[The author is the Convenor of the, CPIM Research Unit, whatever that may
mean.
It thus provides us with interesting insight into how the parent
organisation looks upon, or rather would like its own (dwindling)
constituency and the larger peripheries look upon, its troublesome offshoot.
 And of course raises some broader issues while defending the
indefensible. In the process, it also tells us something about the
"tradition".]

http://pragoti.org/node/3687

On the Indian Maoists and their Sympathisers
Sat, 2009-11-14 14:31 | Prasenjit Bose<http://pragoti.org/taxonomy/term/222>
[image: Mritodeho3.jpg] <http://pragoti.org/node/3688>



As the Maoists continue with their violent and disruptive activities,
sections of the intelligentsia are openly expressing sympathy for their
cause. Although the sympathy is often couched in rhetoric against the state
and its security offensive against the Maoists, what distinguishes the
Maoist sympathizers from a broader community of intellectuals and civil
rights groups, who are skeptical of the intent and apprehensive of the
efficacy of the Union Government’s anti-Maoists operations, is their
stubborn refusal to condemn the anarchic violence and mindless killings by
the Maoists.





*I*

On 4th October 2009, the Bengali daily Anandabajar Patrika carried an
interview of CPI (Maoist) Polit Bureau Member Koteshwar Rao alias Kishanji
where he said that Union Railway Minister Mamata Banerjee is their preferred
choice for being the next Chief Minister of West Bengal. He even justified
Maoist support to the Trinamul Congress by hailing Mamata Banerjee’s
capacity to rise above class interest and adopt pro-people positions. One
wonders what Kishanji and the Maoists’ take is on Mamata Banerjee’s Railway
Budget passed by the Parliament few months back, which is replete with
proposals of Private-Public Partnerships in developing railway stations and
freight terminals to logistics parks and cargo centres. What do they have to
say about the thousands of acres of land that is proposed to be acquired for
the Railway freight corridor project in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar? Perhaps the
Maoists also consider the FICCI Secretary General Amit Mitra, who was
appointed by Mamata Banerjee as head of an expert panel to draw up business
plans for the Railways, as not a part of the “comprador-bureaucratic
bourgeoisie”, which according to their Party Programme rules over India.
Mamata Banerjee’s “interactive session” with the corporate bigwigs in
Kolkata on 22nd August may also have been perceived by the Maoists as an
enclave of the “national bourgeoisie” who have come on board their “new
democratic revolution”.

This rank opportunism of the Maoists has gone hand in hand with their
devious game of turning themselves into henchmen of Trinamul Congress under
the façade of pseudo-revolutionary rhetoric and joining in the massacre of
CPI (M) cadres in West Bengal. Over 130 CPI (M) activists have been killed
by these forces since March 2009 across the state, with more than half of
them killed in the West Midnapore district alone. The victims were mostly
poor peasants or agricultural workers from dalit or adivasi families. The
Maoist sympathizers justified this mayhem as elimination of “class enemies”
and celebrated the violence against the CPI (M) in Lalgarh as a revival of
Naxalbari. The Trinamul Congress, on the other hand, aided and abetted by
sections of the media, indulged in stupendous double-speak. They started by
attacking the State Government for failing to control Maoist violence and
questioned why the Maoists were not being banned in West Bengal. When the
Central Government banned the CPI (Maoist) and the State Government started
joint operations with central security forces, the Maoist sympathizers
initiated shrill rhetoric against state repression. The Trinamul Congress
obliged by shifting its stance and opposing the anti-Maoist operations,
calling for a withdrawal of Central security forces.

The hypocrisy of the Trinamul Congress and the Maoists is further borne out
by the protests against the arrest of Chhatradhar Mahato, the leader of the
People’s Committee against Police Atrocities (PCPA) of Lalgarh, who was
arrested by the police in end-September 2009. Besides charges of murder and
attempt to murder of CPI (M) activists, arson, demolition of police
outposts, waging war against the state etc. under various sections of the
IPC, charges have also been framed against him for raising funds for a
terrorist outfit, attempting to murder police personnel and conspiring
against the state. All these charges are prima facie credible. While
Chhatradhar Mahato was a one-time Trinamul Congress activist, his brother
Shashadhar Mahato is an active member of a Maoist armed squad. Since
November 2008 the Maoist backed PCPA, which was led by Chhatradhar Mahato
blockaded the Lalgarh area, making it out of bounds for the police and
administration. This “liberated zone” was used by the Maoists to launch a
series of attacks against the CPI (M) activists and others like activists of
the Jharkhand Party (Naren) and election commission personnel, killing over
80 persons in the Lalgarh area since November 2008. Several Trinamul
Congress leaders, including Mamata Banerjee visited Lalgarh during this
period and expressed open solidarity with Chhatradhar Mahato.

After his arrest, Chhatradhar Mahato has started disclosing several facts to
the police regarding the Maoists’ activities, their nexus with Trinamul
Congress, their sources of funds, etc. This has embarrassed the Maoists, who
have now started adopting desperate tactics. First came the kidnapping of
the OC of Sankrail police station by the Maoists, through which they secured
the release of some of their arrested supporters. Then the Bhubaneshwar
Rajdhani Express was held hostage for several hours by the Maoists and the
activists of the PCPA near Jhargram on 27th October, in order to pressurize
the State Government to release Chhatradhar Mahato. With the situation
getting out of control, Mamata Banerjee and other Trinamul Congress leaders
have started leveling outrageous allegations against the CPI (M), that the
hijacking of the Rajdhani Express was a conspiracy hatched jointly by the
CPI (M) and the Maoists in order to malign the Railways. The day is not far
when she is going to allege that even the killings of CPI (M) activists is
also a CPI (M) conspiracy!

The brouhaha over state repression in West Bengal is complete bunkum. On the
contrary, the Left Front Government has continued to adopt a democratic
approach towards the problem in Lalgarh. Following the complaints of police
harassment of some adivasis following the assassination attempt on the Chief
Minister in Salboni in November 2008, which had sparked off the Lalgarh
agitation, the administration had negotiated with the agitators, transferred
the culpable police officials and released several arrested persons. Since
then there has not been a single reported instance of atrocity by the State
police or the Central security forces, even as the Maoists have continued
with their killing spree. Can the State Government be faulted for taking
steps to arrest the culprits of murder and arson? Had the alleged links
between Chhatradhar Mahato and the Maoists been fabricated, why has the
court remanded him to custody? After all, he is not being tried in a
kangaroo court. Why should he not be prosecuted? Why should he be released
only to return and continue with the murders and mayhem against the CPI (M)
activists?

It is time for the Maoist sympathizers in West Bengal to deeply introspect
about their role in these developments. Blind hatred for the CPI (M) have
driven them into such frenzy that even wanton killings of poor CPI (M)
activists seem justifiable to them. They have no qualms in supporting Mamata
Banerjee and the Trinamul Congress, which is a reactionary force allied to
the Congress, the ruling party at the Centre today. Mamata Banerjee will
never sever her ties with the Congress because the only thing she is
interested in is power, not only at the Centre but also in the State. In the
ultimate analysis, the Maoist sympathizers are only playing into the hands
of the rightwing anti-democratic forces. The restoration of peace, dignity,
justice and socio-economic development is what the adivasis want in Lalgarh
and elsewhere in the State. This cannot be attained unless the Maoists stop
their brutalities and targeted assassination of CPI (M) activists.

*II*

Far away from the political theatre of West Bengal, where the Maoists are on
a rampage, some Maoist sympathizers based in New Delhi have chosen to raise
the pitch. Prominent among them is celebrity activist Arundhati Roy, who
appeared on CNN IBN news channel few weeks back, facing an unusually genteel
Karan Thapar, to express her outrage at the planned security offensive by
the Union Government – “the army of the rich” – against the “the army of the
poor”, the Maoists. She argued that free market democracy in India has
failed to deliver justice to the poor, especially the adivasis, and the
State has deliberately ignored peaceful protests against those injustices.
What is the choice left for the adivasis, dispossessed of their land and
livelihoods by big corporates and tortured and raped by the State, but to
take up arms in self-defence, she asked? Her advice to the Union Government:
withdraw the armed offensive, hold unconditional talks with the Maoists and
do things like, “for example”, making public all the MoUs signed by the
Government with mining companies, which according to her is a “key issue”.

What strikes one immediately is that the media savvy CPI (Maoist)
leadership, whose interviews galore nowadays from TV channels and websites
to newspapers and magazines, has neither cited any MoU signed by any
Government as their “key issue” nor made any demand to make those MoUs
public. When Roy does so, is it because she perceives the question of mining
and displacement in the tribal inhabited areas to be the root cause of the
Maoist problem? Or is it because of her difficulty in providing a truthful
account and reasoned justification for the activities and beliefs of the
Maoists, whose cause Roy has chosen to espouse?

The explanation that the roots of the Maoist insurgency lie in the systemic
deprivation and exploitation of the adivasis by the Indian
bourgeois-landlord state suffers from several infirmities, because it is
entirely ahistorical. The Naxalite movement of 1967, from which the present
day Maoists originated, was supposed to be the beginning of a protracted
armed struggle; to wrest State power from the hands of the
“comprador-bureaucratic” bourgeoisie who had kept India as a “semi-colony”.
The experience since then has shown that such a road to revolution is not
only inappropriate in Indian conditions where parliamentary democracy has
taken roots, but such sectarian politics in a diverse society like India,
inevitably leads to alienation from the people and degenerates into mindless
violence and anarchy. Eventually, the Naxalites reached an ideological
dead-end as domestic and international developments completely overtook
their shallow and confused understanding of Indian society and polity. The
failure to make any advance in pursuing such an erroneous path led to
innumerable splits within the Naxalite movement in the 1970s and 1980s.

In practice, the basic debate within the Naxalites have always been on
whether their activities would remain to be based on individual
assassinations of “class enemies” (the infamous “khatam line”) or to
reorient their work prioritizing mass activities and participating in the
democratic process. Several Naxalite groups, like the CPI (ML) Liberation
and the CPI (ML) New Democracy, eventually realized the futility of their
adventurist path, abandoned armed struggle and joined the parliamentary
democratic process. However, some of the groups like the CPI (ML) Peoples’
War and the MCC continued with their violent tactics and eventually merged
in 2004 to form the CPI (Maoist). The documents of the CPI (Maoist) clearly
enumerate their “central task” as “seizure of political power by armed
force”.

It is this historical background which celebrity activists like Arundhati
Roy are now seeking to suppress by constructing a new narrative of poor
people and adivasis taking up arms to defend their lives and livelihoods in
the face of ruthless exploitation by free market capitalism, after their
peaceful protests have been entirely ignored by the State. The effort is to
portray the security offensive as one between the State and the adivasis.
But this is so deceptive. The Maoists can hardly claim any contribution in
the struggle against the exploitation and deprivation of the adivasis. The
Left parties like the CPI (M) and CPI and several independent adivasi
organisations have been fighting in these areas for the land and forest
rights of tribals and against their exploitation since decades. A major
achievement of that struggle was the enactment of the Forest Rights Act for
the tribals and other forest dwellers, during the tenure of the previous UPA
Government. What has been the contribution of the Maoists in this struggle?

The adivasis have also been increasingly dispossessed of their lands and
forests, in the post-liberalization period, which has seen foreign and
domestic big capital being allowed to exploit forest and mineral resources
in a reckless manner, especially in States like Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and
Orissa. The socio-economic development in tribal inhabited areas has been
grossly neglected by the Central as well as the State Governments. The Left
parties and adivasi organisations have been struggling against these
policies. The Left ruled States like West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura have
successfully implemented land redistribution programmes in the adivasi
inhabited areas. While much remains to be done in terms of ensuring
comprehensive socio-economic development, the Left led Governments have been
steadfast in defending the land and forest rights of the adivasis as well as
protecting their culture and identity. The Maoists have never been found
agitating on these issues. In fact, much of Maoist violence is directed
against the railways, roads, power and telecom facilities and even medical
teams, which expose their anti-development vision.

Far from any concern for the socio-economic development of the adivasis, the
Maoists have chosen to focus on the tribal inhabited forests mainly out of
military-tactical reasons, because it is easy to conduct guerilla warfare
and set up their “liberated zones” in these areas given the near absence of
the administration in those places. The typical tactics of the Maoists have
been to build their base areas in forests near tribal habitats and establish
their control over the area through the force of the gun, eliminating or
terrorizing all other political parties and adivasi organisations into
submission. The hapless situation of the adivasis can be seen in
Chhattisgarh today where they are caught between the vicious cycle of
violence between the Maoists and the state-sponsored armed militia, Salva
Judum. In Orissa, thousands of Christian tribals had to bear the brunt of
Bajrang Dal orchestrated violence, after the Maoists executed VHP leader
Lakshmanananda Sarawati in August 2008 and fled from the scene leaving the
tribals to fend for themselves.

The experience in the States like Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Orissa shows
that mindless violence by the Maoists and repression unleashed by the state
using the pretext, invariably leads to a cycle of violence and
counter-violence, shattering the lives and livelihoods of the poor tribals.
In this violent milieu armed Maoist gangs get a free hand to indulge in
extortion, robbery and mayhem. Under the garb of pseudo-revolutionary
rhetoric against the Indian constitution and the election process, the
Maoists also forge opportunistic links with bourgeois political parties for
patronage and protection. Having witnessed how people decisively reject
their poll boycott calls by turning out in large numbers, they have started
issuing directives to people on who to vote for. Kishanji’s statements
endorsing Mamata Banerjee reflect this trend. They are also involved in
booth capturing, threatening and even killing representatives of one
political party on behalf of another. For instance, JMM MP Sunil Mahato was
killed in Ghatshila by the Maoists in March 2007. They also made
assassination attempts against former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister
Chandrababu Naidu in 2003 and West Bengal Chief Minister Buddhadeb
Bhattacharya in November 2008.

The Maoists do not represent any democratic movement. In their “liberated
zones”, no political activities other than their own are permissible. They
conduct kangaroo courts and summarily execute political opponents labeling
them as “police informers”. Their presence outside their base areas in the
forests is negligible. Politically, they are totally absent in the
countrywide movement against imperialist globalisation and neoliberal
policies, be it working class actions like strikes or peasant struggles on
agrarian issues. They have failed to draw any lesson, either political or
economic, from the experiences of building socialism in the twentieth
century. If anything, they have become even more dogmatic over time,
articulating a development vision, which seem eerily similar to Cambodian
Khmer Rouge under Pol Pot. To romanticize these nihilist anarchists as a
revolutionary force fighting for justice to the adivasis is nothing but
utter travesty.

*Conclusions*

The Maoists cannot be tackled by the Central or State Governments through
security operations alone. While violence has to be combated as per law, the
issues affecting the lives and livelihoods of the adivasis have to be dealt
with on an urgent basis. Under no circumstances should innocent adivasis or
their independent organisations be targeted or harassed in the name of
anti-Maoist operations. The Maoists need to be thoroughly exposed before the
people. Meanwhile, the Maoist sympathizers, who are calling upon the state
to initiate “unconditional dialogue”, would do well to persuade the Indian
Maoists to follow the examples of their Nepalese comrades and other CPI (ML)
groups and move away from the destructive path of “protracted armed
struggle”, which for them has become an end in itself.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
 To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
 For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to