Maoist Gaze, the central publication of the Communist Party of Nepal (Revolutionary Maoist)


Central Publication

Nepal Communeist Party (Revolutionary Maoist)

  no. 5 Vol. 1 15 September 2022


Contents: Page

Editorial 1

Our attitude towards the International Communist Organization 2

Reactionary Journey in Communist Costume 7         

On the Russo-Ukrainian War 14

China-US Conflict and Taiwan 17

Press Release 20



Let's take the initiative to create an international hub!

In a certain period of world history, especially in Russia, the socialist revolution under the leadership of Lenin in 1917 succeeded and the communist movement continued on its way. The process of establishing the socialist system was progressing. The new democratic revolution led by Mao in China made an important contribution to this great struggle to further the world revolution.

After Stalin's death, Khrushchev took over the leadership of the government of the Soviet Union and the Communist Party. The Khrushchevite clique reversed socialism in Russia in 1956 and restored capitalism. This clique also tried to drown the world communist movement in the right revisionist quagmire. In response, the Chairman of the Chinese Communist Party, Mao, raised the flag of Marxism-Leninism higher. After that, the world communist movement split into two camps. Despite various efforts, an international center of communist parties and organizations could not be established for nearly three decades. But meanwhile, many efforts have been made to build an international hub. The Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM) was founded at the international conference organized by the communist parties and organizations in 1984. At that time, parties and organizations that accepted the same views and thoughts as guiding principles on fundamental issues such as Marxism-Leninism-Mao Thought, opposed all kinds of revisionism and accepted the principle of using force in socio-political change were included in this. This was a remarkable achievement for the international communist movement. One of its weak points was that it failed to incorporate some genuinely revolutionary communist parties. However, efforts to incorporate these parties continued until the last moment. On the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the birth of Mao, the great leader of the world communist movement, in an extended meeting held by the RIM Committee in 1993, Mao's contributions were well evaluated and it was decided to adopt Maoism instead of Mao Thought. Maoism was accepted not only as a terminology change, but as the third stage of Marxism and the qualitative development of Marxism-Leninism. Thus, Marxism-Leninism-Mao Thought was elevated to a higher level, Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, as an integrated guiding principle. Today, Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is established as the guiding principle of all communist parties. In addition, RIM played an important role in the internationalization of people's wars led by communist parties at that time in Peru, Nepal, India, the Philippines, Turkey, Bangladesh and other countries. Thanks to all these, the process of building the Communist Party in different countries of the world has progressed. RIM played a vital role in the world communist movement for nearly 22 years.

In the later period, the top leaders of the CPN(Maoist) and US DKP, which had played a crucial role in RIM, went on the path of corruption. Prachanda, the ex-president of the CPN (Maoist), followed the path of national and class capitulation and led the party to right revisionism. Bob Avakian, President of the US DKP, followed the right opportunist and liquidationist line of the New Synthesis, arguing that MLM was obsolete and therefore unable to lead revolutions in the given situation. These two events directly or indirectly affected RIH. As a result, RIM was liquidated without any official decision. There have been some attempts to re-establish RI, but these have also been unsuccessful.

After that, efforts were made to build a new international communist center from a new axis. There was an attempt to form a preparatory committee to hold an international conference of communist parties and organizations. However, due to insufficient effort, preparation and basic agreement, the situation was not ready to hold such a conference. The process of publishing a joint statement signed by the organizations in contact and reaching a common understanding with reference to 1 May continued. But strangely, “Workers of the world unite!” The communist parties that adopted the call began to issue two joint statements each year. This created doubts as to whether the communist parties would split again before an international center was formed.

We believe that discussion and negotiation should be conducted for unity and rapprochement, not division and separation. There have been some positive signs in recent discussions and talks. It is understood that there is a conscious effort to have a unity-oriented debate, not a division-oriented one. We should welcome this effort. Even today, there is a need for unity among the communist organizations scattered around the world and a clear international, ideologically and politically. Let's all move in this direction.


Our stance on the International Communist Organization

International Division

CPN (Revolutionary Maoist)

The International Communist Movement now lacks a center after the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement Committee (DEH-KOM) was dissolved without being declared. As a result, the movement is now disbanded. Most of the revolutionary communist parties, which may or may not be part of RIM, are active in their missions; some have deviated ideologically and some have even become neo-reactionary. And many other parties and organizations have emerged. The international communist movement is advancing in its own relativism, fighting against imperialism. The objective situation is developing in favor of the proletarian revolution. However, the lack of necessary ideological and political unity and an international communist center weakened the united and central offensive of the revolutionary communists against imperialism and internal reaction. Imperialism survived in the weakness of the revolutionary communists. This is a painful reality today.

Meanwhile, some of the Maoist communist parties made attempts to establish an international organization and two coordination committees were formed to organize a conference. Somebody United Marxist-Leninist-Maoist International Conference, the other is United Maoist International Conference recommends. It is noteworthy that both initiatives propose a unified international conference. Although they did not emerge as a joint statement, these are positive steps forward. However, there is no unity in the understanding of many important ideological and political issues between these two coordination committees and the parties close to them. Despite this, there is consensus among the revolutionary parties to build an international communist center through a joint conference. This is a good thing. Stepping up on this, we must systematize the two-line struggle between the parties and build a unified international organization within the two-line struggle. This is a necessity today.

After these attempts in the international communist movement, the ideological and political positions of various communist parties have also begun to emerge. This started a new discussion. Many problems of unity and separation also came to the fore in these discussions. One harshly criticized the other. This is not wrong. But this needs to be handled properly. Seeking ideological cracks in the movement in the name of struggle and trying to wedge it, or seeking consensus on the basic theoretical problems of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism in order to realize unity will not lead us to the right place. The ideological struggle we wage must be based on principles and its method must be scientific. This opens the way for the foundation of unity.

Marxism taught us that the communist movement is a unity of opposites. There is an uninterrupted ideological struggle between Marxist and non-Marxist perspectives, tendencies and lines. This is known as a two line fight. No communist party or movement can escape it. This is the driving force of the communist movement. Actors and trends may change, but the struggle continues. This is why Mao said that struggle is absolute and unity is relative. This is a fundamental question of Marxist philosophy that the Communist Party must grasp. We must strive to build a strong but relative unity in the midst of absolute struggle. There can be no absolute unity between opposites.
During the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and the Great Debate, Mao correctly synthesized the dialectic of unity and struggle in the communist movement. For him, the basis of unity is ideological struggle, and this struggle must be guided by revolutionary transformation and a higher level of unity. In short, he synthesized it as unity-struggle and transformation. Only the revolutionary transformation after the struggle creates a new basis for a higher level of ideological unity. It is important to keep in mind that the goal of the two-line struggle should be transformation, not negation.

The two statements we published simultaneously on May 1 in the past years show how weak the theoretical basis of unity in the Maoist movement is. We are in such an embarrassing situation that we are trying to determine which side is stronger by counting the number of signatories on both sides. This shows the ideological state of all of us. We have to get on top of that. Self-criticism is the first condition for this. For this very reason, Mao said that revolutionary communists must be ready to set themselves on fire. We must grasp this spirit of Mao.

We are currently in the process of building an international communist organisation. There is unity among us on many issues, but on some issues, our understandings and positions are different. In this case, we must determine the necessary minimum conditions and proceed based on them. The minimum principles to be adhered to are Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, the necessity of violence in the social revolution, and the theory of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, that is, the permanent revolution under the dictatorship of the proletariat. The ones to be opposed are imperialism, all kinds of reaction, parliamentarism, revisionism, the Prachanda Way and the New Synthesis. These conditions as a whole distance us from the current main danger, right-wing revisionism. We should establish an international body by organizing a joint conference or congress between communist parties with similar views on the above fundamental questions. It is inappropriate to insist on who is in RI and who is not, when DEH-KOM does not already exist.

In addition, there are contradictions on some other issues between communist parties that share the same views on the above basic questions. Some of these will be resolved during the two-line struggle, and some will be resolved by the class struggle. New contradictions will also reappear. This is what the universality of contradiction means. When a common understanding of the fundamental problems of ideology and politics is formed, moving forward by building relative unity through unity-struggle transformation and new unity on a new basis is the lesson Mao taught us.

There are also many friendly contradictions in the contemporary international communist movement. Some of these are Marxism-Leninism-Maoism and mainly Maoism, the universality of the people's war, the fundamental and main contradictions of the world, the problem that the international communist movement is currently in the stage of strategic counter-offensive, the thought of Gonzalo, the evaluation of the Comintern and Stalin, the evaluation of RIM, etc. It is good to strive for a common view on these issues within the movement. However, it is not correct to start the construction of an international organization after reaching a common understanding on these issues. These are issues that can be resolved during the two-line struggle and the class struggle.

Right here, we're not going to have a comprehensive discussion on the disagreements mentioned earlier. We will discuss when necessary. We will now have a brief discussion about our preliminary view of the above-mentioned questions. These are as follows.

One, Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is an intertwined whole and comprehensive principle. Marxism is not a simple arithmetic summation of Leninism and Maoism. Leninism developed on the basis of Marxism and rose to Marxism-Leninism. Likewise, Maoism arose on the basis of Marxism-Leninism, and our guiding principle, Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, developed. Thus, Marxism, Leninism and Maoism are inseparable and interrelated; They are not separate doctrines. The second of these three doctrines is undoubtedly more advanced than the first, but it is inseparable from the next. This is what is meant by saying that in today's world no party or individual can be a Marxist without being a Maoist. In principle, the understanding of Maoism risks separating and undermining Maoism from Marxism and Marxism-Leninism. That's why they are connected with a hyphen, not a comma. Therefore, our party does not accept the concept of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, mainly Maoism. Marxism-Leninism-Maoism is a comprehensive principle in action and is developmental. It is also true for future developments.

Second, the question of whether people's war is universal. This requires an explanation. The term people's war usually refers to protracted people's war, the theory developed by Mao. It progresses through three stages. These are strategic defense, strategic balance, and strategic counterattack. In addition, the base area is the backbone of the protracted people's war. In developed capitalist countries where transportation and communication technology is highly developed and the revolutionary class is concentrated in cities, prolonged people's war and building base areas is not feasible. In this case, how will the people's war be without a base area? Why won't there be mobile insurgent guerrillaism? There is no satisfactory explanation in any of the documents we have received so far.

The use of force, that is, violence, is universal for the seizure of power. Therefore, it is also necessary in the social revolution. This is a war waged by the people, led by the party of the proletariat. So far, two models of violence have been used in successful social revolutions. These are the protracted people's war and the armed popular uprising, that is, the Chinese and Russian models. Both of these models of warfare were conducted by the people. If war by the people is called people's war, then both these models of war are people's wars. However, this is a very simplistic interpretation. It cannot capture the essence and content of the subject. Again, these war models cannot be reproduced in the current situation. We need to develop them. An in-depth analysis is required of how much the people's war terminology currently used overlaps with the two established models mentioned earlier, and where it differs. Otherwise, if the word people's war sounds good but there is no clarity on how to implement it on the ground, there is no other option for the communist movement but to go around the same cycle.

There have been many spontaneous uprisings in the past few years. Since there was no revolutionary party leadership in these countries, they disappeared as the rising waves disappeared on the seashore. We have recently witnessed spontaneous popular uprisings in Sri Lanka, which is in debt-ridden, depleted international currency reserves, and even daily activity has come to a standstill. The government army and police sat like a silent spectator. Public anger will also subside in Sri Lanka. Let's imagine that there is a real communist party and a determined armed unit under its leadership; what could have happened in Sri Lanka then? When we talk about the universality of violence in the revolution, we need to focus our attention here as well.

Third, another point of discussion concerns the fundamental and principled contradictions of the world. The contradictions between labor and capital, the contradictions between imperialist powers, and the contradictions between imperialism and oppressed nations and peoples are the main contradictions of today's world. Among them, the contradiction between imperialism and oppressed nations and peoples is the chief contradiction. The failure of the neoliberal economy, the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, the Russia-Ukraine war, and the Taiwan crisis between the US and China have all contributed to the escalation of the global economic recession. As a result, all the fundamental contradictions of the world intensified. Although the danger of the Third World War has increased due to the sharpening of the contradiction between imperialists, the main trend of the world today is revolution.

Fourth, the question of whether the contemporary international communist movement is in the stage of counter-offensive is another matter of debate. Some parties analyzed the period from the publication of the Communist Manifesto to the establishment of the Paris Commune as a strategic defense phase, and the period from the October Socialist Revolution to the Chinese New Democratic and Proletarian Cultural Revolution as a strategic balance phase, and then moved to the strategic counter-attack phase. it seems. We do not agree with this. Although it is accepted as correct considering the theoretical superiority of Marxism over capitalism, it is not an objective analysis in a situation where there is no socialism in any country in the world and the subjective power of revolutionary communists is weak. We believe this comment is the result of a mechanical imitation of Chairman Mao's statement that the next 50 to 100 years will be very turbulent.

Fifth, another topic of discussion is Gonzalo Thought. Synthesizing Chairman Mao's contribution to Maoism and serving the world revolution by opening a new front of democratic revolution in Peru after the counter-revolution in China are very important contributions of Comrade Gonzalo. However, we do not consider it a mature decision to synthesize Gonzalo's contributions as Gonzalo Thought. Again, we do not think that this synthesis is wrong and that the defense, implementation and development of Gonzalo's contributions should be stopped. The correctness of the synthesis will be proved during the intense debates in the international forum by working with comrades who defend the Gonzalo Thought and its application mainly in the field of class struggle. We believe that preventing new ideas from sprouting inhibits its development.

There are also disagreements about the assessment of Six, Comintern and Stalin. There is disagreement over the formation of an anti-fascist front at the Seventh Congress of the Communist International and instructing the Communist Parties in the countries concerned to support that front. Our position is that it is correct to form an anti-fascist united front aimed at defeating fascism and preserving Soviet power, which was the base area of ​​the communists at that time. Again, we accept Mao's assessment that although Comrade Stalin was a great revolutionary, the international communist movement suffered some losses due to his metaphysical weaknesses.

Seventh, there are also differences in the assessment of AID. The founding of RIM was a revolutionary step of far-reaching significance at a time when counter-revolution was taking place in Russia and China and the defenders of imperialism were touting the end of history and the failure of Marxism. The document titled “Long Live Marxism-Leninism-Maoism” and the RIM Manifesto provided an orientation and revolutionary energy to the communist movement at that time. Established as an embryonic centre, the RIH Committee has played a largely commendable role in supporting the people's war in Peru and Nepal and building communist parties in other countries. However, a problem arose that the two-line struggle within the RIM was not healthy and as a result, the US DKP caused losses in the communist movement in the recent past due to its sectarian and hegemonic role. (DEH) had its limitations and weaknesses. This is an issue that needs serious consideration.
Apart from the above questions, there are other controversies and disagreements in the communist movement. This is not a bad thing. But in order to resolve the differences and develop the communist movement, an appropriate method of conducting the two-line struggle must be developed. And the class struggle itself resolves some conflicts.

Now a question has arisen, which coordinating committee should attend the joint international conference organized by? Given the current level of unity in the world communist movement, it is unlikely that a party supporting one initiative will attend the conference called by another. In this case, holding parallel conferences means a declaration of division within the movement. Such a split in the communist movement serves imperialism. The differences of the communist parties are such that they can be resolved through comradely ways within the framework of Maoist principles. For this, a single international center needs to be established. In this case, it may be a viable option to dissolve both coordinating committees by mutual consent and to form a new organizing committee to hold a joint international conference. We think that parties on both sides will join the call for a joint conference or congress. Our party is ready to participate in it.

Some may view our stance as collaborative or eclectic. However, this is not true. If we stand with the core principles of MLM, then we must be ready to move forward in unity by waging a two-line struggle in subsequent conflicts. The idea that demands absolute unity in ideology and prefers to build an organization accordingly is incompatible with Marxism. The Marxist worldview is the philosophy of absolute struggle and the relative unity of opposites. Therefore, relative consensus is and should be made on some issues of the organization, but not on the fundamental principles. This applies not only to the present, but also to the future. We must not ignore the unity and struggle that existed between Marx and Blanqui in the First International, and between Lenin and Kautsky in the Second International.

Now the question arises whether the conference should form a loose platform of international communists or a relatively strong centre. Given the current level of unity among us, proper organization is now a platform. Even if the joint conference or congress decides to establish the International Communist Center, we will not oppose it. However, the center's decisions must be taken by consensus. We should not resort to democratic centralism and the majority and minority method when making decisions.


The economic situation all over the world is getting worse, mainly due to the failure of the neoliberal economy. The Covid-19 epidemic, the Russia-Ukraine war and the Taiwan crisis added to this. All the fundamental contradictions of the world are getting ready to explode and the threat of world war appears. Considering all these, the coming days will be the days of global economic and political crisis and the possibility of peoples to engage in a spontaneous revolt has increased significantly. Many countries of the world are in Sri Lanka's line. While the masses of the people were seeking a revolutionary leadership for their liberation, whether the Marxist-Leninist-Maoist parties were unitedly ready to fulfill this responsibility emerged as a serious question. Only with a conscious, united and planned action can we defeat imperialism and its dogs. Progress with determination is the need of the day for all of us.

Long live Marxism-Leninism-Maoism!

Long live Proletarian Internationalism!

Down with Imperialism and All Reaction!

Down with All Revisionism!

Long live the World Socialist Revolution!



Reactionary Journey in the Communist Mask

Comrade Kiran.

  1. context of the topic

Born out of the historic Jhapa uprising in 1972, the CPN (ML) declared that it would complete the new democratic revolution in Nepal through protracted people's war. However, in the next period, it changed to CPN(UML) by adopting right revisionism and a parliamentary political line based on multi-party democracy. And to complete the new democratic revolution in Nepal, the CPN(Maoist) advanced by declaring the Great People's War in 1996 and calling the CPN(UML) the shield of reaction. About ten years later, a section of the CPN (Maoist) led by Prachanda followed the path of neo-revisionism and parliamentarism and turned into the CPN (Maoist Centre).

The two revisionist groups, CPN (UML) and CPN (Maoist Centre), merged on 17 May 2018 and the combined party was named Communist Party of Nepal (NKP). Oli became Prime Minister of Nepalese government. Prachanda and Oli agreed to run the government alternately. Both Oli and Prachanda became the Leaders of this party. Ordinary people asked, why two presidents in one party? As Oli answers the question – it's not a matter of pace or taxi driving; it's a matter of pushing a jet plane, so two pilots are needed; He said that this is a matter of two presidents in the Party. Oli kept babbling: trains will run in Nepal, ships will come, the country will progress on its journey of prosperity and no one will starve. People started to be surprised after hearing this.

Days passed. It was discussed that a president would lead the government, another president would lead the party and the Prime Minister would change his order. However, Oli did not soften his stance, and disagreements continued to escalate. The controversy escalated when Oli dissolved the House of Representatives and began acting alone. Conflict intensified due to position, prestige and personal ego. At the same time, both Oli and Prachanda lost the case against the double CPN in the Supreme Court. As the proverb says, “we are rats again”. The Supreme Court resurrected both the UML and the Maoist Center (abbreviated as MM), nullifying their unity. They woke up from their dreams. Later, Nepal's parliament formed a coalition government with Prachanda led by Deuba.

Even after losing the government, Oli did not stop roaring. However, Prachanda started shouting even more than him. By calling himself a true Maoist, he again began to cause great confusion. After all, they had followed the path of neo-reaction before and after unification. Even after the resurrection, they continue to walk on the same path.

In his article Revisionism and Decline, which analyzed the politics of the dual CPN and its chief leader, he wrote: “The history of the Nepalese communist movement is the history of the fierce two-line struggle between Marxism and revisionism. In this struggle, sometimes Marxism and sometimes revisionism got stronger. Right revisionism, which sometimes seems strong in form and number, is actually a neo-reaction. Although he tries to mislead the world by wearing Marxist costumes and ornaments, this is only temporary. It is certain that revisionism will be exposed as neo-reactionary in the eyes of the public. Faced with serious difficulties and many complications, Marxism must present itself effectively in the revolutionary process in order to liberate the working class and the people. This is what the dialectic of world history and the Nepalese communist movement tells us.” (Kiran, Revisionism and Decline, p. 17). These are also true in the current context. In this article we will draw attention to the CPN(MM) and its main leadership. We have written about his ideas, views, policies, program and line in previous works, and there is no need to talk much about it now. We tried to briefly examine the latest situation regarding their world views, policies and activities.

  1. World view

Worldview serves as a guide in determining the policy, program and line of the Communist Party. Marxists follow the metaphysical versus materialist dialectic. Revisionists, on the other hand, take refuge in metaphysics against materialist dialectics. MM and its chief leader pursued a revisionist worldview under the shadow of metaphysics.

The fundamental law of materialist dialectics is the law of unity and the struggle of opposites. According to Lenin, this law is based on the concept of "one splits in two". Mao also gave a detailed explanation of this law and concept. However, revisionists pursue the doctrine of the union of two in one as opposed to the division of one into two. The law of dividing one into two emphasizes unity-struggle-transformation, while the law of two-in-one emphasizes unity-struggle-reconciliation. Accordingly, revisionists reconcile between the bourgeoisie and the working class, between the opportunist line and the Marxist line. MM has been doing this for a long time.
Likewise, revisionists adopt dualism, eclecticism and pluralism against materialist dialectics. In this direction, they work to create a permanent harmony between opposites, to mix different alien ideas and to create obstacles to building an integrated worldview. This is exactly what MM does.

One of the most important ways of thinking followed by metaphysicians and revisionists is sophism, also called casuistic. They resort to sophism to make their opponents uneasy and present falsehood as truth. Sophists work hard to prove white with black and black with white, right with wrong and wrong with right, truth with lie and lie with truth.

Regarding the opportunists of the Second International, Lenin says:The progress of science provides more and more material proving the correctness of Marx's thought. This makes it necessary to fight it hypocritically without openly opposing the principles of Marxism, but by pretending to accept Marxism, depriving it of its content with sophistication and turning it into a harmless, sacred 'icon' for the bourgeoisie.…” (Lenin, Collected Essays, Vol. 21, Page 222)

The main leader of MM is very adept at using hypocrisy. Lenin's words also apply to MM. Examining the documents reveals many misstatements.

3) Guiding Principle

The MM's political report states: “The guiding principle of the party is Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. The Party is determined to defend, implement and develop it in accordance with the historical situation today.” (Political Report adopted by the Eighth Congress of the MM, page 35). Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, which is said here as a guiding principle, is not real, it is only for show. What is real? The political report reads: “The need of the day is to work, research, think, contemplate, discuss and struggle to synthesize new ideas under the strategy of socialist revolution. The democracy of the 21st century developed by the Prachanda Way and the Maoist movement will be an important experience and reference material for this.” (ibid. p. 31). The emphasis on the Prachanda Path is evident here as well. Referring to the Prachanda Path and the twenty-first century, MM leadership seems to be trying to design a new path and synthesize new ideas as an alternative to and opposed to MLM.

4) The so-called originality of the democratic revolution

The political report stated, “The class struggle and the process of political struggle did not go as we wanted, but the bourgeois-democratic revolution was essentially completed by following its peculiar path. The Russian February Revolution, which put an end to tsarism in 1917, as Lenin and the Bolsheviks said, could not be completed as a provisional revolutionary government led by the working class. Comrade Lenin came to the conclusion that the end of tsarism and the transfer of power to the bourgeoisie was essentially a complete bourgeois-democratic revolution, even if it was not completed as they said, and the Party came to the conclusion that the preparations for the socialist revolution must now be carried forward. (ibid, pp. 31-32) Here, the supposed originality of the Nepalese People's Revolution is discussed as compared to the ideas expressed by Lenin about the Russian February Revolution. In fact, such a comparison cannot be made.

First, according to Lenin, the first, great and essential feature of the revolution is the transfer of state power from one class to another. Before the February Revolution, state power in Russia was in the hands of the serfs, represented by the elite class and the monarchy. After the February revolution, state power in Russia passed into the hands of the bourgeoisie. Before the Parliamentary Republic of Nepal was established, state power was in the hands of the feudal, comprador and bureaucratic bourgeoisie. Even after the parliamentary republic is established, the state power is in the hands of the same class. So how did the bourgeois-democratic revolution take place in Nepal?

Second, the pre-revolutionary Russian revolution was aimed only at the serf-owning, aristocratic landlord class, and the monarchy represented this class. But because Nepalese society was semi-feudal and semi-colonial, the Nepalese Revolution was directed against both internal feudalism and external reaction. So how does the overthrow of the monarchy and the establishment of the republic complete the bourgeois-democratic, that is, the new democratic revolution?

Thirdly, Lenin also spoke of the "revolutionary democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry" to complete the bourgeois-democratic revolution in Russia. Although such a dictatorship as a whole could not be established in Russia, there was a dual power and in this sense, the “revolutionary democratic dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry” was realized. But in the context of Nepal, in the process of the Great People's War, the country's large rural-based popular governments were dissolved in collaboration with representatives of the former state power.

Fourth, in his April Theses, presented immediately after the February Revolution, Lenin said: “Not a parliamentary republic—to turn from Soviets of Workers' Deputies to a parliamentary republic would be a step backwards—but a nationwide, top-to-bottom Soviet of Workers', Agricultural Workers' and Peasants' Deputies. republic." (Lenin, April Theses, Vol. 24, p. 23). On the contrary, in Nepal, a parliamentary republic was adopted immediately after the end of the monarchy and every effort was made to preserve, establish and strengthen it.

In this way, given all this, no comparison can be made between Russia's February Revolution and Lenin's great ideas and surrender to the reactionary class and state power in Nepal and betrayal of the revolution. Trying to compare in this way is like trying to compare revolution and counter-revolution.

5) Concept for current constitution

The political report adopted at the 8th Congress of the MM states: “The new constitution has made it clear that the people will adhere to the competitive multi-party system of government and socialism based on it. In addition to the universally accepted fundamental problems of democracy, the constitution guarantees human rights, independent judiciary and separation of powers. Likewise, the state is clearly defined as an inclusive federal democratic republican state oriented towards socialism. It has defined the character of our change, our state, and our society.” (ibid p. 34)

Here, the so-called new constitution based on a democratic republic was praised. Democratic republic was supported. And it is said that the constitution will remain “committed to socialism” and the satisfaction of the state being defined as “socialism-oriented” is expressed. It is also said that change determines the character of the state and society.

The MM happily accepted the democratic republic. So what kind of socialism is this? The comprador is and cannot be anything but socialism without the dictatorship of the proletariat, acceptable to the bureaucratic capitalists and the feudal classes. Do true Marxists stick to parliamentary republics? Referring to the experience of the Russian revolution and the Leninist concept, Stalin says: “As a result of the study of the experience of the two Russian revolutions, on the basis of the theory of Marxism, Lenin concluded that the best political form for the dictatorship of the proletariat is not a parliamentary democratic republic, but a republic of Soviets. Hence, in April 1917, in the period of transition from the bourgeois revolution to the Socialist revolution, Lenin issued the slogan of the republic of Soviets as the best political form for the dictatorship of the proletariat.” (History of the CPSU, page 356).

6) Policy, program and line

The policy, program and line of the old MM era, the double CPN era and the last MCM era are almost the same. The MM's political report states: “In the present particular capitalist stage of the development of the Nepalese people, the Party's strategy is to establish scientific socialism. However, given the weak position of national capital, the strong dominance of comprador and bureaucratic capitalism over the economy, and the necessity of struggling against feudal remnants and foreign interventions, it is not possible to immediately switch to socialism and then implement socialist programs. From the momentary point of view, the party will take care to create the basis of socialism through peaceful competition and legal means. Therefore, the main policy of the party today is 'socialism-oriented welfare'.” (Political Report, p.35).

Here it is said that Nepalese society is in a certain capitalist stage. The establishment of socialism was taken as the party's strategy. And it has been mentioned that it is not possible to immediately switch to socialism and implement the socialist program. And it was mentioned about laying the groundwork for socialism through peaceful competition and legal means, and it was said that welfare based on socialism was the main strategy. It is said that on the one hand, Nepal is in a special capitalist stage, and on the other hand, it is not possible to implement the program of socialism. What is this? It is an expression of a very ambiguous and contradictory political thought in itself.

There is also talk of peaceful competition and laying the groundwork for socialism by legal means. The document reads: “Is it possible to build the foundation of socialism through the electoral means of peaceful competition? In accordance with the concept laid down in the communist movement of the twentieth century, this is impossible. However, we said it was possible because of the experience of past counter-revolutions, the characteristics of the 21st century, and mainly because of the role played by the Communist Party-led people in Nepal's bourgeois-democratic revolution.” (Ibid., p. 36) To believe that socialism can be achieved by means of peaceful competition and legal election, no matter how distorted, is simply to follow in the footsteps of far-right revisionist and reactionary ideologues, including the treacherous Khrushchev.

7) The Mixed Economy Illusion

The systematic liberalization process in Nepal started in 1992. From 1992 to 2009, more than 30 public industries and businesses were canceled and dissolved. The hegemony of neoliberalism in Nepal's economy has grown. The mixed economy began to come to an end. However, MM says, "By adopting a mixed economic policy that includes public, private and cooperative, an approach to making not only politics but also the economy inclusive and participatory" has been put forward. (ages34)

Today Nepal's economy is dominated and led by the private sector. Comprador and bureaucratic capital are influential in Nepal's economy. Nepal's economy is dominated by neoliberal imperialism. Privatization and commercialization are common in education, healthcare and other sectors. But while the MM continues to create confusion about mixed economic policy, it also dreams of socialism under the guidance of neoliberal imperialism.

8) Dualism and eclecticism

The entire MM document is filled with various contradictions, dualism and eclecticism. It is dualism to say that opposite things are true and this is true. Preparing a vegetable soup by mixing various incompatible ideas and trends is eclecticism. MM leadership does exactly that. While MM analyzes the current Nepalese society, he says, on the one hand, “The typical capitalist phase of today”, and on the other hand, “The current situation is a manifestation of the internal conflict of the Nepalese people against the crone bureaucratic capitalism fueled by the remnants of foreign reaction and feudalism”. (Ibid, p. 35). This is a strange and contradictory analysis.

If Nepalese society is “today in a special capitalist stage” according to MM's analysis, then the main contradiction in Nepalese society should be between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. In that case, the socialist program of resolving such a fundamental contradiction might be correct. But when MM analyzed in the same document that the fundamental contradiction of Nepali society emerged as “the contradiction between the Nepalese people against comprador and bureaucratic capitalism fueled by the remnants of foreign reaction and feudalism”, socialism cannot be an appropriate program to resolve this contradiction. Instead, in this case, the new democratic program would be appropriate. But MM doesn't seem to think so. There is a serious inconsistency and contradiction between the analysis of society and the program of resolving internal contradictions. Similarly, the MC says elsewhere: “Actually, the question of national independence against imperialist intervention is a fundamental question of the bourgeois-democratic revolution. In the case of Nepal, although the bourgeois-democratic revolution has basically been achieved, the fundamental question of foreign intervention and national independence has not been resolved. (ibid, p. 39).

Here, the leadership, on the one hand, says, “The question of national independence against imperialist intervention is a fundamental question of the bourgeois-democratic revolution”. On the other hand, he says, “the bourgeois democratic revolution has basically been achieved in the specific context of Nepal”. And he still says: “The fundamental problem of foreign intervention and national independence has not been resolved.” What a contradictory thing!

It is clear that the question of national independence is the fundamental question of the bourgeois-democratic revolution. If the bourgeois-democratic revolution has been achieved, then the fundamental question of national independence must also be resolved. The bourgeois-democratic revolution in Nepal has been completed but the fundamental question of national independence has not been resolved – oddly enough.
Says Mao: “The two fundamental tasks, the national revolution and the democratic revolution, are at the same time different and united… It is wrong to see the national revolution and the democratic revolution as two completely different stages of revolution. (Selected Works, Mao, Vol. 2, Page 318). MM leadership has done just that wrong thing. According to the Maoist concept, the national revolution and the people's revolution should be understood as a revolution that will be carried out in one stage, not in two different stages. This is exactly what MM fails to understand. This is a grave mistake. But the strange thing is that the MM leadership does not admit this kind of mistake. On the contrary, MM has fallen into the quagmire of dualism and eclecticism, following a contradictory logic.

9) Mediation of foreign aggression

The MM leadership is brazenly mediating Indian expansionism and US imperialism. Lenin said that in the era of imperialism and proletarian revolution, imperialism and revisionism are inextricably linked. This is well characterized in the context of the MM and all the right revisionists in Nepal.

It was clear that the MMC (Millennium Challenge Corporation) imposed by US imperialism was an integral part of the anti-national and Indo-Pacific strategy. Various leftist and patriotic forces had long been agitating against this agreement. By completely ignoring and disobeying all these points, MCC President Prachanda played a very despicable role to approve it from parliament by weaving a false web of so-called interpretive statements to appease US imperialism.
The first clause of the so-called interpretive declaration reads: “Nepal, by becoming a party to the Convention, declares that Nepal will not be part of any strategic, military or security alliance of the United States, including the Indo-Pacific Strategy.” (Article No. 1, the interpretative declaration proposed by the MM and adopted by the Nepalese parliament). It is well known that any treaty, agreement or agreement is bilateral. In this case, this unilateral declaration by Nepal cannot have any legal meaning and value. After all, it is clear that this declaration is nothing more than a piece of paper on the one hand and an illusion on the other.
Immediately after the MCC deal was ratified, Prachanda told reporters: “I am delighted that the country has survived an accident, after the MCC was ratified along with the interpretive declaration.” (Kantipur Daily 28 February 2022). How shameless to claim that the country survived an accident by endorsing the MCC, which poses such a serious threat to the sovereignty and national independence of the country! This is an ugly and hateful example of the brokerage of US imperialism.

There are many instances where MM leader Prachanda mediated Indian expansionism, and we have mentioned them in various places. It has recently played a very vile role in passing the national anti-citizenship bill (2022) through Parliament. He also said that when he visited India recently, he shamelessly passed this bill on his own initiative. This is also a vile example of mediating Indian expansionism.

10) Drama and illusion

MM and its core leadership have created many tricks and illusions on various theoretical and political issues. A little discussion is necessary in this context:

First, the problem of creativity. Revolutionary communists take seriously the problem of creative application and development of Marxism. However, revisionists distort and vulgarize Marxism in the name of creative application and development of Marxism. MM's original leadership does just that. The mistake of immersing the CPN (Maoist) in parliamentarism, which has been waging a ten-year people's war to bring about a new democratic revolution in Nepal, has become for Prachanda a creative practice of Marxism.

Second, the issue of originality. Marxists try to advance the revolution in an original way. But for the opportunists, this originality is an ugly imitation of the reactionaries. The MM said that the end of the monarchy and the establishment of a parliamentary republic with the alliance of the Nepali Congress are the main features of the Nepalese bourgeois-democratic revolution, which was carried out by giving the leadership share to the bourgeoisie. It is simply absurd and reactionary to talk of ending the monarchy and establishing a parliamentary republic as the completion of a new democratic revolution, without ending the semi-feudal and semi-colonial state of Nepalese society and establishing a new democratic state. Here the concept of uniqueness is shamelessly distorted.

Third, deception and cheating. There must be no deception or deception within the Communist Party on vital matters, including theory and politics. Mao said: “Apply Marxism, not revisionism; unite, do not divide; be open and honest, no intrigue and conspiracy.” (Basic Understanding of the Chinese Communist Party, page 7). But revisionists do not do that.

The MCC document states: “While the Chunwang meeting of the Central Committee gave general theoretical and political direction to very serious and sensitive decisions such as the signing of the peace treaty and the deployment of the People's Liberation Army and its weapons in the cantons, these decisions should have been taken only through open discussion and deliberation in the central committee. While objectively correct, the leadership's aforementioned decision-making process has led to distrust and anxiety somewhere within the party. The subjective weakness of Chairman Comrade Prachanda has been exposed, reflecting his overconfidence that goes beyond the democratic centralism of the party.” (Political Report, ibid, p. 29). It turned out that serious issues such as the signing of the peace treaty and the keeping of arms with the People's Liberation Army in the cantons were not included in the Central Committee and were decided individually. But Prachanda's subjective weakness and failure to transcend the party's democratic centralism have been reduced to "a weakness reflecting overconfidence." This is an ugly example of deception and cheating of a serious nature.

Similarly, the document states that “In some contexts, talking about drafting a so-called constitution and thinking of rebellion in mind has taken a toll on drafting a maximally progressive constitution through the Constituent Assembly, because after the peace treaty was signed and the army and weapons were placed in the canton, revolt was not possible.” (ages 29). Here, the duality of writing a parliamentary constitution on the one hand and deceiving revolutionary comrades by talking about rebellion on the other, is fully exposed.

Self-criticism of shortcomings, weaknesses and mistakes is a positive thing. But here, in the name of so-called self-criticism, such serious errors, deceptions and tricks have been tried to be cleared. This is serious irony.

Fourth, so-called socialism, reaction in action. Marxists maintain consistency between what they say and what they do about politics, program, and line. Revisionists, on the other hand, say one thing and do another. Referring to Kautsky and other right-wing revisionist leaders of the Second International, Lenin named “Social Imperialism” as a way of thinking that favors socialism in words and imperialism in action. Prachanda's socialism, on the one hand, does not have the dictatorship of the proletariat, and on the other, is based on the concept that it can be achieved through peaceful parliamentary electoral competition. According to Marx-Engels in The Communist Manifesto there are different forms of socialism and reactionary socialism is one of them. So it is clear that the socialism promoted by Prachanda is nothing but reactionary socialism.

Fifth, the practice of fallacy. Above we quoted Lenin's statement about fallacy. Its essence is to look like Marxism and neutralize its content, turning it into a harmless god-idol for the bourgeoisie. Prachanda and the MM under her leadership are doing exactly the same. In the report, this fallacy was applied from beginning to end. For example, in this political report, they claimed that the guiding principle of the party was Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. Elsewhere, they have put forward the concept of the Prachanda Path and twenty-first century democracy as the basis for a "new ideological synthesis". In the same way, the report presented by Prachanda, on the one hand, mentions "to grasp the basic principles of Marxism" on dictatorship and violence, and on the other hand, its content has been weakened by saying that "in the current transitional state, which is turning towards socialism, there is the possibility to prepare the foundation of socialism through peaceful struggle and competition". Actually, the MM leader Prachanda is very talented at bullshit. And we need to root out such nonsense.

Sixth, the old Maoists' illusion of unity. Following the dissolution of the dual CPN and the re-establishment of the MCC, Prachanda has said on several occasions that all ex-Maoists must now unite. In this context, Prachanda's faithful followers say -Prachanda has now corrected her mistakes. The party is called the Maoist Center. Likewise, the guiding principle is called Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. It is also said that a socialist revolution will be realized while the remaining tasks of the democratic revolution are completed. Therefore, the former Maoists must unite and form a single Maoist party.

It is precisely in this context that the story of an old tiger in Panchatantra is particularly memorable. Sitting next to a pond in the middle of the forest, the tiger said, dear forest dwellers, I am old now, I have fasted nonviolence, now you can come to this pond and drink water without fear. All the animals in the forest were surprised; They came to the pond and began to drink water. But it has to happen. The tiger shows its natural nature. Many animals living in the forest die.
This is the true essence of unity among the old Maoists. It is the Supreme Court's decision, not their determination, that compels Prachanda and his party to use the term Maoism. They really have nothing to do with Maoism. It is necessary to be vigilant against such unity and to smash these illusions, which have been fabricated to lure revolutionary communists into a revisionist net.

The political report on the MM adopted by the Central Committee of our party states: “Although his intention was to dissolve into the UML and become a double CPN, the MM, who was reinstated by the court and forced to appear in its old guise, suddenly jumped into the congress despite being told that it would hold a conference. Although he pretended to be self-critical and talked about a new ideology and a new party, he shamelessly accepted parliamentarism and pluralism, decided to defend the old state power and the constitution, and followed the right revisionist line of peacefully going to socialism. Whereas the twenty-first century democracy of the past immersed the Nepalese revolution in parliamentarism, today's twenty-first century socialism will certainly lead to a far more social fascism than that. The leadership of this group is also an active mediator of imperialism and expansionism.” (Current Political Situation and Our Mission, February 2022). The above words of our Party Central Committee are noteworthy.


The CPN (MM) and its main leader have been widely discussed. Now, from the same context, let us say something about the origin and development of revisionism in the communist movement and the responsibility of revolutionary communists to it, by providing a necessary perspective on the characteristics of the period we live in.

First, the petty bourgeoisie is the majority in Nepal. Although the Communist Party is a political party of the proletariat, it is heavily influenced by the petty bourgeoisie. There was no consolidation, correction and proletarianization in the Communist Party as expected. The petty-bourgeois class is floundering in class, ideological and political terms. This class is one of the main pillars and sources of revisionism.

Second, in the era of imperialism and proletarian revolution, there is a close relationship between imperialism and revisionism. The opportunists, who make a habit of eating the crumbs of the imperialists within the Communist Party, devote themselves to the service of imperialism and reaction. In this case, revisionism is born, develops and division in the revolutionary communist party becomes inevitable.

Third, when the revolution enters a certain juncture or the development of history enters a certain juncture, the enemy class changes its tactics. It tries to prolong its life by adopting a strategy of throwing a large reform network on the one hand, and attracting opportunists within the progressive or communist party on the other.

Fourthly, Nepal could not and could not stay out of this situation. In the case of Nepal, the monarchy cannot hold on to the old state power by organizing itself in the old ways. Similarly, the aging Nepalese Congress lacks any new style and ability to think, other than to use the name BP. In this case, Nepali reactionaries have tried and are still trying to prolong their lives by taking the blessings of imperialism/expansionism and pulling the opportunists within the Communist Party to themselves by weaving a great strategic network. Opportunists and revisionists within the Nepal Communist movement have also become the characters and protagonists of this drama. Prachanda, who is the main leader of the MM, is one of those who play such negative roles.

Therefore, at the moment, taking the necessary lessons from the history of the Nepalese revolution and communist movement, on the one hand, making the necessary preparations to complete the new democratic revolution against reaction under the guidance of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, on the other hand, all kinds of revisionism in general, and right neo-democracy in particular, which travels backwards. It is necessary to strongly advance the ideological struggle against revisionism.


On the Russia-Ukraine War

-Comrade Gaurav

Historical Background:

Under the leadership of the working class, the world's first proletarian revolution was carried out in France in 1871, with a revolution that was engraved in history with golden letters under the name of the Paris Commune. This revolution lasted only 72 days. The world communist movement has deeply examined, analyzed and synthesized the reasons behind this event. The socialist revolution, which developed with the right guiding principles, lines, strategies and tactics under the leadership of Lenin, succeeded in October 1917 in Russia under the leadership of the Russian Revolutionary Socialist Democratic Workers' Party (Russian Communist Party). This revolution, of far-reaching significance, not only confirmed the correctness of Marxism, but also laid the groundwork for Leninism. After that, this revolution was seen and used as a model of socialist revolution in the world communist movement. Besides leading this socialist revolution in Russia, Lenin also directed the first socialist government.

After that, new democratic and socialist revolutions were carried out in different countries. The Soviets were formed. At the end of 1922, the Soviet Union, which includes today's Russia and Ukraine, was united and the Soviet Union was formed. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was established under the leadership of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union became a powerful nation. Meanwhile, Lenin died and Stalin became head of the party and government, basically following in Lenin's footsteps. Meanwhile, World War II broke out. The German fascists, led by Hitler, started World War II with the ambition to impose their hegemony on the whole world. The former Soviet Union was Hitler's main target. It was not possible to defeat German fascism by fighting separately. Considering this situation, an anti-fascist united front was formed with the initiative of the Soviet Union of the time. In the end, fascism led by Hitler was defeated. After this event that shook the whole world, Stalin, who was the leader of the world communist movement at that time, gained a good place in world politics. In such a world environment, a wave of new democratic and socialist revolutions took place in different countries.

After Stalin's death, Khrushchev took over the leadership of the Soviet Communist Party and the Soviet Union. The 1956th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, held in 20, adopted the policy of peaceful transition and peaceful coexistence presented by Khrushchev. Class struggle was abandoned and the policy of class reconciliation was adopted. The policy that socialism could be brought in through parliamentary elections and peaceful processes was proclaimed. The Communist Party of the Soviet Union changed color. Capitalism was restored, replacing socialism.

With the internal contradictions within the restored capitalist system and the external provocation and support of US imperialism, the countries of the former Soviet Union fell apart one after another in the 90s. The mighty Soviet Union began to disintegrate. In this process, Ukraine also left the Soviet Union in 1991. A fierce war has been going on for some time between Ukraine and Russia, which broke away from the former Soviet Union.

War between two imperialists

On the surface, it seems that the decisive reason for the outbreak of this war was the mutual hostility between Russia and Ukraine. However, this is not the essence of the matter. The role of the USA in the outbreak of this war has been important. Although there were contradictions between Ukraine and Russia on some issues, it did not turn into a war for a long time. There was a chance that this war would not have broken out now if the Ukrainian government, led by President Zelensky, had not, at the instigation of the United States, decided to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a military organization led by US imperialism. If we talk about the Ukrainian people, they are innocent. They neither wanted Ukraine to become a NATO member and join the US military alliance, nor did they want to surrender to Russia. The Ukrainian people are caught between US and Russian imperialist interests. They are the victims of a terrible war. They were forced to live a life of extreme pain and suffering. They were forced to leave their country and seek refuge abroad in hopes of saving their lives. This is an unfair war. We demand an immediate end to this war. Now we would like to reiterate our demand for an end to this unjust war.

From the outside it looks like a war between Ukraine and Russia. Russia and Ukraine seem to be fighting face to face. But in reality this is an indirect war (Proxy war) between the US and Russian imperialism. The United States is waging war against Russia by provoking Ukraine. Lenin said that imperialism means war. This statement is equally true today. There are almost no years and days when there is no war anywhere in the world. It is true that the Second World War took place in the 25 years after the First World War. However, even 70 years after the Second World War, the Third World War did not occur. One of the main reasons for this is that the imperialist powers today have so many advanced destructive weapons that if a third world war breaks out, it will certainly be many times more destructive than the second world war. No one can escape this. It can be clearly said that the Third World War did not break out because the imperialists did not want it. So has the war stopped? Regional and indirect wars continue. The major imperialist powers do not fight directly, but through their representatives. This is how US imperialism is waging war against Russia in Ukraine. The United States not only provides arms and financial support, but also mobilizes the entire NATO in this war against Russia. US troops have not yet been sent directly to confront the Russian army. These imperialist countries are not fighting face to face. They are waging a proxy war.

There are some people who think this is a war between socialist and imperialist countries because the Soviet Union was once a world-renowned socialist power, and even today China and North Korea, which claim to be socialists, support Russia in this war. Russia has abandoned socialism and transformed into social imperialism through state capitalism. After the counter-revolution of 1976 in China, capitalism was restored and North Korea is no longer a socialist country. This is the truth. As for the issue of China and North Korea supporting Russia, it is an alliance they have formed between themselves against US imperialism. European countries led by the USA, Japan etc. It is another front created against the front created by Today's Russia is not a socialist country, and there is no doubt that this front was created to protect non-existent socialism.

The imminent threat of world war

Some speculate that this could lead to a World War, as the war between Russia and Ukraine continues and international military alliances are formed. This estimate cannot be said to be 100% wrong. There is the possibility of a Third World War. However, it has been said above that the imperialist rulers do not want a World War to break out at this time. The imperialists are unlikely to benefit from World War II if it happens anytime soon. This is why World War II did not break out. If the balance of power between the big and powerful imperialist countries, especially the USA, Russia, China, France and England, is disturbed, if the interests of a powerful country are directly hindered, or if a major event occurs that unexpectedly affects the world, then the possibility of a World War is undeniable. In this case, the deadly consequences of destructive warfare would be unimaginable. Its fatal consequences are difficult to predict. As mentioned earlier, this war does not seem likely to lead to the Third World War at this time.

The Russia-Ukraine war is an unjust war. It must end. The deadly effects of this war are widespread all over the world. Our country has also benefited from this. The life of the people of our country is getting more and more difficult. In order to end this war and prevent a possible World War, there is a need for international organization of peace-loving people against war. Communist revolutionaries should not stray from this; they should join forces. In this context, it is important to remember a quote from Mao. Analyzing the contradiction between war and revolution, Mao said, "Either revolution will prevent war or war will lead to revolution".

The Sino-US Conflict and Taiwan

-Comrade Basanta

The unsavory relationship between China and the United States reaches its climax after Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan on August 2. People began to say that war between Taiwan and China was inevitable, this time at the instigation of the United States. The situation is getting so tense that no one can say when war will break out between the two countries. The whole world is divided into two poles on this issue. There are even those who say that the war between China and Taiwan is a precursor to the Third World War. Prepared against this background, this short article will focus on the mutual relationship between Taiwan and China, the causes of the conflict between China and the United States, and various aspects of this conflict.

Taiwan is a small island located east of Fujian Province, China. B.C. Taiwan is mentioned in Chinese records dating back to 239 BC. Its total surface area is 36,197 square kilometers. About 24 million people live in Taiwan, and more than 95 percent of them are of Han descent. As in mainland China, the language spoken by most people in Taiwan is Chinese Mandarin. This language is the official language of the Taiwan government. Although China and Taiwan existed under the rule of different powers and as separate countries during the colonial period, the people living in mainland China and Taiwan represent the same nation, the Han.

Taiwan, formerly known as Formosa Island, was a colony of the Dutch Republic for more than four decades, from 1624 to 1668. The Chinese kings of the Qing Dynasty ruled Taiwan from 1683 to 1895. After Japan defeated China in the First Sino-Japanese War, Chinese rulers surrendered Taiwan to Japan in 1895. The Japanese army attacked China again in 1937. Under the leadership of the Communist Party, the Chinese people waged a national war of resistance against the Japanese occupier and its agent, Chiang Kai-shek. When Japan lost the Second World War, which lasted from 1939 to 1945, the Chinese national war turned into a civil war. After nearly four years of civil war, a new democratic revolution took place in China in 1949 and mainland China became the working area of ​​anti-imperialist and anti-feudal people under the leadership of the Communist Party. The US and British imperialism planned to send Chiang Kai-shek and his followers, who lost the civil war, to Taiwan. Thus Taiwan fell into the hands of imperialist agents who were defeated in the new democratic revolution in China. Kuomintang leader Chiang Kai-shek and his son maintained military rule in Taiwan for 38 years.

The victory of the new democratic revolution in China was a serious challenge for the imperialists. Moreover, the development of proletarian revolutions in Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Malaya, Cambodia and other countries in East Asia further increased the threat to the imperialist countries. This was not an intolerable situation for the imperialist looters. They started to make Taiwan their base in order to stop the revolutionary process that is developing in the name of democracy, human rights and rule of law in China and that region. Since its establishment, the United Nations has recognized only Taiwan with a population of 600 million as the Republic of China, not the new democratic government of mainland China with a population of 60 million. This was their prejudiced thinking and practice against the communist system. It can easily be understood that this decision was taken to stop the growing influence of the communists in East Asia by making Taiwan an imperialist base. This clearly shows the strict anti-communist stance of the United Nations.

Imperialism, especially the United States, has been using Taiwan since 1949 as a bait to point weapons against China in the name of its security. The Sino-American Mutual Security Agreement, signed in 1955 between Taiwanese and American rulers, was a mandate given to US imperialism to "protect Taiwan from the Chinese threat." After the United Nations recognized the government of the People's Republic of China on October 25, 1971, Taiwan withdrew its representative from the UN and the security agreement began to become ineffective.

After the counter-revolution in 1976 in the People's Republic of China, the United States established diplomatic relations with China on the basis of the One China policy in 1978, when Jimmy Carter was president. But the American ruling class has not stopped provoking Taiwan and pitting it against China. US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi's visit to Taiwan on August 2, 2022 is the last link in the US war to sell advanced weapons to Taiwan under the pretext of provoking and resisting China. In the last two decades alone, the US has sold nearly $50 billion worth of weapons to Taiwan.

The United States Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) estimates that approximately two-thirds of global seaborne trade passes through the South China Sea. China has 26 percent, South Korea 7 percent, Singapore 6 percent, Thailand 5 percent, Vietnam 5 percent, Indonesia 4 percent, Japan 4 percent, Hong Kong 4 percent, Malaysia 3 percent and other countries 36 percent. China alone exported 2016 billion dollars worth of goods through this route in 874. Most ships using this route pass through the Taiwan Strait. It can be easily estimated how sensitive the South China Sea, Taiwan Strait and their security are for China, which has the world's second largest economy and carries out 60% of its trade via this sea route.

Also, reports say that 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and 11 billion barrels of mineral oil remain below the surface of the South China Sea. Scientists believe there is a large amount of gas and oil still waiting to be discovered in this region. The rulers of Vietnam, China, Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan and the Philippines around the South China Sea have started to lay claim to the islands in this region, especially since the last 70's. China not only occupied the islands it claimed sovereignty over in this region, but also built artificial islands and large naval bases in the South China Sea. One of the many reasons China covets the South China Sea is its rich natural resources.

America is now aware that China is not a communist country, but a developed capitalist country that has embraced neoliberalism. America and China are major trading partners. More than 2021 billion dollars of mutual trade was realized between these two countries in 656. The USA calls China a communist country only to mislead the peoples and defame communism and its ideology. Intense political and economic rivalry is the current reality between these two countries. The rising power between these two countries is China, and the falling power is America. The fact that Western imperialist countries defined China as a strategic threat at the last G-7 summit also points to this fact.

US imperialism increases its military activities in this region due to its political, economic and commercial importance. In the fourth decade of the last century, the United States first established a military camp in Guam, which was under its control, to monitor this area. This situation continues even today. During the Cold War, US military bases were established in many countries in the South Pacific region. Even now, the US has established permanent camps in South Korea, Singapore, Japan and other countries. Earlier this year, US President Joe Biden signed an agreement to sell $14 billion worth of weapons to Indonesia against Chinese hegemony in the South China Sea.

In this context, on 1 June 2019, the USA announced a document called the Indo-Pacific Strategy to the public. “The People's Republic of China, led by the Communist Party of China, is trying to reorganize the region in its favor, using military modernization, influence operations and a predatory economy to coerce other nations,” the US Secretary of Defense said in a message published in the report. In response, the Department of Defense supports options that promote long-term peace and prosperity for all in the Indo-Pacific. … We are committed to defending and developing these shared values. … Achieving this vision requires bringing together a more deadly Joint Force and a stronger team of allies and partners.” As part of its strategy to contain China, the USA has also established military alliances called Quad (USA, Japan, Australia and India) and AUKUS (Australia, Great Britain and USA) on the pretext of the security of the Pacific region. It is clear from these facts how the US eye is focused on this region.

The above facts illustrate the economic and political conflict of interest and the resulting contradictions between the US and China in the South China Sea region. In an environment where these contradictions are escalating, Nancy Pelosi's visit to Taiwan has fueled the burning fire and the world has become polarized in this context. Not only that, former US President Donald Trump has said that Nancy Pelosi is a chaotic woman and should not go there. Her public criticism of Pelosi—whatever she says and wherever she goes—shows that American society is also fragmented on the issue.

Meanwhile, the Chinese People's Liberation Army suspended its military exercises around Taiwan for four days, and the Chinese government issued a white paper on the Taiwan issue. In this case, some people seem optimistic that the war between China and America will not break out for now. Overall, the likelihood of war between China, guided by Sun Tzu's military strategy, and the United States, which provoked others but did not go to war itself, seems to be diminishing. However, the Taiwan issue has become a prestige issue for both countries. A Taiwan-based Sino-US war seems inevitable because of China's policy of unifying Taiwan anyway, except in the case of the US raising its hand, as stated in the white paper.

In general, the unification of these two geographies is a nation-state formation process, because the people of Taiwan and China are from the same nation. It is their internal matter, so it is not something anyone should oppose. However, the current conflict between China and Taiwan is not limited to this. The main reason behind this conflict is the conflict of capitalist interests, that is, an inter-imperialist conflict. It shows the rivalry between Japan, Australia and other western imperialist countries, namely the US pole on the one hand, and the Russian-Chinese pole on the other. No one can understand the Taiwan problem without grasping this fact.

Currently, the Russia-Ukraine war continues. This war is essentially an inter-imperialist war between the US-led NATO alliance and Russia. Considering the Taiwan crisis and the Russia-Ukraine war, some people think that a III. He claims that the clouds of world war are circulating. Considering the nature of US imperialism that does not go to war itself but retaliates against the enemy by pushing its puppet rulers to war, it seems that various war fronts will be opened at the regional level and the world war will not start anytime soon. But on the contrary, world war cannot be a planned attempt of any imperialist power. It is the result of the coincidence of necessity and opportunity. World war occurs when inter-imperialist antagonism becomes irresolvable by other means. Therefore, it would be wrong to conclude that the danger of world war is now over.

Currently, the USA and China are facing each other. While the US maneuvers against China in order not to lose its global dominance, China is actively working to change the US hegemony alone. The conflict between the American pole and the Chinese pole directs today's world. These two superpowers are working hard to manipulate the world public opinion in their favor. The United States competes for world domination by military means and China by economic means. The USA's MCC (Millennium Challenge Corporation -ÇN) and SPP (State Partnership Program -ÇN) projects and China's BRI (Belt and Road Project -ÇN) project are weapons in this regard. By including Nepal in its Indo-Pacific strategy, US imperialism is putting heavy pressure on the Nepalese government to join the anti-Chinese military front.

In this way, there will be an intense conflict between the USA Pole and the Chinese Pole in the coming days, and the danger of this conflict turning into the Third World War is undeniable. In this case, the communists of every country, including Taiwan, should develop the revolution in their own country and try to prevent the imperialist war before it breaks out, not by holding one's tail against the other. But should it break out, they should move forward by adopting the policy of turning the imperialist war into a revolution.

Press Release

A special meeting of the Central Committee of our party was held under the chairmanship of the Secretary General Kıran Yoldaş between 26-28 August 2022. The necessary and important decisions taken at the meeting were announced to the public with this press release as follows.

  1. At the meeting, a minute's silence was held in memory of the immortal martyrs who fell martyrs in various class struggles, including revolution, mass movement and people's war at the national and international level.
  2. The political report presented at the meeting by GS Comrade Kiran was widely discussed and then adopted with the necessary amendments.
  3. Parliamentary elections at both the federal and state levels will be held on November 4, 2079.

(a) It is seen that it will not be carried out in a clean, fair, irregular and liberal manner, but will be carried out in a fascist manner by the representatives of the current state power and system,

(b) the masses are kept under extreme panic, terror, fear and siege by money pouring, excessive abuse of resources, show of force and extreme measures by reactionary, opportunist and corrupt elements,

(c) Many parties and organizations claiming to be communist not only take advantage of or participate in the parliament but also surrender to the reactionary state and the system, join the government to take advantage of the parliament and engage in Millerandism (legal Marxism, ministerialism), support and sink into the old state power and system, Other parties' losing their political identity by taking the election symbol, making use of the election in order to benefit, and many other bad examples made it necessary to learn from them and move forward,

(d) the current state power, system and government has become extremely critical economically, politically and culturally, the executive, legislative and judicial organs of the government are failing day by day, the current coalition government is maintaining all the unequal agreements it has signed with Indian expansionism, the regime's various in a situation where it remains silent on population encroachment in the regions, brazenly presents the anti-national MMC by mediating and capitulating to US imperialism, and requires all this to be exposed

(e) In this period, it has been historically and politically necessary and inevitable to move towards scientific socialism in order to replace the existing state power and the parliamentary system with a new democratic state power and to solve the problems of nationalism, democracy and people's livelihood,

With this in mind, our party CPN (Revolutionary Maoist) has adopted the policy of actively boycotting the elections and has decided to organize and execute various programs to strictly implement this policy and decision in practice.

  1. In the process of uniting the real revolutionary communist party, groups and personalities, the formation of the Party Unity Coordination Committee between our party and the CPN (Bahumat) gave a positive message to the people and the communist ranks and encouraged them. The meeting concluded that our party is determined to actively move forward this process together with other genuine communist parties and groups and to unite the revolutionary communist forces in a principled manner.

Revolutionary greetings!

CPN (Revolutionary Maoist)

Central Committee

English PDF:Maoist Perspective

English PDF:Maoist Outlook