Failure of Maoist Model of Insurgency - Essay Example

Failure of Maoist Model of Insurgency Name Institution Course Date Failure of Maoist Model of Insurgency Introduction Maoism is a modified concept of Marxism-Leninism that came from the teachings of Mao Zedong who was a Chinese communist (Weir, 2007). Mao Zedong was known to focus on peasantry that he referred to as a revolutionary force that was possible to mobilize by leadership of Communist party (Clements, 2006). This was based on Chinese Communist rural insurgency model that was able to bring the Communist Party to power. Maoism model of insurgency considered rural development the priority. The strategy made sense to Mao at the early stages of socialism since many people were peasant. Maoism is different from other political ideologies as it contains a military doctrine and also clearly connects all its political ideologies together with military strategy (Karl, 2010). This is to say that peasantry can be coordinated to take part in war encompassing guerrilla warfare in three distinct stages. The first stage is concerned with strategizing and mobilising the peasantry; the second stage entails developing rural base areas and enhancing the coordination and cooperation of the guerrilla organisations; the third stage entails shift to conventional warfare. Maoism is all about organising the military and economic power to protect the revolutionary region from outside threat and keeping corruption under control through centralization. A fundamental notion that differentiates Maoism from other ideologies is the fact that the concept believe that class struggle would continue to manifest throughout the socialist period due to antagonist contradictions existing between capitalism and communism. This paper will highlight Maoist model of insurgency in China and the reasons why the model was a failure outside china. The paper will focus on failed model of insurgencies in Greece and the Philippines. The reason why Maoist model of insurgency still exist is because it worked in China during the 1940s (Katagiri, 2015). If Mao Zedong strategy had not taken power in 1949, then guerrilla warfare would still be taking place perhaps due to the doctrine of ‘Maoism’. Maoist model of insurgency worked well in China as the goals set by the Maoists were regarded nationalist and not socialist. Maoism was developed by Mao Zedong in the 1920s as ideology for revolution. Mao Zedong ideology took shape in the early 20th century. This was because the country was very weak and overly divided so the unification of the people and dismissal of the foreigners was required. For this, Mao counted on the support of the army and his party. Mao decided to establish his revolution on millions of peasants since he considered them angry for violence and with potential energy. By 1940s, Mao Zedong had already revolutionized and mobilized the peasantry (Pan, 2009). After the establishment of Chinese Communist State during the late 1940s, Mao tried to assimilate to Stalinist concept of ‘building socialism’. However, he reacted against what resulted from the concept such as the growth of bureaucratic Communist Party and development of managerial and technocratic elites. In 1955, Mao enforced agriculture collectivization which was followed by refinement of the plans of revolutionising the masses into establishing small-scale industries in China. Mao Zedong used military-political strategy to maintain the people’s support and drown the threat deep in the regions where population would tackle them effectively by using mobile warfare and guerrilla warfare (Chen, 2001). The Mao Zedong concept of guerrilla warfare and military strategizing enabled the Maoist to overthrow imperative law that existed and recomposed a strong independent national economy for China. Maoism in China was also successful since its operations were based on the waves of mass anti-imperialist movement and millions of peasants in the country were key people to fighting against threat forces and army’s (Chen, 2001). The Maoist model of insurgency became international tendency. However, it’s failed outside China especially in Greece and Philippines. In Greece, the National Liberation Army was formed during the German occupation (DeRauen and Heo, 2007). It was considered military section of the left-wing National Liberation Front in the time of Greek Resistance. It was driven by the Communist Party of Greece and fought against the Germans and other guerrilla bands. The National Liberation Army was the powerful guerrilla band in Greek which developed effective administrative bodies that ruled liberated regions. After the Greek civil war, Communist Insurgency was defeated by the government forces in 1949. The ELAS was funded by the communist nations including Yugoslavia, Albania and other insurgents. The National Liberation Army incorporated a classical Maoist guerrilla posture and established based areas on northern border. The government elected in 1946 defeated the insurgency in Greece by utilizing terror threats against the ‘leftists’ which led to alienation of the Greek people and tattering of the economic condition (DeRauen and Heo, 2007). In order to fight against the government, ELAS tried to utilise ‘strategic offensive’ stage of warfare which led to their failure. ELAS choice of Stalin during the split between Tito/Stalin resulted to alienation of the Yugoslavia and Albania as the primary practical benefactor and this led to another reason for their failure. ELAS followed many Maoist model of insurgency but was brutal towards the people and this led to them losing population support. In the Philippines, insurgency was also defeated by the government body. The Hukbalahap was developed which was an alliance between the peasants and the Communist Party (DeRauen and Heo, 2007). The Huk utilized the fact that the government was very corrupt, brutal to the population, lacked proper security and considered insurgency as a police problem to win the support of the population. To solve the existing governmental problems, number of political and economic reforms was developed to address the peasant’s grievances. The army was also reformed and emphasised on small unit tactic (DeRauen and Heo, 2007). There was also creation of Scout Ranger units and appointment of Raymond Magsaysay as the Secretary of Defence. Huk however failed as they were isolated from the external support and unification of the leadership. However, utilization of Maoist model of insurgency by the Huk of Philippines and ELAS of the Greece was not successful due to a number of reasons. The problem with Maoist model of insurgency is its evaluation of the global capitalism and its position as the agent for change (Kosmidou, 2013). Maoism is a political approach that is aimed at overthrowing a state considered independent and democratic. The certainty of the nature of bourgeon in democracy by establishing a country as a puppet state under control of a foreign capital such as the Maoists do, is considered a huge mistake as a good number of people in Philippines and Greece still had faith in democracy, even with the leverage of capitalism in the countries (Kosmidou, 2013). Also, Maoist model of insurgency is a concept that succeeds in scarcity. Whereas confident working class, democracy etc. are doctrine for socialist ideas, portraying self-proclamation for depressed classes under undemocratic conditions is a doctrine ground for Maoist model of insurgency. Maoist does not agree that liberation of working people is the job to be done by the working-class. For this, the Huk and ELAS aimed at winning the hearts of the people. However, there tactics for doing this was only partially effective as it was not guaranteed to work every time (Kosmidou, 2013). Maoist model of insurgency failed in Philippines and Greece’s as they engaged in irregular war (Mockaitis, 2011). Successful guerrilla armies of Mao Zedong during the civil way in China insisted upon a regular army whose guerrilla forces’ function was to act as an adjunct. The regularity of Chinese civil war enabled the concept of insurgency to be successful in the country. Irregular wars and poor leadership led to the failure of insurgency in Philippines and Greece. In addition, the ELAS and Huk intimated the population to win their support. But Zedong’s strategy was to win the support of people through other means (Mao and Schram, 2015). Mao’s believed revolution would succeed through people’s war. People’s army was capable of building strength and support in the remote areas. Mao also emphasized fight against feudalism and installed land reforms in the provinces in order to gain more support from peasant masses. The strategy used in China to win the support of the masses was effective compared to the strategy used in Philippines and Greece (Mockaitis, 2011). In addition, ELAS decision to choose Stalin after the split of the Tito/Stalin was irrational. Mao upheld the Stalin legacy but was highly critical of its decisions. For instance, he did not agree with Stalin’s insight that there lacked class struggle within the Soviet Union (Mockaitis, 2011). Success of Maoist in China was attributed to the belief of Mao that the remnants of the ideology are influential even in an event of proletarian party in power. Stalin was too much engraved on economic base and did not put into consideration other aspects of revolution-cultural revolution. Both Philippines and Greece ignored Cultural Revolution in their fights (Mockaitis, 2011). In conclusion, Maoist model of insurgency was successful in China since Mao Zedong used military-political strategy to maintain the people’s support; its operations were based on the waves of mass anti-imperialist movement and millions of peasants in China were primary people to fighting against threat forces; and its incorporation of regular army. Maoist model of insurgency failed in Philippines and Greece due to irregular army lacking good leadership, and winning the population support by coercion of populace. References Chen, J 2001, Mao's China and the cold war, Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press. Clements, J 2006, Mao, London, Haus Pub. DeRouen, K. & Heo, U 2007, Civil wars of the world: major conflicts since World War II, Santa Barbara, Calif: ABC-CLIO. Karl, R 2010, Mao Zedong and China in the twentieth-century world a concise history, Durham NC, Duke University Press. Katagiri, N 2015, Adapting to win how insurgents fight and defeat foreign states in war, Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press. Kosmidou, E 2013, European civil war films : memory, conflict, and nostalgia, New York, Routledge. Mao, Z. & Schram, S 2015, Mao's Road to Power Revolutionary Writings, 1912-49, Hoboken, Taylor and Francis. Mockaitis, T 2011, Resolving insurgencies, Carlisle, PA: Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College. Pan, P2009, Out of Mao's shadow : the struggle for the soul of a new China, New York, Simon & Schuster. Weir, R 2007, Class in America an encyclopedia, Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press. Read More