|
|
|
|
In the grip of
Maoism
By Sultan Shahin
NEW DELHI - The Communist Party of India
(CPI Maoist) and Janashakti, the two main Maoist
groups in the south Indian state of Andhra Pradesh
on Wednesday pulled out from the three-month-old
peace talks initiated by the state government,
with the consent of the central government. The
blame game has since ensued, with both the state
government and the Maoists refusing to claim
responsibility for the breakdown.
A joint
statement issued by leaders of the two Maoist
outfits said the decision to pull out was in
protest against the intensified combing operations
by "Greyhounds", the elite force of the police,
and the "encounter killings taking place on a
daily basis". Denouncing the Congress Party-led
coalition government's policies as anti-people,
they issued a call to the people to wage a war for
a new democratic society.
The
strongly-worded statement came barely two hours
after a cabinet meeting chaired by chief minister
Rajashekhara Reddy resolved to go in for the
second round of talks with Maoist leaders and
initiate other conciliatory measures, such as
slowing down the combing operations and asking the
police to observe restraint.
Within hours of
the announcement, however, state Home Minister K
Jana Reddy appealed to the Naxalites - as Maoists
are called in India, as the present phase of
Maoist rebellion had started in a village called
Naxalbari in West Bengal in 1967 - to reconsider
their decision, as the government, he said,
remained committed to continuing the peace talks.
Talking to reporters, he urged them to view the
recent police encounters as "unfortunate
incidents". He assured them that there would
neither be combing operations nor any repression.
Asserting that the police had been instructed to
avoid excesses, he said the Maoists should also
see that there was no loss of life or destruction
of property. They should also desist from carrying
weapons while visiting villages. The minister
assured them that he would consult political
leaders and mediators in the talks to create a
congenial atmosphere for holding the next round.
He asked both sides to observe restraint as this
process would take about a fortnight.
The
Maoist statement was signed by top rebel leaders,
the CPI (Maoist) State Committee secretary,
Ramakrishna, the North Telangana Special Zonal
Committee secretary, Jampanna, the Andhra-Orissa
Border Special Zonal Committee secretary,
Sudhakar, the Janashakti State secretary, Amar,
and senior leader, Riyaz. Four of these leaders
had participated in the first round of peace talks
held between October 15 and 18, 2004. They said
they accepted the government's formal invitation
for talks for finding a solution to problems
facing the state, like restoration of democratic
rights, land distribution, the World Bank's
diktats and a separate Telangana state to be
carved out of Andhra Pradesh. "But," they said,
"the government did not conduct itself with
responsibility during the talks." These
developments, they said, proved that the ruling
classes would not resolve people's issues through
talks. They accused the government of trying to
suppress the Maoist parties in the name of
negotiations.
These developments came
after three consecutive days of encounter killings
by police and reprisals by Maoists resulting in
the death of 10 persons, including nine extremists
and a village chief. Maoists burnt a bus and
destroyed two liquor shops in Guntur district. A
strike called by Janashakti evoked only partial
response in several districts; though, it was
quite successful in Warangal. Once again, with the
Maoists vowing to avenge the killing of its cadre
by the police in alleged encounters, the police
department is moving a proposal to provide
bullet-proof cars to the ministers from Telangana.
The previous Chandrababu Naidu regime, too, had
provided such facilities, though the chief
minister himself had barely survived an
assassination attempt. As many as 50 bullet proof
vehicles had been bought to provide security to
the ministers.
In another quick response,
the central government is backing the formation of
state-level task forces that would be required to
coordinate operations "on both sides of the
border", as a top Home Ministry official put it on
Wednesday, to curb the spread of Maoism. The
Maoist threat is widespread in nine states and
growing in at least six more states. The most
affected are Bihar - the eastern state bordering
Nepal - Orissa, West Bengal, Chhatisgarh, Madhya
Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh and now Maharashtra and
Uttar Pradesh. "These joint forces will be set up
very soon," an official told reporters of the
outcome of the second meeting of the special task
force on Maoism held in Raipur on Tuesday. The
center would foot the bill of kitting, training
and modernizing the special police force meant to
fight the Maoists for three years.
In
another desperate move, New Delhi on Tuesday
announced it is increasing paramilitary forces
recruitment from 10% to 40% in militancy-hit and
border areas. The cabinet committee on security,
which met in New Delhi under the chairmanship of
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, cleared the
proposal to streamline recruitment into
paramilitary forces in the special states.
Speaking to reporters after the meeting, Defense
Minister Pranab Mukherjee said that recruitment in
the special states will depend on the population.
He said that the states have been asked to prepare
an action plan to fight the Naxalites.
There is predictable gloating in the
hardline-strategist circles at the failure of
these talks, as they can again say "we told you
so". Similar reactions had greeted the failure of
talks initiated by the previous government. But
whenever meetings of the Home Ministry's
parliamentary committee are held, reports Kuldip
Nayar, veteran journalist and former member of
parliament and former high commissioner to London,
the only solution suggested is to have "a serious
dialogue". "Even when there are talks - as those
that took place in Andhra a month ago," Nayar
wrote recently, "the police dictate the rules.
There is no generosity, not even an attitude of
give-and-take. The Naxalites are treated as
criminals, not rebels. The government tends to end
peace talks abruptly because it believes that it
can suppress such movements by force." Nayer
thinks that the Maoists have come to symbolize
hope, however fleeting and however distant.
The establishment attitude is symbolized
by M K Narayanan, the present officiating national
security adviser and a special adviser to the
prime minister on internal security. He is a
former director of India's intelligence bureau
famous in intelligence circles for having been a
brilliant officer.
Before rejoining the
government, Narayanan wrote an article entitled
"How to contain the extreme left". His concluding
remarks would show the pious emptiness at the
heart of the government: "With 'Bonapartism'
riding roughshod over 'revolutionary' communism,
talk of peaceful conflict resolution has its
limitations. The frustrating experience of the
aborted talks [2000-2002] between the Andhra
Pradesh authorities and the Peoples War [or PW,
with the Committee of Concerned Citizens acting as
the mid-wife] - confirms this hypothesis.
Moreover, revolutionary movements that do not
believe in democracy, or so-called 'liberating
movements' that do not endorse democratic and
civil society norms, are unlikely to accept an
agreement within a constitutional framework.
Meanwhile, the fact that the PW is currently
engaged in eliminating some of its erstwhile
leaders, accusing them of having betrayed the
struggle, does not provide much comfort about the
future of peaceful negotiations."
While
accepting that "more than law and order issues
are, hence, clearly involved", Narayanan is unable
to come up with any clear strategy, except
suggesting that human-rights groups should stop
highlighting police brutalities. He goes on: "What
is needed is a common strategy to deal with left
wing extremism. As attacks on the state apparatus
multiply, they could further damage the
foundations of the democratic political system. A
weakened state cannot possibly deal with this kind
of challenge, and this is precisely what constant
criticism and carping by human-rights watch groups
tends to do. It is not merely a question of
demoralizing those engaged in countering extremist
violence, but of undermining the edifice itself."
Independent observers find it difficult to
understand how the Maoist problem would go away
even if "constant criticism and carping by
human-rights groups" were to cease. What is
apparently required is an attempt to understand
what makes the Maoists tick and formulate
strategies accordingly. After all, they are
running parallel governments in large parts of
rural India. Nothing can happen in rural and small
town Bihar, Jharkhand, Orissa, Chhattisgarh,
Andhra Pradesh and parts of other states without
Maoist permission.
One example would
suffice. The political strongman of Bihar, union
railway minister and head of the ruling party in
the second largest state in the country, Lalu
Prasad Yadav, was not able to hold a rally in the
state capital Patna recently, because, angered by
his decision not to allow a Maoist rally, the
latter did not permit him to organize a rally
either. His party has been winning elections in
Bihar for four consecutive terms only because he
is able to make a deal with the Maoists before
every election. If he fails to do so this time,
there is no way he can win the forthcoming state
elections in a few weeks from now. The same was
true of Andhra Pradesh in last year's elections:
the Congress-led coalition won because the Maoists
decided not to enforce the election boycott they
routinely pronounce in the areas where people were
going to vote for the Congress and its allies.
The Maoist phenomenon
Asia
Times Online made an effort to understand the
Maoist phenomenon at the ground level earlier this
month. This correspondent spent a week in the
Maoist heartland of Bihar and Jharkhand, in the
adjoining districts of Aurangabad and Palamau. As
the overwhelming majority of the people in these
states, as in other affected states, are just
trying to eke out a living and could be counted as
have-nots, they have no reason to fear the
Maoists. Unlike in the big cities, where the
middle classes have something to lose, people here
are too poor to consider the Maoists a menace.
Indeed, their own kith and kin are joining the red
brigade in ever-growing numbers, as other
employment opportunities are few and far between.
Maoists look after these frustrated youths and
give them something to do. In fact the moment it
gets known that someone has turned Maoist, his
stock in the family and the village rises. He
becomes a person to be feared.
The most
shocking revelation for a city-dweller fed a daily
media diet of stories that depict the Maoists as
terrible criminals is the respect and awe in which
these groups are held as providers of justice and
equality to the rural social fabric. In
conversations with the village folk, this
correspondent asked repeatedly about the so-called
kangaroo courts through which the Maoists are said
to dispense summary justice. But people from
different backgrounds and castes were unanimous
that the punishments meted out were just and only
to criminals who were known to have committed
these crimes. There is very little kept private in
the countryside. Everybody knows who is doing
what.
Justice for the exploited is hard to
come by through the judicial system. Poor people
accused of crimes for which the maximum punishment
on conviction would be a month in prison are known
to have languished in jails for as long as three
decades and come out just because some
human-rights group noticed them and filed a
public-interest case in the supreme court. On the
other hand, the influential and wealthy would
either never go to jail or even if they do, they
live a luxurious life even there: they simply put
the jailers on their payroll.
Also, India
has always had a village judicial system called
the panchayats. This system can sometimes
be very cruel and very unjust. But it enjoys wide
acceptability. The only difference between the
Maoist courts and panchayats is that while
the latter is mostly run by upper caste and
influential Hindus, and usually perpetrate
injustices to the lowly castes, the former are run
by the deprived sections of society who mete out
instant punishments to those who are known to have
either raped a low caste woman or exploited a poor
person in some way.
While the upper castes
and the wealthy will not hear a good word about
Maoists, the local populace insists that Maoists
do not engage in indiscriminate killings and that
punishments meted out to individuals are well
deserved. If it is illegal, it is only as illegal
as the judicial decisions taken by upper-caste run
panchayats that routinely order killing and
the rape of lower caste men and women if they try
to step out of line. A dalit (untouchable) boy
seeking to marry a higher caste girl, for
instance, would be routinely ordered by the
panchayat to be killed by his own parents.
In many cases parents of both the boy and the girl
would themselves kill their children if ordered by
the panchayats. Panchayats can even
order women to be gang-raped if full view of the
village if they have caused them some offence like
refusing to work in the fields or in the household
for free. But the power of such upper-caste
panchayats lies highly diminished in areas
where Maoists rule.
Apart from being harsh
toward the upper caste and wealthy in clear cases
of rape, exploitation or other crimes, the Maoists
are also unforgiving toward those who have the
wherewithal but will not pay taxes to the parallel
government, or would try to hide their incomes. No
business or development activity can take place in
these states unless the businessman or the
contractor has paid 10% of his income to the
Maoists. The road linking Daltonganj, the Palamau
district headquarters to a sub-division town
Garhwa, for instance, could not be repaired for
years as the contractors was elusive and did not
want to share his income with Maoists. Traveling
on this road last fortnight, however, this
correspondent found that the construction activity
has started now and roadside villagers infer that
some deal must have been made.
Many agree
that criminal elements have infiltrated the Maoist
movement. As the movement has grown, it has
inevitably become somewhat unwieldy. But Maoist
supporters say that crimes are committed by
criminal elements in the name of Maoism. Such
criminals are, however, never spared by the
movement. They are invariably found out and
punished. It is only when the police commit crimes
and ascribe them to Maoists that the latter are
unable to counter as the police is a largely
faceless force and its functionaries keep getting
transferred from one area to another. It is
difficult to carry out a vendetta against
individual police officers. The continuing battle
with the police is of course another matter. Only
a fortnight ago a senior police officer and six of
his colleagues were gunned down by Maoists in
north Bihar.
The Maoist phenomenon
received a fillip from the lack of development in
rural areas. But now it has itself started
promoting underdevelopment. Modern communication
facilities like telephone and expanding road
networks, for instance, are inimical to the Maoist
enterprise. Residents of an upper-caste and
wealthy Brahmin village called Ketat, for
instance, feel safe because they have telephones
and are also situated on a road going to Garhwa
Road which has a police station. They have never
suffered a Maoist raid.
Villagers of
nearby Kamta say the same thing. Here the
residents are Muslim and a couple of them perhaps
prosperous enough to be paying small taxes to the
Maoists; but again they are situated on the
roadside and have telephone connections which
could be used for calling the police; so they have
remained safe so far. But what makes them afraid
is the proximity of Kothilwa Mountain. Hills and
mountains provide the best refuge and an
impregnable defense to the Maoists.
Maoist
exploits and dare-devilry have become the stuff of
legends in the area. With nothing better to do
villagers and shopkeepers in small towns narrate
detailed stories of how a certain person was
gunned down by Maoists and for what reason. One
prosperous Muslim resident of Chhatarpur, a
roadside town on the Daltonganj-Aurangabad road,
for instance, was killed because he would not
surrender his licensed gun to the Maoists. But how
the Maoists managed to eliminate him is a story
with several spins. Some tales focus on the
bravery of the Haji, who was finally killed while
traveling in a jeep, some on the effectiveness of
the espionage network run by the Maoists, from
whose net few escape. As the overwhelming majority
of people have nothing to lose, except by accident
if caught in some rare crossfire, they seem to be
enjoying the raging battle being fought between
the Maoists on the one hand and the police or the
upper-caste militias on the other.
On the
growing spread of Maoism, a resident of Nawa, a
small township on the same road, said; "Virtually
every family has a Maoist member. If you stay the
night here, and walk on the road after nightfall,
every passerby would greet you with the Maoist
slogan "Laal Salaam" [Red Salute] and you
might face difficulties if you don't greet the
fellow back with a Laal Salaam yourself."
One thing about Maoists that has caught
the imagination of many in the areas this
correspondent traveled thorough is their fierce
secularism and opposition to discrimination on
grounds of caste. Maoist, or for that matter other
mainstream communist leaders, have traditionally
come from the upper castes and wealthy classes.
But they mix with the lowest of the low among
India's numerous castes without showing the
slightest sense of superiority. Maoist cadres come
from all castes and communities, though it would
be difficult to find upper caste people except at
the leadership level. In a country where nearly
all political parties have fixed vote banks among
certain castes and communities, many common people
find it admirable, indeed awe-inspiring.
Everything in India boils down to caste,
in the final analysis. Upper castes long for the
time when the lower castes knew and were resigned
to their lowly place in society. They are
determined to perpetuate the millennia-old system
of caste discrimination and appalling exploitation
of the poor for as long as possible. They have
created a whole host of militias to counter the
Maoist onslaught. These militias engage in
indiscriminate killings of lower caste villagers
and display unspeakable brutality in killing women
and children. A vicious cycle of retaliatory
killings goes on.
Thoughtful individuals
in Bihar and Jharkhand's villages suffering from
the Maoist threat say that the only way to counter
Maoism would be to provide good governance,
development and social justice. But now Maoism
itself would come in the way. Like everybody else
in the business of administering the country,
Maoists, too, have developed a vested interest. A
civil war can be quite profitable for some.
Similarly, the police have a vested
interest in the survival of Maoism. It is this
ongoing struggle with Maoism that brings to them
millions of dollars worth of arms and ammunition,
part of which they can sell to the Maoists and
boost their income. Maoists have now come to
welcome encounters with the police as it is an
easy way of snatching sophisticated weapons and
ammunition. All the licensed guns in the
countryside have either been taken back by the
state or looted by the Maoists. The citizenry is
entirely at the mercy of the two governments, one
overt and the other covert, one rules by the day
and the other by night.
It is possible
that M K Narayanan is right, after all, and the
likes of Kuldip Nayar wrong. What is there to talk
about with the Maoists? If good governance and
social justice is impossible to provide, all that
governments can do is deal with the consequences
of ill governance, as best as they can and for as
long as they can. Apparently, India is in for a
long-drawn-out and even fiercer battle with the
Maoists. If the government can draw together
immense firepower for the battles ahead, the
Maoists have the resources to either loot or buy
the same firepower from the government forces
themselves. Corruption and caste supremacy can
hardly go together.
Sultan
Shahin is a New Delhi-based
writer.
(Copyright 2005 Asia Times
Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us
for information on sales, syndication and republishing.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
All material on this
website is copyright and may not be republished in any form without written
permission.
© Copyright 1999 - 2005 Asia Times
Online Ltd.
|
|
Head
Office: Rm 202, Hau Fook Mansion, No. 8 Hau Fook St., Kowloon, Hong
Kong
Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
|
Asian Sex Gazette South Asian Sex News
|
|
|
