Interview with an Indian Maoist

Thanks to the anonymous blogger who pointed this out. This interview with Indian Maoist spokesperson Azad appeared in yesterday's edition. As he pointed out in the comment, the interviewer K.Srinivas Reddy himself seems to sympathize with the Maoist worldview. This is the question he put:

How do you envisage the future scenario in Nepal? Will India and U.S. imperialism adjust to the new reality and support the Maoist government? Or, will they create hurdles?

Frankly, I fail to see the point of this interview in the first place. Apart from a desire to give coverage to these 'Indian maoists' whoever they are (I believe there were several maoist groups in the country and I am not sure which one this is), of what interest is it to the readers what the spokesperson of some far left outfit thinks about a victory of an ideological ally in a foreign country (note that no questions have been asked about whether the victory has changed the Indian Maoists' own political strategy in any way)? Secondly, as the commentator rightly asks, should the interviewer be expressing such sentiments about any country in his questions?

The answers indicate a clear preference for armed insurrection over electoral politics and a contempt for the Indian government and its interests in Nepal.

Lacking a majority in the CA, the Maoists will be powerless. They will have to compromise and adjust, sacrificing the interests of the oppressed in whose interests they came to power. Or they will have to mobilise the people and intensify the struggle through all means, including armed insurrection, to implement genuine democracy and establish people’s power. There is no other alternative.

We will be living in a fool’s paradise if we believe that the U.S. and India will be comfortable with the Maoists in Nepal or that they will adjust to the new reality. Although they will continue diplomatic relations, they will create an adverse situation if the new government does not obey their dictates. The U.S. tried its best to keep the monarchy alive as the King was a pawn to rule by proxy. As for India, it received a slap in its face when G.P. Koirala and his NC faced a defeat.

Note that the concerns throughout of both the interviewer and the interviewee are only about the attitudes of India and the US. China, despite being a powerful northern neighbor barely gets mentioned. The implied meaning is clear - China is a friendly country that is always helpful, does not cajole or bully and opposes imperialism. India and the US on the other hand are countries to be wary of.

After reading it, I am forced to conclude that the primary purpose of this interview is ideological, i.e., to promote Maoist propaganda by providing an outlet to them to vent and convince the public that their line of reasoning, however sympathetic it may be to armed violence, contemptuous of democratic ethos and Indian interests, it is a perfectly legitimate and honorable political force to contend with.

Fudging the numbers as see fit

Analyzing democratic elections become very complicated when there are more than two parties involved. Coalition politics makes it difficult for any person with average mathematical skills to predict the winner of an election.
Thus, the CPM led left front can claim victory despite having won a bit more than 10% of the total seats. However the same rules do not apply to neighboring countries like say, Nepal. Sure the Maoists have passed in flying colors, learning how to rig democratic elections from their friends from the country bordering the north and comrades from a southern state. However the Chindu decides to not apply the same rules here. Read this article,
http://www.hindu.com/2008/04/26/stories/2008042660061700.htm
The Chindu's hatchet man in this case Siddharth Varadarajan, rants that the US is preventing the Maoists from forming the government. But in the article the evidence given is,

According to political and diplomatic sources, the U.S. ambassador in Kathmandu, Nancy Powell, is “actively pushing” the idea that Girija Prasad Koirala should continue as Prime Minister.

Then the article meanders to rant at how the Nepali Congress with a 100 seats is preventing the Maoists(who do not have a majority) from forming the Government.
How is it that the CPM which does the exact same political blocking in India is lauded as fighting for the common man and NC's action's seems as anti-democratic? Let us know of your thoughts on this incident of double standards by The Chindu.