tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7381909.post114589957861858798..comments2023-08-04T17:34:49.094+05:30Comments on A New Praxis in a changed world: The Revolution is coming.....Srinivasan Ramanihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13620263203764236450noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7381909.post-1146644192507679332006-05-03T13:46:00.000+05:302006-05-03T13:46:00.000+05:30Dear Viji,India is not particularly siding with th...Dear Viji,<BR/><BR/>India is not particularly siding with the US. As I mentioned, the Indian Establishment has taken a very mature stance slowly but steadily after a couple of goof-ups. It started off parroting the "two pillars" line of Constitutional Monarchy and Parliamentary Democracy and slowly changed the position to hint that any solution that is acceptable to the Nepali people is acceptable to India. In the case of the US, they have always supported a Const. Monarchy position because they think thats the best way for keeping the Maoists out.<BR/><BR/>India also have problems with the Maoists in particular. There are several reasons, the Class Character of the Indian State itself is one...the opinion of India among the Maoists is another..and the biggest is the festering Indian Maoist (the radical Naxalites) problem. The Maoists in India have some kind of presence in areas that they call the Liberated Zone or the Red Corridor which extends till Nepal from Andhra Pradesh..<BR/><BR/>Unlike the Nepali Maoists, the Indian Maoists do not want to take part in the democratic processes that have been institutionalized by the Indian state. They still are harping on positions that are a) theoretically incorrect, b) practically wrong for they claim to be communists and c) they are a huge danger for the Indian state, as much that Manmohan Singh called them as the greatest danger to the Indian state.<BR/><BR/>Eventhough Prachanda, the Nepali Maoist leader has made a statement that there is no particular link between them and the Indian counterparts and has also asked for the Indian Naxalites to re-evaluate their dogmatic postures (he calles them Dogmato-Revisionists), the Indian State is still suspicious of the Maoists in Nepal and their intentions. This is the reason why India has not headlong taken the cause of the Constituent Assembly demands that were first articulated by the Nepali Maoists.<BR/><BR/>My opinion is that, the Indian state has played a very progressive role (which could have been furthermore progressive yet) in the whole set of events that took place in Nepal. It did start off badly with some ill-timed moves (read Sidd Varadarajan's latest article on this), but progressively retraced its steps to suit the right things to be done. I am not sure if China has taken any such pro-active role at all. In the context of things too, No-role by China itself seems the best role possible.<BR/><BR/>The problem creators are the Americans, in my opinion.<BR/><BR/>Lastly, the above factoring of problems that I have done is not entirely using a class approach. If we do that, we can get a much better understanding...Srinivasan Ramanihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13620263203764236450noreply@blogger.com