Thanks for providing download link.
Cheers

A English translation of the interview. (Translation: Paramendra Bhagat)

Rabindra Mishra: King Gyanendra and Prachanda seem to have the key to the political crisis Nepal faces. We have not succeeded in our attempts to interview the king so far. But Prachanda talked to us. This was his first radio interview. Prachanda said if the king were to come forth for a free and fair elections to a constituent assembly, and if such an assembly were to retain a constitutional monarchy, that verdict will be acceptable to him and his party. The monarchy, the republic issue, and the issue of a constituent assembly have been hot, and so we focused mainly on those issues in our talk. My first question to him was as to why is the word "republic" absent in the recent 12 point agreement between the parties and the Maoists.

Prachanda: The essence of that 12 point agreement is to bring an end to the autocratic monarchy by seeking a way out through a constituent assembly. Our goal still is to end up a republic through a constituent assembly. The word "democracy" has been put there in English. But the essence is to bring autocracy to an end, to institutionalize the people's right to self-decision, and to go public with our slogan of a democratic republic among the people.

Rabindra Mishra: That is quite clear from the 12 point agreement. But what I am trying to figure out is are you agreeing to retaining the monarchy in some form, ceremonial or constitutional, if that might lead to a solution?

Prachanda: That is precisely what I am also trying to say. The essence of the 12 point agreement is not to accept the monarchy. It is to struggle against the autocratic monarchy.

Rabindra Mishra: If that is the essence, why is it not clear in the document?

Prachanda: This is an understanding between us and the seven parties. We all know all the seven parties have not come out for a republic with any clarity. But the document is headed towards what we have been saying for a long time now.

Rabindra Mishra: So your final goal is a democratic republic. The UML has the same goal. The Nepali Congress is now neutral on the monarchy question. If the palace were to reach out for reconciliation, how flexible are you willing to be?

Prachanda: We do not expect the palace to reach out if the past is any indication.

Rabindra Mishra: Maybe you have not seen that so far, but now after the 12 point agreement, and after the king returns back, if there are signs, how flexible are you willing to be?

Prachanda: We can comment on that only after we see the nature of such a signal. Our spirit is to move ahead. Our spirit is to take the country towards a republic.

Rabindra Mishra: Both the UML and you say that but, for now, if circumstances lead you to an agreement with the king, how flexible are you willing to be?

Prachanda: So far we have not seen any possibilities of any kind of an agreement with the king.

Rabindra Mishra: You have not seen so far. But to seek a way out of the crisis if you are forced to seek an agreement, how flexible are you willing to be?

Prachanda: We have not given any thought to that. The question about such a possibility is theoretical at best. If there is a solid signal, a genuine attempt to reach out to seek a forward looking solution on behalf of the country, then we can give some thought to it. But so far we have not seen any signs whatsoever. None.

Rabindra Mishra: You have repeatedly talked of state restructuring. If it were to become possible for the palace, the parties and you to together make that state restructuring possible, then you are willing to compromise, right?

Prachanda: That is not true. We went through two rounds of peace talks. During the last talks especially we sought a direct talk with the king to talk about the political, cultural, class-based, regional, sexual, and ethnic problems so as to seek a new structure, but there was an utter lack of interest from the king and the monarchy along those lines. Instead he responded by heaping autocracy. That is why your line of questioning is highly theoretical and mechanical.

Rabindra Mishra: Your 12 point agreement asks for an all party interim government that will take the country to a constituent assembly. But you have a disagreement. The parties want the House revived, you want a roundtable conference of all forces. But you agree on forming an interim government. Will that interim government have a representative of the king or not?

Prachanda: Our roadmap of a roudtable conference, interim government and a constituent assembly leaves no room for any representative from the king.

Rabindra Mishra: But if you will not make room for the king's representative, how do you expect the palace and the army to accept that?

Prachanda: It is not our goal to get accepted by the palace and the army. Because the palace has been so intent on thwarting the Nepali people's desire for peace and democracy, we see no alternative to creating a major storm of a revolution by the people. That is our understanding.

Rabindra Mishra: You talk about a storm. The parties talked of an impending tsunami. It did not happen. You have been waging your insurgency for a decade, but you have not been able to take over a single district headquarter. So if you look at the ground realities, and if you seriously seek a way out, and if there is a roundtable conference of all the political forces, and if that leads to an interim government, will that have a representative of the king or not?

Prachanda: We are confident now the storm of a revolution will come because ever since the royal palace massacre we have been trying to create a joint front with the parties. Now that that has materialized, the storm is on its way. That revolution will give birth to the interim government. That government will take the country to a constituent assembly.

Rabindra Mishra: Who will be the head of state when that interim government is formed?

Prachanda: The question of head of state and prime minister can be settled after a trust is generated between all parties after a successful revolution and when it is time to form the interim government.

Rabindra Mishra: If that be the case, why has that not been made clear in the 12 point agreement?

Prachanda: That is implied. The seven parties are still for House revival. They are not in any mood to get rid of that right now. We feel as we keep talking and interacting, we will all come around a common slogan down the line.

Rabindra Mishra: I see a lot of confusion here. Both the parties and you have been vocally critical of the king, but the agreement does not even mention the word republic. But then during interviews you all go after the king again. You talk tall about a republic. So instead of being in a strategic offensive, are you instead in the phase of a strategic deception?

Prachanda: Absolutely not. We have agreed on what we have agreed on. There is no attempt to hide or mislead.

Rabindra Mishra: So elections to a constituent assembly take place only after the monarchy has been abolished?

Prachanda: And why would that be? Why can't there be elections to a constituent assembly? It is absolutely possible. When the people's movement forges ahead, when there is a strong understanding between all political parties, then the revolution leads to an interim government that leads to a constituent assembly.

Rabindra Mishra: But according to you the monarchy has to end before the interim government can be formed. Is that not so?

Prachanda: The first emphasis of the 12 point agreement is to throw the ball into the king's court. It is for the king and the monarchists to now come forth saying how far they are willing to go to solve the national crisis. It is now their turn.

Rabindra Mishra: That is what I have been trying to figure out all along. If they are willing to seek a way out, if they are willing to soften their stance, are you also willing to soften your stance to seek common ground?

Prachanda: (A little agitated) I also said that much earlier, that question is highly theoretical at this stage. After that comes, what to do, that we can only decide later after studying the developments. The main issue right now is to create a movement to counter the king's autocracy. This is not a time to seek any understanding with the king.

Rabindra Mishra: No, it is still not clear. What is not clear is you yourself have suggested that the monarchy is abolished, and then the parties and you get together and a trustworthy person is made head of state. If that is the precondition for a constituent assembly, then an abolition of the monarchy is the precondition to a constituent assembly. Is that not the case according to you?

Prachanda: That sure is our goal. But we have also said all along that if all the forces in the country are willing to honestly go to a constituent assembly, then it is possible for all forces to go there together.

Rabindra Mishra: This is the clarity I was seeking. So if the king were to now come forth for a constituent assembly then it would be possible to go to a constituent assembly while the king is still around, no problem, right?

Prachanda: That is something for the king and the monarchists to make clear.

Rabindra Mishra: So if they were to clearly come forth for such an assembly, then it is not problematic that the monarchy is still around while the country goes for a constituent assembly, right?

Prachanda: If they can get clear on that, we can give thought to that.

Rabindra Mishra: Looks like you have really softened, haven't you?

Prachanda: What do you call softening? Nepal is in a crisis, and the people want peace and democracy. Our flexibility is for the people. That sure is.

Rabindra Mishra: So you are going to accept the outcome of the constituent assembly, whatever it might be, right?

Prachanda: We said that a long time ago. We have made that very clear in the 12 point agreement. We are committed to accepting the outcome of a constituent assembly that might be the result of free, fair elections. We have made that very clear.

Rabindra Mishra: So if that assembly comes to the conclusion that the monarchy is to be retained, you are going to accept that?

Prachanda: We don't believe the Nepali people will say that. But if that is what they say, we will respect that.

Rabindra Mishra: I see a clash here. On the one hand the monarchy has to be abolished before there can be elections to a constituent assembly. But then if the people want it back, you are going to reestablish that overthrown monarchy?

Prachanda: That is not how it is. If all the forces were to agree to a constituent assembly, all forces will get the opportunity to present themselves to the people. What we are saying is when that happens, we absolutely, totally do not believe the Nepali people will keep the monarchy that has repeatedly attacked their freedom.

Rabindra Mishra: You talked about my theoretical question. Is that not your theoretical wish? But if the people do keep the monarchy despite your wish, will you accept it?

Prachanda: We have said we will respect the people's verdict.

Rabindra Mishra: The clash still is that you want the monarchy abolished before the constituent assembly, but then you will agree to reestablish it if the people say so through the assembly.

Prachanda: That is not the case. The flaw in your logic is that you are not seeing we are willing to accept constituent assembly elections and UN supervision.

Rabindra Mishra: In the 12 point agreement you talk of elections and supervision by the UN or another trustworthy third party. Do you think India will agree to that?

Prachanda: We have not specified any country. We have not intended to specify either.

Rabindra Mishra: What India has been saying is the Nepalis themselves should solve the problems among them. Outsiders can only help. India is against UN involvement. Does that not make it impractical to seek UN involvement?

Prachanda: We don't see any reason why the UN should not be accepted. But if that is a problem, that is why we have left options open for some other trustworthy third party. India, China, Europe, America. We think we need help from all of those powers.

Rabindra Mishra: Have you talked to the Indians about this?

Prachanda: No, we have not had such talks.

Rabindra Mishra: So after elections to a constituent assembly are conducted under such supervision, you are willing to discard your weapons. True?

Prachanda: What we have been saying is after the constituent assembly election results are out, according to those results, the two armies should be integrated, and one unified army has to take shape. We have made clear there is such a peaceful resolution to the problem.

Rabindra Mishra: Let's talk a little about the Indian role in Nepal's politics. For the longest time you have been talking loud about Indian expansionism and American imperialism. But recent developments have shown India is very important also to you as the larger Nepali politics. Many are calling you India's pawn now.

Prachanda: That is absolutely baseless. Nepal's crisis and geopolitical reality lead us to think we need help from India, China and the other world powers. We are clear on that.

Rabindra Mishra: If it be that important, why have you been badmouthing India for the longest time?

Prachanda: There are ideological stands we take. Those are there for sure.

Rabindra Mishra: When you met the Nepali leaders in India recently, were you aided by the Indian intelligence agencies?

Prachanda: We held the politial dialogue through our own initiatives. We did not experience or feel any external help.

Rabindra Mishra: That makes the Indian intelligence agencies look incapable. When all the top Nepali leaders went to Delhi and met you, they had no inkling.

Prachanda: That is not something we can comment on. What is for sure is that after the king's 2/1 misadventure, new interactions have become possible. New fermentations have been taking place. Most parties are talking for democracy. We don't think the government was in a total dark. But we did not experience or feel any involvement or help.

Rabindra Mishra: Your three month long ceasefire is about to expire in a few days. Will you extend it?

Prachanda: We declared our three month long unilateral ceasefire out of respect for the people's desire for peace and democracy. But the royal army has murdered more than 25 of our cadres during this time period. More than 50 have been disappeared. Under such circumstances, it is very difficult for us to extend the ceasefire even if we might want to. But still there is one week left. We are thinking. We are deliberating.

Rabindra Mishra: You have spent 10 years circling the villages. How much longer will you stay that way?

Prachanda: Our central committe met recently. We evaluated. We have decided on a new direction. The class imbalance of power in the villages has changed. The feudal structure in the villages has been smashed. We have been trying to build a new structure. The country is looking for a political outlet. The central committee has decided to move beyond the villages to the urban areas and to the strategic installations.

Rabindra Mishra: What will you do for that?

Prachanda: The 12 point agreement has been the outcome of the new direction sought by the central committee.

Rabindra Mishra: Will there be other attacks?

Prachanda: It is less about attacks. Our major thrust is to take our political moblization to a whole new level.

Rabindra Mishra: All the lives that have been lost during the 10 years, people blame both the state and you. Do you think of yourself as a sinner or a sage?

Prachanda: Look, Rabindraji, this is a huge insurrection. The 237 year old feudal structure has been revolted against. This has been for justice. Everything has not happened the way we have wanted. This is not about sinner or sage. Human society develops through such revolts. Hundreds of thousands have been sacrificed in other circumstances. This can not be measured emotionally, it has to be measured scientifically, factually.

Rabindra Mishra: That was Prachanda.
____

Thank you Nepe, for providing the translation of the interview. If no meaning was lost during the translation then, from my point of view of the interview, either Prachanda is confused about what he actually wants or he is hiding his real motive. He is willing to keep and respect the outcome of the assembly even if Nepalese decide to keep monarchy, while he is for absolute abolishment of it.
He also states that according to the outcome of the assembly both, RNA and Maoists armies should be integrated. This makes me believe that either the assembly will deliver results in his favor or he will take his men back in the jungle until or unless he gets what he wants.
I seriously doubt his real intentions after listening and reading this interview and reading the 12 points agreement with political parties that are so ambiguous.
But if that means peace, prosperity and happiness to all Nepalese and Nepal, I am for it.

Hurray,

It's seems it is you who is confused.

As far as I can see, Prachandra is saying VERY CLEARLY (not necessarily sincerely !) that he is taking a DEMOCRATIC APPROACH. Letting people to decide what they want and accepting people's verdict.
__

Thank you but no thank you Nepe for your clarification of what Prachanda was saying since that part I clearly got.
However, while Prachanda says he will take democratic approach and will accept whatever people decide, why does he keep saying that the monarchy has to be abolished even if hypothetically, if people chose to retain it?
And what was all this peoples' war, killing of thousands of people all about if at the end he would let people decide on nepal's politics? Could he not have simply joined the main stream politics since the beginning when invited to do so by the political parties? He could have found out then what people want.

Hurray,

If Prachanda -- or anybody for that matter -- says monarchy should be abolished and at the same time says that he will respect the people's verdict, it would not be CONTRADICTORY. It would simply be DEMOCRATIC.

Now the question 'why now?'.

Well, let me tell you this joke first.

शहरको नामूद रक्सिबाजलाई प्रार्थना-सभामा देखे पछि मुल्लाले सोधे, "खान साहब, तपाई पनि यहाँ ?"

खान साहब नतमस्तक हुँदै जवाफ फर्काउछन, "के गर्नु, मान्छे बिग्रिन कति बेर लाग्दो रहेछ र ?"

Joke aside, if you feel that Prachanda is finally talking democracy (Constituent Assembly), then you will have to familiarize with the history of HMG-Maoist talks first.

It is not Prachanda, but Girija and Madhav who are talking democracy finally. Ask them, not Prachanda, why now?

And when some time in next year King Gyanendra will say yes to CA after the US threatens to air raid Narayanhity if he does not agree to CA, then ask him too, why now?

Had King Birendra been alive, instead, and agreed for CA, you would be asking him too, why now ?

The answer is: that's how democracy is, slow but all consuming, omni-victorious, unifying and universal force.

लोकतन्त्राय नम:
__

feels like Maobadi leaders now want to taste the honey "govt position"

Security forces arrested two district-level Maoist leaders, Nepal Samacharpatra reports.

CPN (Maoist) 3 and 4 No. united area in-charge Dilliram Ghimere "Hikmat" and Dhundiraj Guragai "Chandu" were arrested Monday from Topgachi VDC.

Lumari Lawati "Sugan", Manita Gurung and Shankar Dhungana were arrested in Panchthar.

So Nepe, you are saying that Maos saw the light after the lost of 13000 + innocent people. Still the question is how can we trust the maobadis. They have never kept their words. I would rather prefer them signing some accord with full commintment to non violence and democracy. ( 3 way). Then total disarment of the maoists.

peace out

My 2 cents:
I think Maoists saw light after February 1. Nepe is right, as usual, that Prachanda is for the overthrow of monarchy but Prachanda clearly said he would respect people's verdict otherwise. It is the interviewer who seems muddled up in his failed attempt to trick Prachanda into verbal mistatement; that was quite unnecessary to my thoughts and counter-productive regarding the seriousness of the whole interview for the peace of the country.
Without the interview, needless to say (except to the interviewer), if Prachanda alone were given the driving seat, Nepal would be an autocratic communist country. That's where UML and Congress parties have factored in.

Let me guess: Rabindra probably may not know how the interview was setup.. he seems to have a microphone and a headset, but the whole interview is probably setup by the RAW and the British Intelligensia. This should answer his question towards the end about Indian involvement.

Highfly,

What you are saying I am saying is not what I am saying. Read the posting carefully again.

As for whether the Maoists saw the "light" after 13000 Nepalis lost their lives, the fact is that they were showing this "light" when zero life was lost (40 points demands, Feb 4, 1996). At that time, since the Maoists were nobody, it is conceivable that the "light" was ignored. However, when HMG sat with them for a talk (November 2001), obviously acknowledging the Maoists as a force to recon with by then, the "light" was ignored again. Remember, at that time, only 1800 Nepalis had lost their lives.

Now, you are not an elementary school kid not to know that HMG had to ignore the "light", because they believed that they had a constitutional obligation to protect the unquestionability of monarchy. In another words, our political leaders were damn sure that Nepali people DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT to decide whether they want monarchy or not. The rest is history.

The original 40-point demands of the Maoists:
- http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/nepal/document/papers/40points.htm

*** *** *** ***

Testdirecotor,

I would give Rabindra a benefit of doubt. In any case, this interview was a great improvement in his style from the one he conducted with another Maoist stalwart, Baburam Bhattarai. However, I think that the BBC Nepali team, particularly Kathmandu based Shushil Sharma, failed to get the message of the 12 points agreement in it's entirety.

More on this:
- http://www.sajha.com/sajha/html/OpenThread.cfm?forum=2&ThreadID=25500#185064

Nepe,

Atleast you do not consider me of elementary school, thats good to know. Lets bury the past for the moment. ( OUr cyber history going back and forth). You mentioned about 40 points ganda. You also know it well that bck then there was NC govt.

ALso I have not found ground to trust maoists. Reason being, they have never kept their words, how can we expect to keep their words now?

A extremist communist pleading democracy is very doubtful. Thats why I mentioned about the accord. But it all depends upon king. You know it well, he will not let go.

For myself, I am sick of war. Too many innocent life lost where as so called elite class played them around. Be it maoists, be it royals or the stupid parties.

To get king in the bandwagon, I think crying out about republic will not help. Fisrt step should be bringing him back to consttitution and moving forward as per peoples mandate.

ALso, parties should have ball in the court rahter than maoists. Instead democratic reublic, I fear communist republic.

peace out

HF

PS: Nepe, I do not doubt your sincerity, but I do not know where your stubburness will lead you and your people. Also, you have to listen to the people whom you are planning to lead.

Well my few words on the interview. . .

I thoroughly enjoyed Rabindra Mishra's impromptu questions pushing Pushpa Dahal to say something concrete. But since their "republic slogan," they have not said, done or acted concretely and sincerely. Oh! apologies. Correction: Save aside the mass murders, mutilation and senseless acts of terrorism.

Indeed king has to come within the frame work of constitution and the verdict of Nepalese people has to be respected. It is given. But one thing became evidently clear from his interview, that is, Maoists saying they will respect people's verdict is "hinged" upon people deciding what Maoists already think is right. Aha!

Not that I am saying the core belief that 'people' has to be the main power in any system is not right; it is. But what is scary is not what he said, but what he did not. That is, they respect people's verdict as long as it matches with their own. Period!

So after all this "bhuichalo" we will be back to square one, or worse.

While I am at it, let me as well express my UTMOST disgust on those "GUU khane" so called leaders for making a mockery of Nepal's sovereignty YET AGAIN by their ass licking puppet acts in recent times.

Again, we remain stuck between two giant thieves and a one mountainous murderer. Add to that a piranha-esque (in nature) neighbor in the size of a whale. Water indeed appears treacherous. Hmm . . .

May god, if not bless Nepal/us; at least do not despise it/us.

Astu!

IndisGuise :O

I think you all have some valid points.But i think King G and Prachanda have already negotiated before this PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT...... So it's just a drama they are creating to confuse people like us.

HF wrote:
>PS: Nepe, I do not doubt your sincerity, but I do
>not know where your stubburness will lead you
>and your people. Also, you have to listen to the
>people whom you are planning to lead.

What is this ? What is "you and your people", "planning to lead" etc ? Are you in an impression that Nepe is some leader with a following or somebody with a plan to be ?

Nope.

Nepe,

So you do not have plan to lead. Ok its up to you. I think somebody else will take the challenge. But you are a concerned citizen, are not you? Do not you think we had enough with war?? Lets try to find a possible way out.

peace out

HF wrote:
>Lets try to find a possible way out.

Highfly, why are you acting like some leader yourself ? By the way, although I am very selective in reading threads and posting in Sajha since quite some time, I have seen you here and there addressing "We" instead of "I" to yourself and often making calls "Let's do this and that..".

Where do you get this kind of authority of a leader ? I mean, do you have an organized group to authoritatively represent when you address yourself as "We" ?

>So you do not have plan to lead. Ok its up to you.
>I think somebody else will take the challenge.

This is funny. I mean quite Quixotic. I am feeling like a Don Quixote. You are not making me one purposely, I hope.

NEPE sonofbitch who made you our leader... you don't speak for me......... and I am tired of your opinions........... shut the hell up............. pussy!!!!!!! go to nepal and try to revolt...
not in america where you are safe...... I have known and seen many nepes like you in america...... waiting for an oppourtinity to get a seat in the senate if anything happens...

God how I wish to strangle you with my bare hands...........

goes for all you nutcrackers who run after the crow without trying to see if your freaking ear is entact....

NEPE is NEPALS ENEMY NO.1

Nepe,

Your last thread is the perfect example of things I am talking about. You cannot hear any dissenting opinion or view. We as we Nepalis, thats what I meant. I do not wanna be involved in poltics. But I have every right for my opinion in the things that affects me as I am a Nepali.

I have every right to comment against the things you guys are doing as it affects the Nepalis as a whole.

I do not wanna discuss with you any more. It seems you like the suck ups and the people who blindly follow you than who raises questions and try to discuss for possible solution.

You will never change.

peace out

HF wrote "It seems you like the suck ups and the people who blindly follow you than who raises questions and try to discuss for possible solution." about Nepe.

This sounds very similar to Maoists or should I say communist strategy. Afterall, Nepe is their spokesperson here in Sajha. Aren't you Nepe?