NEPAL: MAOISTS' TOP IDEOLOGUE BHATTARAI

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 KATHMANDU 002394

SIPDIS

STATE FOR SA/INS AND DS/IP/SA
LONDON FOR POL - RIEDEL

E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/15/2012
TAGS: PTER ASEC CASC NP
SUBJECT: NEPAL: MAOISTS' TOP IDEOLOGUE BHATTARAI
BACK-PEDALS ON THREATS TO AMERICANS

REF: KATHMANDU 2171

Classified By: AMB. MICHAEL E. MALINOWSKI. REASON: 1.5 (B,D).


1. (C) Summary: In a December 14 interview with the
Washington Times, Maoist ideologue Baburam Bhattarai appeared
to back-pedal from the implicit threat against American
diplomats conveyed in a November 15 communique issued by a
regional commander. While it is always difficult to assess
the sincerity of Maoist statements--especially those conveyed
via Western media--Baburam's softer tone may reflect an
attempt by the insurgents to ward off a possible terrorist
designation by the USG. End summary.


2. (SBU) On December 14 the Washington Times website
carried the text of a December 7 e-mail interview by Chitra
Tiwari, a former Embassy FSN described in the byline as a
"Washington-based analyst of international affairs," and
Maoist ideologue Baburam Bhattarai. (Note: Tiwari recently
has acted as an apologist for Nepal's Maoists. End note.)
In the interview, Bhattarai asserted that the six-year-old
insurgency "is now peaking toward a climax . . . and a
situation of strategic stalemate has developed in the overall
sense." While preferring to resolve the conflict
"internally," Bhattarai stated that the Maoists "would not
mind facilitation or mediation of some genuinely neutral
international organizations" under certain conditions.


3. (U) Nepal's "friends in the West should realize" that
true constitutional monarchy is not possible in the country,
Bhattarai claimed, and support the Maoists' bid to establish
a "democratic republic"--not a communist republic--via
elections to a constituent assembly. Discounting any
ideological or other ties to the Khmer Rouge, Bhattarai
alleged that the Maoists have "already resolved to discard
some of the negative and harmful experiences of the
international communist movement," claiming that the
insurgents are engaged in "a united fight with parliamentary
democratic forces against the feudal, autocratic monarchy . .
." When confronted with frequent comparisons of Maoist
tactics with those of Cambodia's Khmer Rouge, Bhattarai
denied such comparisons and questioned the validity of the
many claims of gross human rights violations committed by Pol
Pot's Khmer Rouge.


4. (U) Bhattarai denied that Maoists have extorted money
from foreign tourists in Nepal, asserting "It is just
impossible that our highly motivated and disciplined cadres
would commit such heinous crimes. . . .Foreign tourists are
completely safe in our areas, and will be so in future."
Nonetheless, he warned tourists not to patronize "big hotels
and so-called Nature Conservation Areas (which) are mostly
controlled by the ruling Shah-Rana families," and
acknowledged "some hazards of getting caught in the crossfire
in a situation of raging civil war."


5. (U) "U.S. government employees and American citizens--for
that matter all foreign employees and citizens--are
completely safe in Nepal," Bhattarai continued. He parroted
the party line, first seen in the November 15 communique from
the Kathmandu Valley commander claiming responsibility for
the killings of two Embassy security guards (Reftel),that
the Maoists "have no policy of harming or attacking any
foreign national unless they are found working against the
revolutionary movement." With respect to the assassinations
of the two guards, "the party has reviewed the cases and
resolved that henceforth, if any such charges are leveled
against any such employee, the concerned embassy would be
advised before action is taken. However, we would caution
the enlightened American people to beware of the xenophobic
propaganda of the U.S. government to hide its nefarious
agenda."


6. (C) Comment: Since so many of the statements in the
interview, including the denial that Maoists extort money
from foreign tourists; the claim that the Maoists do not seek
a one-party Communist state; and the oblique defense of Pol
Pot, are patently false, it is difficult to have full
confidence in Bhattarai's pledge that the Maoists will
henceforth notify us before executing any of our employees.
It is clear, however, that the Maoists dislike being tagged
as terrorists (the Maoist student union has demanded the
government lift the terrorist label from their organization
as a condition for ending the current educational strike),
and are anxious to avoid the sanctions and international
opprobrium that would come with such a designation by the
USG. Bhattarai's statements may reflect an effort, at least
by the Maoist leadership, to mollify the USG and avert such a
designation. If his intent is to signal a lessened threat to
our Mission personnel and the American community, we welcome
it.
MALINOWSKI