Anticipating personality cult in Nepali Maoists

Only a few factors can be combined to conclude why the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoists) rose to power in just a matter of a decade. The armed struggle that began in February 1996 culminated in the civil uprising of April 2006 placing the CPN-M as the most decisive factor in the political history of Nepal. The people who put forth the agenda of federalism were not only radical at the time but they also molded the belief of a large mass to unite against the age-old institution of monarchy.

With the success of the Constituent Assembly election, which the United Nations called it “a historic achievement,” the nation waits to see how the leaders who once believed in armed rebellion conduct through a parliamentary process. One of the biggest concerns today is what kind of character will the Maoists develop given their history of coercion and intimidation. Will Nepal eventually become a totalitarian state like most communist regimes in the past? What is the impact of charisma in communist leadership in the context of Nepal? Will the modest background of leaders like Pushpa Kama Dahal ‘Prachanda,’ Dr. Baburam Bhattarai and scores of others eventually evolve to become autocratic once they have the democratic mandate?

Another concern in Nepali politics is concluding the intention of the Maoists who often say that to achieve a ‘higher ideal’ they have accepted ‘bourgeois democracy’ for now. Therefore, the abolishment of monarchy is only the first step. The socialists interpretation of poverty among the proletariat is due the rise of capitalism. However, since the Maoists are not opposed to capitalism this ideological shift creates confusion.

Does this mean the CPN-M leadership has a secret plan that will thwart the present agreement in which the UN is directly involved? As the Maoists have not disclosed their plans for the federal restructuring of the state, does it mean they are open to discussions, agreements and compromise? And if yes, until when?

We ought to see transitional democracies with some skepticism, especially when radical communists become powerful.