A war of words between UML and Maoists over 'irrelevant' issues

After Pushpa Kamal Dahal, the leader of the main opposition party and Chairman of the Maoist Center, criticized the government's actions last Tuesday, the controversy flared up after the UML leader used the term "Maoist's violent war" in response.

The leaders of the two parties, who were riding in the same power boat earlier, have created a controversy inside and outside the parliament regarding the matter that has become history after the break of cooperation. The main target of Pushpa Kamal Dahal, who was forced to leave the government after the new alliance between Congress and UML, is now Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli .

When the transitional justice is about to reach its conclusion, the UML and the Maoists are in dispute over the interpretation of the 10-year armed conflict. Analysts have commented that it is irrelevant .

Even though the constitution of Nepal and the detailed peace agreement have defined the definition of the conflict, the top leadership of UML and Maoists have again come into conflict over this issue.

After UML Secretary Yogesh Bhattarai said in the House of Representatives last Wednesday, "Maoist 10 years of violence", Maoist Secretary Devendra Paudel countered that. On that day, there was a debate between UML and Maoist MPs in the parliament. Amidst the controversy, Speaker Devraj Ghimire had to instruct the Parliament Secretariat to investigate the words spoken by UML Secretary and MP Bhattarai, who is leading the government in the House of Representatives meeting on Wednesday. After Maoist Chief Whip Hitraj Pandey objected to the term 'Maoist's 10-year violence' as against the constitution and the rules of the Parliament, the Speaker had to order an investigation.

Now this controversy has reached the top level . In the context that the peace process is about to be concluded, Maoist General Secretary Dev Gurung said that after the UML tried to discredit the Maoist "People's War", it is necessary to counter it.

'Constitution itself has explained people's war . UML has gone beyond that and raised questions on the constitution with wrong intentions," he said, "it seems that the agreement of Congress and UML to amend the constitution against the federalism, inclusive, and proportional system is trying to increase the conflict in the country."

He also argued that the UML leader had expressed against the constitution that came on the foundation of the comprehensive peace agreement. "Maoist seems to be violating the detailed peace agreement by misinterpreting the people's war," he said.

UML Deputy General Secretary Pradeep Gyawali said that the statement made by Maoist Center Chairman Dahal in the Parliament last Tuesday created a controversy . Maoists said that while bringing the budget, the government is trying to establish a 'people's war' which is not mentioned in the constitution in other contexts including giving public holidays.

'Maoist has done a job of targeting the victims in a biased manner, whether it is when the government brings the budget or when the Maoist-led government gives public holidays. He is trying to establish people's war," he said, "the whole society does not accept people's war. It is understood as the armed struggle of the Maoists.' He said that the Maoist Chairman Dahal lost his temper after leaving the government and attacked the government which has not passed 100 days.

Prachanda repeatedly threatened rebellion. He repeatedly gave Sri Lanka and Bangladesh liberals . Are you trying to adopt this model? He said, 'Not only the government, but also the Maoists' job to protect the country from extremism.' .

Maoist Chairman Dahal, speaking to reporters in Surkhet on Friday, argued that UML insulted the people's war as violent. He also asked the UML leaders not to insult the historical role and importance of the People's War.

While there is a dispute over the Maoist armed war terminology, UML General Secretary Shankar Pokharel said that Dahal's "non-political expression was countered by the ruling party".

Maoist Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal is the initiator of the bitter debate going on in the Parliament. The apolitical and unparliamentary expression given by him against the Prime Minister and the new equation is the cause of today's conflict. Yes.'

He has also claimed that 'the constitution does not recognize people's war'. "Maoists who oppose UML and Congress for not speaking the language of the constitution, can they speak the language not recognized by the constitution?" he asked. "The day the Maoist side stops using the word people's war, from that day they will have the moral right to object to what the Congress and UML call a violent conflict," he argued.

Political analyst Shyam Shrestha said that it is irrelevant to argue about the terminology of 'Maoist Armed Struggle', which has been agreed upon in the past between UML and Maoists.

'There is a tendency to take smell as a habit when power is shared in Nepali political parties . It is an old disease to get into controversy by raising irrelevant issues after losing power cooperation. This has become a disease of Nepali politics," he said, "Maoist armed war has been accepted by the comprehensive peace agreement and the constitution of Nepal. It is not relevant to get into a dispute now.'

Instead of debating on the development of the country, employment, quality education, health services, he said that the parties have repeated the old trend by getting into a dispute on issues that have been agreed upon in the past.

What are the main agenda of the country to be raised? Priority issues such as progressive development of the country and quality services of the state have not been raised, he said, and even the ruling party and the main opposition have not paid attention to it. Congress, UML and Maoists have a history of violent conflicts in the past, he said.

Agreement in the past, but now why the dispute ?

Maoist armed war has been defined and accepted as armed conflict in Nepal's constitution, detailed peace agreement between Congress, UML and Maoists. After UML and Maoists formed CPN in June 2075, the constitution has also been agreed upon. However, now after the 'separation of power', they have come into controversy again.

In the preamble of Nepal's constitution, Maoist war is called armed struggle. "Remembering the glorious history of the historical people's movement, armed struggle, sacrifice and sacrifice that the Nepali people have repeatedly made for the national interest, democracy and progressive change, and honoring the martyrs and the missing and victimized citizens," the constitution states.

In the comprehensive peace agreement signed in 2063, Maoist 'people's war' is defined as an armed war . "We announce the beginning of a new chapter of peaceful cooperation by ending the armed conflict that has been going on in the country since 2052 based on the political agreement reached between the two sides to ensure the sovereignty of the Nepalese people through the Constituent Assembly, progressive political exit, democratic restructuring of the state and economic-social-cultural transformation," detailed peace. It is written in the agreement .

The word 'people's war' has been accepted in the constitution made after the union between UML and Maoists.

'The CPN (UML), which proceeded on the path of peaceful people's movement and parliamentary struggle, and the CPN (Maoist), which proceeded on the path of people's war, ended the monarchy with the initiative and leadership of the CPN (Maoist) in 2062/63 and established a democratic republic with features such as federalism, secularism, inclusiveness, and proportionality. It has been possible to do,' was said in the preamble of the law.

After the division of CPN, UML has rejected the word Jan Yudhu, while Maoists have been using the term Jan Yudhu.