普拉昌達(dá)同志談尼泊爾當(dāng)前形勢(shì)（二）

問(wèn)：In Baluwatar, you said that within 15 days there will be an Interim

Constitution. Till today, it has not happened. Why?

問(wèn)：在巴魯華特，您曾說(shuō)過(guò)，在15天內(nèi)臨時(shí)憲法就可以草擬出來(lái)。可是到現(xiàn)在，它還沒(méi)出來(lái)，這是為什么？

答：The Interim Constitution Drafting Committee is working very seriously.

However, the delay is because of the political parties. It is likely that the

Interim Constitution will be ready in one week. The dominant classes of

the old regime and even some Congress and UML Bamun-Chhetri leaders are reluctant to allow the right to self-determination with autonomous ethnic federations. This is creating bottlenecks in the process of the CA elections, isn’t it? We are in the first decade of the 21st century. The world has moved far ahead. People’s consciousness, awareness and thoughts are high. Such kind of leaders have to understand these realities. In this changing context, how can we resolve ongoing contradictions and conflicts should be the focus of our attention. The slogans that we raised are not going to bring about social unrest, but they will help to resolve social contradictions for hundreds of years in the future. I request all concerned to view, from this perspective, our programmes which will provide a political climate that will not compel people to feel cheated. No one will be in

a situation where they might have to pick up arms.For 237 years, Nepal’s State was centralised and feudal. We cannot return to that stage. Now the circumstances have changed. Now people and ethnic groups have awareness about State oppression. There is an advancement of consciousness. The State should realise this consciousness. After that, a new nation-state can be formed. If each and every person feels that they are the owners of the country, then we all will feel secure and safe. This consciousness has to be understood.

答：臨時(shí)憲法起草委員會(huì)的工作是非常認(rèn)真的。但是，拖延是由于政黨們引起的。臨時(shí)憲法完全可以在一個(gè)星期內(nèi)準(zhǔn)備好。舊政權(quán)的統(tǒng)治階級(jí)，甚至一些大會(huì)黨以及尼共（聯(lián)合馬列）的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人不愿意把自治權(quán)力交給民族自治區(qū)。這就在制憲會(huì)議選舉的進(jìn)程中設(shè)置了障礙，不是嗎？我們處于21世紀(jì)的第一個(gè)10年中。世界已經(jīng)向前大大發(fā)展了。人民的覺(jué)悟，意識(shí)和思想提高了。這些領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人必須認(rèn)識(shí)到這些現(xiàn)實(shí)。在這樣變化的形勢(shì)下，如何處理當(dāng)前的矛盾和沖突成為我們關(guān)注的焦點(diǎn)。我們提出的口號(hào)不是要使社會(huì)動(dòng)蕩，而是要幫助解決數(shù)百年來(lái)存在的社會(huì)矛盾。我想讓所有的關(guān)注者從這樣的觀點(diǎn)認(rèn)識(shí)到，我們的計(jì)劃是為了提供一種政治環(huán)境，而不是欺騙人民。誰(shuí)也不愿意生活在一個(gè)迫使他不得不拿起槍桿子戰(zhàn)斗的環(huán)境中。237年來(lái)，尼泊爾國(guó)家一直是中央集權(quán)和封建制的。我們不能倒退到那個(gè)時(shí)期。現(xiàn)在形勢(shì)已經(jīng)不同了。現(xiàn)在人民和少數(shù)民族已經(jīng)意識(shí)到國(guó)家壓迫。這是認(rèn)識(shí)上的進(jìn)步。國(guó)家應(yīng)該實(shí)現(xiàn)這種要求。之后，應(yīng)該建立一個(gè)新的民族國(guó)家。如果所有人都認(rèn)識(shí)到這一點(diǎn)，他們就會(huì)成為國(guó)家的主人，那么我們所有人就會(huì)感到安全和有保障。這種思想應(yīng)該被理解。

問(wèn)：On this issue, there have been questions raised by the Marxists. They

say that such issues of identity are not Marxist questions. They say that to gain strength, Maoists are raising identity issues instead of focusing on class issues.

關(guān)于這個(gè)問(wèn)題，馬克思主義者已經(jīng)提出來(lái)過(guò)。他們說(shuō)類(lèi)似這樣的問(wèn)題不屬于馬克思主義范疇。他們強(qiáng)調(diào)說(shuō)，毛主義者提出類(lèi)似的問(wèn)題，忽視了階級(jí)問(wèn)題。

答：If they say that, then we feel that they have not understood Marxism.

Ethnic struggle is also a form of class struggle. Ethnic struggle is not different

from class struggle. Marx himself, then, had interpreted in the Irish question, that identity was a part of the class question. Lenin had replaced the slogan of ‘Workers of the World Unite’ with ‘Workers and Oppressed People of the World

Unite’ during the Third International. These Red sloganeers have not understood Marxism. Lenin has used the formulation of self determination within a federal structure. Those who accuse Maoists of having abandoned Marxism have instead acquired stakes in the existing feudal structure of Nepal. If they genuinely want to end class exploitation,then why do they fear giving powers to Madheshis, Newar, Bheri-Karnali, Seti-Mahakali, Gurung, Magar, Tharu, Rai, Limbu and others? Even though the right to divorce is there, it does not mean that a husband will always leave his wife and a wife will abandon her husband. Only after giving everyone rights will national unity be strengthened.

答：如果他們那樣說(shuō)，那么我們認(rèn)為他們沒(méi)有理解馬克思主義。民族斗爭(zhēng)也是階級(jí)斗爭(zhēng)的一種形式。民族斗爭(zhēng)與階級(jí)斗爭(zhēng)是一致的。當(dāng)年馬克思本人就闡明了愛(ài)爾蘭民族問(wèn)題，那個(gè)問(wèn)題的性質(zhì)就是階級(jí)問(wèn)題。列寧在第三國(guó)際期間，把“全世界無(wú)產(chǎn)者聯(lián)合起來(lái)”的口號(hào)換成了“全世界無(wú)產(chǎn)者和被壓迫民族聯(lián)合起來(lái)”的口號(hào)。這些所謂的馬克思主義者并不理解馬克思主義。列寧在一個(gè)聯(lián)邦體制內(nèi)采用了民族自決的形式。那些指責(zé)毛主義者放棄了馬克思主義的人，自己卻把尼泊爾封建制度當(dāng)做背靠的大樹(shù)。如果他們真想消滅階級(jí)剝削，那么為什么害怕把權(quán)力交給Madheshis, Newar, Bheri-Karnali, Seti-Mahakali, Gurung, Magar, Tharu, Rai, Limbu以及其他民族地區(qū)呢？盡管允許離婚，但并不意味著丈夫總是離開(kāi)妻子和妻子拋棄她的丈夫。只有給與所有人權(quán)力，那么國(guó)家統(tǒng)一才會(huì)加強(qiáng)。

問(wèn)：The dream of a new Nepal that you talked about after the 2 Asarh (June

16) agreement at Baluwatar evoked a tremendous response among the people and raised their aspirations. But looking at the structure of the State today, without a full transformation, what possibility do you see ahead if you were to be the prime minister? In the circumstances, is not the dream too idealistic?

問(wèn)：您在巴魯華特協(xié)議（6月16日）簽定后談到一個(gè)新尼泊爾的理想，這引起了人民的熱烈反響和渴望。但是，面對(duì)當(dāng)前的國(guó)家體制，沒(méi)有發(fā)生根本的轉(zhuǎn)變，如果您成為總理，您可能會(huì)怎樣做？在這樣的形勢(shì)下，那個(gè)理想不是空想嗎？

答：It is not idealistic. We have developed the Marxism-Leninism-Maoism of the

old communist movement into a new manifesto of the 21st century because the old formulations will not work. Knowing that the old methods will not work, ten months back our central committee discussed and agreed on this matter. We did not make all this public. This document of the central committee is the new manifesto of the communist party of the 21st century. We have to evolve a new understanding of contemporary imperialism and revolution. In the prevailing context, strategy and tactics have to be new and relevant. The manner in which the party functions must also be according to a new strategy. In today’s age of globalisation and post-modernism, we have to move decisively in a new form. The 12-point understanding consciously reflects our 21st century interpretation of communist ideology. When we entered into the Baluwatar agreement, I told the world that we feel confident that we would be able to come forward with new ideas. This is not idealism. This is from our experience of the movement. These ideas came from the discussions among the tens of millions of people. Buddha was born in Lumbini but his ideas permeated the world. Likewise during our ten years of people’s war we were not merely confined to Mechchi-Mahakali or Sindhuli and Rolpa-Rukum. We lived in various states of India. We stayed from six months to one year each in Mumbai, Kolkota, Himachal, Delhi, Assam, and many other places. Our consciousness is the result of interactions and influences in a living relationship with humanity in the 21st century. This is why we are realists.

它是現(xiàn)實(shí)的。因?yàn)榕f的方式不能解決問(wèn)題，所以我們把舊共產(chǎn)主義運(yùn)動(dòng)的馬列毛主義發(fā)展成了21世紀(jì)的新的宣言。10個(gè)月前，當(dāng)認(rèn)識(shí)到舊辦法沒(méi)用了時(shí)，我們中央委員會(huì)討論并通過(guò)了這一決議。我們沒(méi)有把它全面公開(kāi)。這個(gè)中央委員會(huì)的文件是21世紀(jì)共產(chǎn)黨的新宣言。我們必須發(fā)展當(dāng)代帝國(guó)主義和革命的新理論。在主要問(wèn)題上，戰(zhàn)略和戰(zhàn)術(shù)必須是全新的。黨發(fā)揮作用的方式也應(yīng)該根據(jù)新的戰(zhàn)略。在今天全球化和后現(xiàn)代主義的時(shí)代，我們必須以新的形式邁出決定性的步伐。12點(diǎn)協(xié)議反映出我們對(duì)21世紀(jì)共產(chǎn)主義理論的解釋。當(dāng)我們簽定巴魯華特協(xié)定時(shí)，我告訴世界我們有信心以新的觀點(diǎn)前進(jìn)。這不是唯心的。這是來(lái)自于我們運(yùn)動(dòng)的經(jīng)驗(yàn)。這些觀點(diǎn)來(lái)自數(shù)千萬(wàn)人民的討論。佛祖誕生于藍(lán)毗尼，但他的思想?yún)s傳遍了全世界。同樣，在10年人民戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)期間，我們并不局限于 Mechchi-Mahakali 或 Sindhuli 以及羅爾帕-魯孔地區(qū)活動(dòng)。我們生活在印度的各個(gè)邦。我們?cè)诿腺I(mǎi)，Kolkota, Himachal, 德里，Assam和許多其他地方分別呆上半年到一年的時(shí)間。我們的思想是21世紀(jì)人類(lèi)生產(chǎn)關(guān)系作用和影響下產(chǎn)生的。因此我們是現(xiàn)實(shí)主義者。

問(wèn)：Let’s extend our discussion to the statement of the CPI (Maoist) (in

India) spokesperson Comrade Azad, who in a recent interview cautioned

about betrayal when collaborating with the State.

讓我們談?wù)動(dòng)《裙伯a(chǎn)黨（毛主義）發(fā)言人阿乍得同志的聲明，他在最近的訪(fǎng)談中提到在與政府合作時(shí)可能背叛的問(wèn)題。

答：To begin with, we are not going to enter this present State structure.

Many people have represented us as being eager to become ministers.

They have not understood our thought and our feelings or we have

not been able to explain ourselves to them. We will not become ministers,

in the existing bureaucratic structure. We have asked for a democratic federal republic in the Interim Constitution itself. Even so there can be agreement with the SPA. After arriving at an understanding with them we can go into the interim government. Without change we won’t go there. When we believe that change has taken place then only we will go. Our people will run the ministries that we head. It is only on this condition that we will join the government. If we go without this condition then we will become just like the UML and NC.

We will not enter this State structure without this change. The 12- point

understanding and 8-point agreement have addressed issues of State

restructuring. If the SPA agrees then there is no problem. You have asked a very important question about Comrade Azad’s comments. See, when there is a revolution in the world in one instant, that revolution does not replicate itself in another time and another context. The Russian revolution took place in a very different manner to the Paris Commune. The Russian revolution took place in a different manner, the Chinese revolution took place in a very different way. The Cuban revolution did not take place in the same manner as the Chinese revolution. Stalin did not recognise the Chinese revolution as a proletariat revolution. He always held that until 1951, the Chinese revolution was a bourgeois revolution. When they really discussed about the Chinese revolution,

then he recognised it as a Communist revolution. The Russian revolution

faced attacks from all sides after its completion. Lenin proposed a treaty

with Germany in order to keep alive the revolution. Even within their central

committee, there was the accusation that Lenin had betrayed the revolution.

But the central committee rejected this decisively. The central committee needed three meetings to resolve the issue. What we are doing in Nepal is recognising the balance of power in the country, and taking the people for a new kind of revolution. Those who are viewing us from the perspective of the old forms of revolution will say that we have already Spoilt it all. However, those who view us in terms of transformation and flow of revolution will find us to be the most dynamic of communists. We made the Unity Centre (Ekta Kendra) in 2048 BS (1991). We had labelled the 1990 movement as a betrayal. But people did not accept this. When people did not believe this, then we too entered Parliament. At that time, many revolutionaries like Comrade Azad said that we were doomed. In the next three years, the RIM (Revolutionary International Movement) had declared us as Rightists and expelled us from the RIM. They had even brought out a voluminous publication on this matter. For boycotting elections, they also declared that only Mohan Bikram was a revolutionary. When we began the people’s war, all the revisionists of the world declared us foolish. They said that we would be turned into dust in ten months. But even after ten years we are here. During the first peace talks, people like Comrade Azad expected us to be finished. However, do we look at revolution in scientific terms, or do we apply the formulae of the 20th century to it is the primary question? We have, on one side, parties like the UML, who in its ‘progress’ has gone for class co-existence. Whatever we are attempting in Nepal is both risky and challenging. But without facing challenges and risks, which revolution in the world has taken place? When we address these challenges, it will appear that sometimes we are going to the Left and sometimes to the Right. In the course of revolution, if one goes Left, then they are Leftists. If they swerve to the Right, then they will be Rightists. We are walking on both our legs. Sometimes the left foot leads, sometimes the right foot is forward. It is only by walking on both our legs that we accomplished the ten years of struggle. When we extend our right foot, then some people accuse us of being Rightists. When we put forward our left foot, they call us Leftists. It is only when we walk using both our feet, that it is scientific.

首先，我們不會(huì)參加當(dāng)前的政府。許多人認(rèn)為我們想當(dāng)部長(zhǎng)。他們不了解我們的想法和我們的感情，或者我們沒(méi)有向他們解釋。我們不會(huì)當(dāng)前官僚國(guó)家機(jī)構(gòu)的部長(zhǎng)。

我們要求根據(jù)臨時(shí)憲法成立民主聯(lián)邦共和國(guó)。盡管，那應(yīng)該同七黨聯(lián)盟達(dá)成協(xié)議。在他們達(dá)成協(xié)議后，我們可以加入臨時(shí)政府。否則，我們不會(huì)加入。只有當(dāng)我們認(rèn)為情況改變了，我們才會(huì)加入。我們領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的人民將成為部長(zhǎng)。只有在這個(gè)條件下，我們才會(huì)參加政府。如果沒(méi)有這個(gè)條件就加入，那我們就同尼共（聯(lián)合馬列）以及尼泊爾大會(huì)黨沒(méi)有區(qū)別了。沒(méi)有這個(gè)變化我們不會(huì)進(jìn)入國(guó)家機(jī)構(gòu)。12點(diǎn)協(xié)議和8點(diǎn)協(xié)議已經(jīng)闡明了國(guó)家機(jī)構(gòu)的問(wèn)題。如果七黨聯(lián)盟同意，那就沒(méi)問(wèn)題了。你提到一個(gè)非常重要的問(wèn)題，即阿扎德同志的意見(jiàn)。要知道，當(dāng)世界上發(fā)生一場(chǎng)革命時(shí)，那么這場(chǎng)革命不會(huì)是另一場(chǎng)革命的復(fù)制。俄國(guó)革命與巴黎公社革命的方式非常不同。俄國(guó)革命以一種不同的方式爆發(fā)，而中國(guó)革命又以另一種形式爆發(fā)。古巴革命同中國(guó)革命的情況也不同。斯大林曾經(jīng)不承認(rèn)中國(guó)革命是無(wú)產(chǎn)階級(jí)革命。他一直到1951年還認(rèn)為，中國(guó)革命是一場(chǎng)資產(chǎn)階級(jí)革命。當(dāng)他們認(rèn)真研究中國(guó)革命后，于是他承認(rèn)那是一場(chǎng)共產(chǎn)主義革命。俄國(guó)革命完成后，四面受敵。列寧為了挽救革命被迫與德國(guó)簽定條約。甚至在中央委員會(huì)內(nèi)部，也有人指責(zé)列寧背叛了革命。中央委員會(huì)斷然拒絕了列寧的提議，中央委員會(huì)召開(kāi)了三次會(huì)議才解決了這一問(wèn)題。我們正在尼泊爾所做的是承認(rèn)國(guó)家力量的平衡，并領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人民進(jìn)行一場(chǎng)新型的革命。那些從舊的革命形式觀點(diǎn)看我們的人會(huì)說(shuō)我們已經(jīng)徹底垮了。然而，那些以革命運(yùn)動(dòng)的觀點(diǎn)看我們的人會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)我們是最有活力的共產(chǎn)主義者。我們?cè)?991年建立了聯(lián)合中心。我們把1990年運(yùn)動(dòng)視為背叛。但是人們當(dāng)時(shí)不接受這一點(diǎn)。當(dāng)人們不相信時(shí)，于是我們也加入議會(huì)。在那時(shí)，許多象阿乍得同志那樣的革命者說(shuō)我們失敗了。三年后，革命國(guó)際運(yùn)動(dòng)宣布我們?yōu)橛覂A機(jī)會(huì)主義者，并把我們從革命國(guó)際運(yùn)動(dòng)中開(kāi)除。關(guān)于這件事，他們有大量的資料。為了聯(lián)合抵制選舉，他們還宣布只有莫汗·比克艾母才是個(gè)革命者。當(dāng)我們開(kāi)始人民戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)時(shí)，世界上所有的修正主義者都認(rèn)為我們是傻瓜。他們說(shuō)我們會(huì)在10個(gè)月內(nèi)就化為灰燼。但是，10年以后我們?nèi)匀淮嬖凇Ｔ诘谝淮魏驼勂陂g，象阿扎德同志那樣的人認(rèn)為我們會(huì)罷手。然而，我們是否以科學(xué)的方式看待革命，或者我們是否應(yīng)用20世紀(jì)的革命公式，這些是首要問(wèn)題嗎？我們有過(guò)象尼共（聯(lián)合馬列）那樣的黨，那個(gè)黨為了發(fā)展而去搞階級(jí)調(diào)和。我們?cè)谀岵礌栕龅囊磺谐錆M(mǎn)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)和挑戰(zhàn)。但是，如果沒(méi)有這些挑戰(zhàn)和風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，世界上又怎會(huì)有革命發(fā)生？

當(dāng)我們應(yīng)對(duì)這些挑戰(zhàn)時(shí)，就會(huì)表現(xiàn)出有時(shí)我們偏左了，有時(shí)我們偏右了。在革命過(guò)程中，如果有人朝左走，那么他們是左派。如果他們轉(zhuǎn)向右邊，那么他們就成了右派。我們?cè)谟梦覀兊膬蓷l腿走路。有時(shí)我們伸出左腳，有時(shí)我們伸出右腳。就是用我們的兩條腿走路，我們完成了10年的斗爭(zhēng)。當(dāng)我們伸出右腳時(shí)，有人就指責(zé)我們是右派。當(dāng)我們伸出左腳時(shí)，他們就叫我們左派。只有我們用兩只腳走路時(shí)，那才是科學(xué)的。

問(wèn)：We see indications that the CA and republic are not on the horizon. If

so, what are your preparations?

我們感到制憲會(huì)議和共和國(guó)不會(huì)實(shí)現(xiàn)了。如果那樣，你們準(zhǔn)備怎么辦？

答：We have not thought that possibilities are exhausted. But the situation has

gone a bit awry. Against this, people have to raise their voice. When we

explained in our recent statement about being committed to peaceful means, we included that statement after much deliberation. We thought that it was possible to maintain ceasefire and go ahead with a peaceful people’s movement. It is possible to go via constituent assembly to democratic republic. This way has to be peaceful. If this is not to be, then Nepali people will go for an uprising. If people go for such a revolt, then CPN(Maoist) will support the revolt.

答：我們不認(rèn)為一點(diǎn)可能性都沒(méi)了。但是，情況有點(diǎn)偏差。人民應(yīng)該表達(dá)他們的不滿(mǎn)。當(dāng)我們最近發(fā)表關(guān)于和平活動(dòng)的聲明時(shí)，我們是經(jīng)過(guò)深思熟慮的。我們認(rèn)為可能保持停火，而以和平人民運(yùn)動(dòng)的方式前進(jìn)。有可能通過(guò)制憲會(huì)議來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)民主共和國(guó)。這種方式必須是和平的。如果不成，那么尼泊爾人民就會(huì)發(fā)動(dòng)一場(chǎng)起義。如果人民發(fā)動(dòng)這樣的起義，那么尼泊爾共產(chǎn)黨（毛主義）會(huì)支持起義。

問(wèn)：After you talked with the Misturaled UN team, you were looking satisfied.

What transpired there?

在您同聯(lián)合國(guó)小組談過(guò)話(huà)后，您看上去還滿(mǎn)意。發(fā)生了什么？

答：There cannot be a universal arrangement for arms management across the

world. Nepal has a unique context. According to our own context, we will manage. I was happy that they acknowledged that they could not replicate the examples of Mozambique and East Timor. Further, they agreed that the prime minister’s letter was not in accordance with the eight-point agreement.

世界上沒(méi)有對(duì)武裝管理的通用模式。尼泊爾的情況是特殊的。根據(jù)我們自己的想法，我們可以管理。讓我高興的是，他們認(rèn)識(shí)到他們不能照搬莫桑比克和東帝汶的模式。而且，他們認(rèn)同總理的信違反了8點(diǎn)協(xié)議。

× 烏有之鄉(xiāng) WYZXWK.COM

您的打賞將用于網(wǎng)站日常運(yùn)行與維護(hù)。
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(hào)