What is it that I am doing today? Why?

I am opposing the bandh, as has been enforced by the Maoist party, with the YCL as the disciplinary force.

Foremost, because the Maoist party had pledged not to hold any bandhs. They broke that pledge.

Everyone in this country knows how necessary and important the forced closure of the country is in nudging public opinion to one or the other side of the indecision fence. Why give up such an effective political weapon?

Then, after having given it up in a public pledge, why be so mercurially amnesiac?

Second, because of the violence inherent in this particular campaign. The intimidation started long before the protests, through a very impressive press campaign: Newspapers across the country reported on, and carried photographs of YCL cadres and other citizens not always voluntarily present at the training camps learning to use khukuri and lathi. It is ridiculous for the Maoists to insist their campaign was a peaceful one, if the seedbed of the campaign was soaked with intimidation well before they took to the streets.

Third, because an "indefinite" strike amounts to political blackmail, unless this is a revolution aimed at changing the entire state, as was done in 1990 and 2006. I am sure even the most fervent supporter of these bandhs will hesitate before equating 2006 and the present event. Unless they clearly articulate that NC, UML and other partners in the ruling coalition stand against the spirit of the achievement made in 2006, or that the events of 2006 were simply a blip along the assured forward march of the People's Revolution [Maoist], it is a reaction out of proportion to the import of their present agenda: of removing MKN as the prime minister, and replacing him with PKD.

Fourth, because the mechanics is faulty: politics is a conversation that should start with one's neighbors [because it is with them that we share physical security and immediate resources], should radiate to encompass entire citizenry [because with them we share economic security and sovereignty as identifiable nation], extend to entire human species and beyond [because with them we share morality and aesthetic], and return to the neighbor once more, so that, after becoming physically and economically secure individuals with an identity, moral and aesthetic stance, we may learn to be just towards each other while sharing resources.

To bring people away from where they ought to be having the most important political debates--their neighborhood--to where they are absolute outsiders and transgressors--neighborhoods of Kathmandu--is to separate the body from the social person; this renders an individual into a mere tool, to be directed and used, not to be engaged in a conversation.

Mediation in conflict-ridden neighborhoods has to, and have always, come from local leaders, despite their ideological differences. When YCL cadres have been trucked in as instantaneous response to retaliation by locals, a lot of stones have been thrown at each other, scores have been injured.

For what? At the end, the YCL cadre from Taplejung will have no effect on the Youth Force or Tarun Dal unaffiliated youth across the divide, whereas a YCL cadre from the neighborhood can better carry both entreaties and threats across the divide.