīng)過3年不斷的斗爭，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)在尼泊爾國內(nèi)發(fā)動人民戰(zhàn)爭的有利條件逐漸具備了。我們在議會中進行的全部爭論使我們相信發(fā)動一場全國人民戰(zhàn)爭的條件完全成熟了。盡管當時在國際范圍內(nèi)，條件確實不利，但那正好可以考驗一下我們的勇氣。我們認為，如果我們能夠利用內(nèi)部的有利條件來消除在全世界迅速擴散的失望情緒，那么我們就可以為部分扭轉國際形勢做一點貢獻。而且，那是我們經(jīng)過充分考慮了的戰(zhàn)略任務。我們現(xiàn)在認為我們的戰(zhàn)略是對的。通過在艱難條件下發(fā)動人民戰(zhàn)爭使我們有機會證明革命并沒有死亡。我們可以告訴世界，21世紀仍然是革命的世紀。

Q. What was your final objective at that time?

問：你們當時的最終目標是什么？

A.    Looking at the semi-colonial and semi-feudal conditions prevailing in Nepal, our immediate aim was to attain new democratic revolution but like any other communist our final objective was also to establish socialism and communism.

答：從尼泊爾目前半殖民地半封建的形勢來看，我們的最近目標是取得新民主主義革命的勝利。但是同其他所有共產(chǎn)主義者一樣，我們的最終目標也是建立社會主義和共產(chǎn)主義。

Q. But then you had to change your objective. Shouldn't it be called opportunism?

問：但是，您已經(jīng)被迫改變了目標。那是否應該叫做機會主義呢？

A.    On this question a lengthy debate is still going on. We are not taking recourse to this new strategy due to some weakness. In fact, we are trying to move ahead only after gaining strength. People should understand that we have changed our policy not because of some sort of setback but due to the strength derived from the People's War. Secondly, we are forced to bring change in our functioning due to the existing balance of forces at the international level. But the first reason is primary. Having gained enough strength any revolutionary party tends to acquire greater flexibility on its way to reaching the seat of power. This is what happened in China also, when Mao Tse-tung, before meeting Chiang Kai Shek in 1945 for the talks regarding the formation of a coalition government, had already decided, in 1940, about reaching the goal of New democratic Revolution. And this could become possible since by that time the communist party had been able to gain lots of strength. Thus, Mao's proposal of a coalition was not an act of weakness but an evidence of CPC having gained strength over the years. Similarly, if we are currently talking about the democratic republic or if we engaged in peace talks or if we are here in Kathmandu, this is the result of our strength and not weakness.Even Lenin was forced to enter into Brest-Litovsk Treaty with Germany at the time of October Revolution. At that time, many in Lenin's party said that it was, like an act of surrender but it was not that. Rather, it was the result of Lenin and Bolshevik Party, the result of their gaining strength. In the same way, the flexibility which you see in our tactics is not the result of our deviation but that of strength.

答：關于這個問題一直存在著長期的爭論。我們不會在這個新戰(zhàn)略方面出于軟弱而對外求助。實際上，我們在力量發(fā)展后一直在努力前進。人們應該理解我們改變政策不是因為某種失敗，而是因為我們從人民戰(zhàn)爭中取得了力量。其次，我們被迫改變政策是因為當前國際力量的平衡。而第一個原因是主要的。任何革命黨在具有足夠力量時都將在奪取政權的過程中采取更大的靈活性。這中情況在中國也出現(xiàn)過。1940年，毛澤東就已經(jīng)確定取得新民主主義革命勝利的目標，而這是他和蔣介石1945年會談關于組建聯(lián)合政府以前的事。而這是因為當時中國共產(chǎn)黨擁有較大的實力才成為可能的。那么，當時毛的聯(lián)合建議并不是軟弱的表現(xiàn)，而是證明中國共產(chǎn)黨經(jīng)過多年的發(fā)展已經(jīng)具有相當實力。同樣，我們今天談論民主共和國，我們進行和平談判以及我們來到加德滿都，這證明我們有實力而不是軟弱。即使列寧在十月革命時也被迫同德國簽定了不列斯特-里窩斯克條約。在當時，列寧黨內(nèi)的許多人都認為那是投降的表現(xiàn)，但它不是的。相反，它是列寧和布爾什維克黨具有實力的表現(xiàn)。同樣道理，您看到的我們靈活的戰(zhàn)術并不是我們的偏離，而是一種實力。

Q. Somewhere you have said that current phase is a transition phase. What do you mean by it?

問：您曾經(jīng)說過當前階段是一個過渡階段。那是什么意思？

A.    We have said so in the context of democratic republic. It means that if we look at the current international balance of forces as also the regional balance of forces in South Asia then it is difficult to reach the centre of power. We will have to take a diversion. That's why our moving forward after reaching an understanding with the liberal faction of the bourgeoise is being called a transitionary phase by us. If we look at deeply at the essence of that which we are calling democratic republic then we would find that it was none other than the people's republic. I am saying this because within that we have raised the class question, nationality question, gender question and the regional question. If all these four issues are solved then it amounts to having new democratic republic. Contentwise it is fine but since we are also talking about the peaceful competition with the bourgeoise, its form looks like a bourgeois democracy whereas it is a New Democracy in essence. That's why we said that it could be a transitional democracy. We feel that only this way we can fulfil people's aspiration for a revolution in the current global scenario and can somewhat contribute towards international communist movement and world proletarian revolution

答：那是我談民主共和國時說的。意思是說，如果我們認識到當前的國際力量平衡和南亞地區(qū)的力量平衡，就會知道取得全國政權是困難的。我們將不得不改變策略。于是我們在同資產(chǎn)階級自由派別達成共識后繼續(xù)發(fā)展雙方的關系，我們稱這個發(fā)展階段為過渡階段。如果我們深刻認識我們所說的民主共和國的本質(zhì)，那么就會發(fā)現(xiàn)那只能是人民共和國。我這樣說是因為在共和國方面我們提出了階級問題，民族問題，性別問題和地區(qū)問題。如果這四個問題都解決了，那么就等于是建立了新民主共和國。盡管我們也談到同資產(chǎn)階級和平競爭，共和國的形式看起來象是資產(chǎn)階級民主，但它的內(nèi)容是好的，它在本質(zhì)上是新民主主義的。所以我們稱其為過渡民主。我們認為只有這樣，我們才能在當前國際形勢下滿足人民的要求并為國際共產(chǎn)主義運動和世界無產(chǎn)階級革命做出一定的貢獻。

Q. But this is not supposed to be your final goal, it is much beyond this. You have just said that you have reached this stage through gradual strengthening of your party. Now efforts are on to disarm the People's Liberation Army (PLA), the main source of your strengthening process. How you are going to counter that?

問：但是這不是你們的最終目標，它離最終目標還有很大距離。您說過您通過逐步加強你們黨的力量，這使你們已經(jīng)達到了這一過渡階段。現(xiàn)在的任務是解除人民解放軍的武裝，這一你們黨最主要的力量。您將怎么辦？

A.    We feel that we have already countered them successfully. They have been defeated and we have been victorious. The question of the management of army was solved by us in Delhi itself when 12-point understanding was reached. Now what these people are doing is counter to 12-point understanding and historical mass movement. We are still being requested by the Nepalese people, Nepal's intellectual section and the civil society not to give up our arms. They say that if we give up our arms, the autocracy will again have its say and these parliamentary parties will be destroyed overnight. Those who are asking us to give up arms are unable to comprehend this. When we talk with the leaders of these political parties we say that had we not been armed, there would have been no 12-point understanding. Had we not been armed, Deuba would have never been able to come out of prison. Had we not been armed, many of you would have been killed because for a feudal monarchy, which murdered its blood-relations inside the Palace, these parliamentary parties are of no importance. These parties have nothing to fall back upon. During 12-13 years of their rule, they have been so corrupt that they have lost their credibility.They have no base among the masses nor do they have any access to arms. This autocracy could have easily eliminated them. But they were saved because we were armed. We also told them that our weapons only made the revival of your parliament possible, you are not credited with it, the credit goes to PLA. We are also saying that you have become ministers and prime minister because PLA is armed. Royal Nepal Army (RNA) has never been active in the cause of democracy. On the contrary it has suppressed all the people's movements which took place since 1951. It has always been loyal towards feudal aristocracy. Therefore the top priority should be given to the democratization of this army. When the 12-point understanding was reached we had told you clearly that we would not give up our weapons. During those days king Gyanendra was conducting farcical municipal elections and these political parties had requested us not to give up arms in any condition otherwise the dictatorship of Gyanendra will unleash a reign of terror. And now when because of these very guns you are in the parliament then you are saying that our weapons are creating trouble for you? The people of Nepal will not accept this. The people know how important are our weapons for them and that if we are disarmed, it will bring havoc in the country. But their class character and selfishness is forcing these political parties to say otherwise. Besides they are also feeling the external pressure. US is openly pressurising these political parties and they are also feeling the pressure of India. These pressures are forcing them to say such things. But we are of the view that even this battle has been won by us. When 8-point agreement was reached at Baluatar (PM Koirala's official residence) on June 16, 2006 then it was decided that both the armies and their weapons will be monitored with the cooperation of the UN. Now raising this issue again amounts to going back on the agreement. If these parties retrace back for the agreement then, we feel, people will not bear them. And a single appeal by us will again bring the masses on the streets. That's why I say that we have won this round too.

答：我們認為我們已經(jīng)成功地解決了這一問題。他們失敗了而我們勝利了。管理軍隊的問題，我們在德里簽定12點協(xié)議的時候就解決了。現(xiàn)在他們這些人所做的是違背12點協(xié)議和歷史性的群眾運動的。尼泊爾人民，尼泊爾知識界和公民社團也都一直要求我們不要放下武器。他們說如果我們放下武器，那么獨裁就會死灰復燃，而那些議會黨派會立刻垮臺。那些要求我們放下武器的人不能認識到這一點。當我們與議會政黨交談時，我們說，如果我們沒有武裝，就不會有12點協(xié)議。如果我們沒有武裝，德烏帕就永遠不可能從監(jiān)獄里出來。如果我們沒有武裝，你們中許多人就會因為封建君主而被殺掉，這個國王已經(jīng)在皇宮中殺了他的親人，你們議會黨派更是無足輕重。議會黨是沒有退路的。在他們統(tǒng)治的12-13年中，他們因為極端腐敗而喪失了威信。他們在群眾中沒有基礎，自己也沒有武裝。獨裁君主可以輕易地消滅他們。但是因為我們有武裝，他們才得救。我們還對他們講，因為我們的武器才使你們的議會得到恢復，榮譽不應給你們，而應給人民解放軍。我們還說，你們能成為部長和總理是因為有武裝的人民解放軍。尼泊爾王軍從來沒有在民主事業(yè)中積極過。相反，它鎮(zhèn)壓了1951年以來的所有人民運動。它一直忠于封建貴族。因此，首要任務應該是尼泊爾王軍的民主化。在簽定12點協(xié)議時，我們就已經(jīng)清楚地告訴你們，我們不會放下武器。那時候，國王賈南得拉正在進行可笑的市政選舉，議會政黨們要求我們無論如何不能放下武器，否則，賈南得拉專政會變成恐怖統(tǒng)治。可現(xiàn)在當你們因為我們的武裝而可以待在議會時，你們就說我們的武裝給你們造成了麻煩？尼泊爾人民是不會接受的。人民知道我們的武裝對他們有多么重要，如果我們解除武裝，那么就會給國家?guī)硪粓龊平佟５牵@些政黨的階級性和自私自利使他們不顧這些。此外，他們還感到外面的壓力。美國公開地對這些政黨施加壓力，并且，他們還感到印度的壓力。這些壓力迫使他們這樣說。但是我們即使在取得這場斗爭勝利后也不會改變觀點。2006年6月16日在巴魯塔爾（總理科依拉那的官邸）簽定8點協(xié)議時就確定雙方的軍隊和武器由參與合作的聯(lián)合國監(jiān)督。現(xiàn)在重提這個問題等于回到這個協(xié)議上。如果這些政黨倒退到當時的協(xié)議上，我們認為，人民是不能忍受他們的。我們會專門呼吁再次把群眾帶到街上。因此，我說這一輪較量我們也贏了。

Q. But these parties are delaying the implementation of 8-point agreement.

問：但是這些政黨正拖延履行8點協(xié)議。

A.    Yes, this is precisely the main thing. We never pressed for the 8-point agreement. It was reached at Baluatar, the residence of prime minister Koirala. We were brought to his residence by home minister Sitaula so the question of our putting the pressure does not arise. On the contrary, it were we who must be feeling the pressure because we had been brought to Baluatar. We had a fierce discussion for 10 to 11 hours on the question of dissolving the parliament before the agreement was reached. We want that after drafting an interim constitution an interim government should be set up and parliament be dissolved. After this we would also dissolve the governments in areas controlled by us and will work under the interim arrangements. These things became the part of the agreement. But, later, Washington started putting pressure on these parties and India also wielded some pressure. Perhaps earlier they did not consult the Indian government on this issue. These leaders are not habitual of thinking independently and they are least bothered about the lot of the Nepalese people. These leaders pay little attention on what the people desire, what are their feelings and aspirations. Their main attention is always focussed on what US is saying or what India is saying. I think this the main weakness of Nepalese parliamentary parties. And this weakness has been playing havoc with the expectations and aspirations of the people of Nepal since 1951. Now also they have sidetracked the agreement to which they have been a party. Thus, these leaders are befooling themselves and are committing hara-kiri because Delhi and Washington cannot rescue them. Only the people of Nepal can rescue them. If, in the eyes of the people, these leaders prove themselves as honest and firm then only their political survival will be possible. Otherwise if they keep looking towards Delhi and Washington, then Nepalese people will not allow them to hold the ground. We hope that they will try to understand this. I am still hopeful of their comprehending this before it is too late.

 答：是的，這正是關鍵問題。我們從來沒有施加壓力來達成8點協(xié)議。它是在總理科依拉那的住處巴魯塔爾簽定的。我們是由內(nèi)政部長西陶拉帶到他的住處的，因此不存在我們施加壓力的問題。相反，因為我們被帶到巴魯塔爾后感到了壓力。我們在達成協(xié)議之前，在關于解散議會的問題上進行了10到11小時的激烈爭論。我們要求在起草了臨時憲法以后，就應該建立臨時政府和解散議會。這之后，我們也將解散我們管理的各地方政府并根據(jù)臨時政策來工作。這些事成為協(xié)議的一部分內(nèi)容。但是，之后，華盛頓開始對這些政黨施加壓力，而且印度也制造壓力。或許早些時候他們關于這個問題沒有同印度政府商量。這些領導人不善于獨立思考，他們很少為尼泊爾人民的事操心。他們很少關心人民的要求，人民的感情和愿望。他們總是主要關注美國的態(tài)度和印度的態(tài)度。我認為這是尼泊爾議會政黨的主要弱點。自從1951年以來，這個弱點就一直阻礙人民的愿望和要求的實現(xiàn)。現(xiàn)在，他們又作為簽定協(xié)議的一方而違反了協(xié)議。這樣，這些領導人正在愚弄他們自己并且在自殺，因為德里和華盛頓不能拯救他們。只有尼泊爾人民才能拯救他們。如果，在人民眼中，這些領導人能證明他們是忠誠而堅定的，那么他們的政治生命就可能幸存。否則，如果他們繼續(xù)仰望德里和華盛頓，那么尼泊爾人民就不會允許他們存在。我們希望他們能盡力理解這一點。我仍然希望他們的理解，以免為時過晚。

Q. Tell me at a time when American attitude is quite negative, and due to their class interests, the political parties are creating all sorts of obstacles, what can be the worst scenario?

問：請問如果美國由于自己的階級利益而導致他的態(tài)度很差，政黨們制造很多麻煩，那么最壞的結果會怎樣呢？

It is due to their class interests that US and feudal elements, comprador and bureaucratic capitalist classes want to halt and destroy this political process. At the time of 12-point agreement also US had openly said that the agreement will benefit the Maoists most and the political parties should not have entered into the agreement. Later, the US said that these parties should withdraw themselves from the obligation of the agreement. But such was the situation in Nepal that these parties were compelled to be with us. This time also when 8-point agreement was reached at the residence of the prime minister, the US ambassador James Moriarty openly said that this agreement is the agenda of Maoists. I think that the agreement is the agenda of the country, of the people and is representative of everybody's feelings. We feel that the experience of the Nepalese people is helping them to identify who are in the favour of peace and who are against it; who are pro-democracy and who are anti-democracy. One thing is sure that these political leaders cannot politically alienate us. Since you have asked about the worst scenario, I feel that they might conspire to give effect to some tragedy. For, we are presently in Kathmandu, and this is an area of their influence. We have seen that internationally when any revolutionary or democratic party becomes immense popular and starts challenging the imperialist forces then imperialism, as a last resort, orders killing of some of the leaders. After eliminating main leadership, divisions are created within the party. This has happened in many countries of the world. I think in the worst of the situations this can happen here also, but we are quite vigilant. We have also warned the Nepalese people against this danger. While currently being in Kathmandu we have received requests to remain alert and these requests have poured in from the people, intelligentsia, civil society and other segments of the country. This suggests that there does exist danger to our lives. We are trying our utmost to make their designs fail.

 答：由于美國和封建分子，官僚買辦資產(chǎn)階級的階級利益，他們想阻止和破壞這一政治進程。在簽定12點協(xié)議時，美國就公開說協(xié)議會更有利于毛主義者，政黨們不應該簽定協(xié)議。之后，美國就說這些政黨應該退出他們在協(xié)議中應遵守的義務。但是尼泊爾的形勢迫使這些政黨與我們合作。當在總理住處簽定8點協(xié)議時，美國大使詹姆斯·莫里艾迪公開說，這份協(xié)議是毛主義者的綱領。我認為這份協(xié)議是國家和人民的綱領，代表了人民的思想感情。我們認為尼泊爾人民的經(jīng)驗會幫助他們辨別誰贊成和平，誰反對和平；誰擁護民主，誰反對民主。可以確定這些政治領導人不會在政治上與我們疏遠。你剛才問到最壞的結果，我認為他們可能策劃陰謀來制造悲劇。因為，我們現(xiàn)在在加德滿都，這是他們的地盤。我們知道，在國際上當任何一個革命的和民主的政黨受到廣泛擁護并開始挑戰(zhàn)帝國主義的力量時，那么帝國主義會訴諸最后的手段，命令殺害一些領導人。清除主要領導人后，就分裂黨。這在世界上許多國家都發(fā)生過。我認為最壞的結果是，這里也發(fā)生同樣的事，但我們非常警惕。我們也警告尼泊爾人民注意危險。當前，在加德滿都我們收到許多關于保持警惕的要求，來自人民，知識界，公民社團和國家的其他群體的熱情關心向潮水一樣涌入。這表明我們的生命的確存在著危險。我們會盡最大努力使敵人陰謀不會得逞。

× 烏有之鄉(xiāng) WYZXWK.COM

您的打賞將用于網(wǎng)站日常運行與維護。
幫助我們辦好網(wǎng)站，宣傳紅色文化！

歡迎掃描下方二維碼，訂閱烏有之鄉(xiāng)網(wǎng)刊微信公眾號