---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sumitra Purkayastha <[email protected]>
Date: 3 March 2010 08:44
Subject: Appeal for talks with broader section of people’s struggles in the
forest and mineral belt
To:


*Appeal for talks with broader section of people’s struggles in the forest
and mineral belt*
*
*

**
*

http://kafila.org/2010/03/02/appeal-for-talks-with-broader-section-of-peoples-struggles-in-the-forest-and-mineral-belt/

Aditya Nigam, Dilip Simeon, Jairus Banaji, Nivedita Menon, Rohini Hensman,
Satya Sivaraman, Sumit Sarkar, Tanika Sarkar

In the light of the recent demands raised by sections of the intelligentsia
urging the government to heed the CPI (Maoist) “offer of talks”, we insist
that “civil society” should rather, put pressure on the government to
initiate talks with representatives of all struggling popular and adivasi
organizations. The CPI (Maoist) cannot be treated as the sole spokesperson
of all the people in the forest and mineral belt, convenient though this may
be for the state and for that party. Does the government believe that
violent insurgents are the only deserving interlocutors?

There is a common pattern to the emergence of Maoist violence in many areas.
First a non-violent mass organisation like the PCAPA in West Bengal or Chasi
Muliya Adivasi Sangh (CMAS) in Orissa arises in response to marginalisation,
displacement or violence against tribals by the police and paramilitaries.
Then the Maoists step in, attempting to take over the movement and giving it
a violent turn. The state responds with even more violence, which is
directed not only against the Maoists but also against unaffiliated
adivasis. At this point, some adivasis join the Maoists in self-defence,
their leaders like Chhatradhar Mahato, Lalmohan Tudu, Singanna are either
arrested or gunned down in fake encounters and large numbers of unaffiliated
adivasis are branded Maoists or Maoist sympathisers and arrested, killed or
terrorised by the state. Clearly, Maoist violence in these cases obtains
legitimacy because of the unbridled use of force by security forces and
violations of the fundamental rights of the local people. On the other hand,
the unilateral and doctrinal use of the language of warfare by one armed
group obscures the political agency of the ordinary people who have had no
say in this declaration.  It also tramples on the human rights of the often
desperately poor people who are obliged to seek a livelihood in
organizations of the state. Furthermore, it is not clear that the CPI
(Maoist) actually shares the rejection of this kind of “development” by the
people of the area, or whether it only wants to wrest control of this
process from the Indian state.

The counter-insurgency operations mounted by the central government in these
areas has led to unprecedented bloodshed, massacres of civilian populations
and rampant violations of constitutional rights in the area. The central
government insists on treating the affected areas as a “war zone”, and has
shown little inclination towards tackling the huge backlog of tribal
oppression that has created fertile ground for such violence. It is also
true that whenever the government has conceded space, the conditions for
this have been created by mass movements, not by the military actions of the
CPI (Maoist).  For example, the decision by the Ministry of Environment and
Forests to put on hold the agreements with Vedanta and Posco in Orissa
because of non-compliance with legal requirements for obtaining the consent
of local adivasis, comes in the wake of sustained joint struggles by a range
of political groupings.

We therefore urge all democratic sections to put pressure on the government
to ensure that:
(1) Regardless of whether talks with the Maoists materialise, talks should
immediately be initiated with those adivasis who are losing their land; and
with representatives of the various mass-based organizations/mass movements,
if necessary by securing their release from prison.

(2) round-the-clock security from attacks by both Maoists and
state-sponsored groups and security personnel, is provided to these
representatives and their families, as well as to witnesses in cases like
the Gompad massacre and their families;

(3) the grievances voiced by these representatives be treated with the
utmost seriousness and addressed as soon as possible.

Maoist violence flourishes in the foetid atmosphere provided by the
destruction of the rule of law and rampant human rights abuses by the state.
It is the task of the government to ensure that the rule of law is respected
by all sides in the mineral and forest belt.  If the rights of the adivasis
to freedom of association and of expression, including the right to oppose
current “development” policies, are respected, and crucially, if this
dissent is taken into account by the government, Maoists will lose
credibility. The party’s violent methods, often designed to cause collateral
damage, will lose the support it currently obtains among sections of the
disaffected population in these areas.
***

-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To post to this group, send an 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