The long dark tea time of the soul

This is the first part of my three part essay on naxalism. I have already posted the second part in this blog, where I have presented a seven-point program for the naxalite central committee. In the present essay, I discuss the origin of the movement, the issues of ideology, politics and and the question of violence. I have also presented a roadmap of what the Indian state can do to counter naxalism.

As far as naxalism is concerned, a military solution simply does not exist. There are far more potent stuff that the state can do, like land reforms, panchayati raj, etcetra.

ps: Don’t ask me why I posted the second part before the first. Suffice it to say that Iam bad at mathematics.
————————————————————————————————————————
A brief history

It all started when Charu Mazumdar led the landless peasants of Naxalbari to an uprising in 1967. Known as Naxalbari uprising, this event provided the much needed spark to launch a revolutionary party. The events of Naxalbari triggered a spark and similar uprisings were repeated in Srikakulam, Buirbhu, Lakhimpur-Kheri and Mushabri. After being expelled from CPI(M), he and Kanu Sanyal, inspired by the Mao’s Chinese revolution, formed the CPI(ML) in 1969. The aim was to launch a protracted people’s struggle in India. In a parallel stream, another group of left revolutionaries called the Dakshindesh group formed the MCC (Maoist Communist Center) in October 1969 with Com. Kanai Chatterjee as its secretary. The death of Charu Mazumdar in police custody in 1972 dealt a serious blow to the movement. Severe persecution of its cadres by the police followed. Ego clashes, lack of unity, conflicting views regarding the nature of violence, and suitability of an armed revolution in India led to numerous splits among the ranks of the party. By the 80s, there were at least a dozen left extremist groups operating in various parts of the country, fighting for nearly the same principles. Many of these groups gave up arms, joined the mainstream and decided to take part in electoral politics. Out of the ones remaine underground, CPI(ML)(People’s War) became the largest and strongest. People’s War was founded by K Seetharamaiah in 1980. Other such groups are CPI(ML)(Party Unity), and CPI(ML)(Janashakti), which is still in existence. Party unity merged with People’s War in 1997. MCCI and People’s war merged in september 2004 to form the united CPI(Maoist), which is estimated to have around 10500 armed members.

For a movement that has affected nearly one third of the country, the amount of public discourse has been extremely limited till recently. Who are these men? Why are they fighting against us? What do they want? What is the source of their funds? Are they fighting for the poor? Is there a common ground between what they want and what the democratic setup in the country stands for? If they are fighting for the poor, why can’t the organs of our state agree to their demands? These are some of the common questions that are asked by regular Indians, who are yet untouched by the maoist movement. There are larger questions on the ethics and practicality of using violence to achieve a political goal. What about the people who are stranded in the crossfire? What are the living standards of those people, where maoists have been able to form a guerrilla zone? How much mass support do they enjoy? How much of their supporters do it because they were forced. It is important to ask and understand these basic questions to have a complete discussion on naxalism.

Naxalism: A Problem, a Phenomenon, a Solution or just a Menace?

AP high court made a remark in 1996 that “while leftwing extremism is viewed as a problem by the administration, it is increasingly being perceived as a solution to their problems by the alienated masses.” Naxalism means different things to different people.

• As a Problem: Naxalism is regarded as a problem by the state, acknowleged as a socio-economic problem. The government blames the presence of maoists as a hindrance to development of the most backward regions of India. The human rights record of both the maoists and the security forces has been bad in the conflict zones. For the people, even genuine development packages such as like those of education and health become untenable.

• As a Solution: Although the military wing is the largest and most important part of the party, it has important social, cultural and economic dimensions as well. The naxalites have gained public support among masses by demolishing the traditional hierarchy of the society, by forcibly distributing land, by making adivasis self-reliant and self-confident. These actions have given them not only many dedicated cadres, but also huge number of fiercely loyal supporters. In fact the unarmed masses in large numbers have been the part of all major naxalite attacks.

• As a Phenomenon: Where there is injustice, sooner or later, there will be a rebellion. As the revolutionary poet Gadar and maoist ideologue puts it, “if people are hungry, they take up weapons”. The discontent can find expression in various forms, democratic and undemocratic. The success of non-violent protest methods is very important to keep extremism at bay. The neglect of a large section of our society and the apparent oppressive nature of state, forces them to take up arms to fight the state. What we are witnessing in the form of naxalism is actually a phenomenon, possibly a reflection of our own state actions.

What do the maoists want? Ideology and Politics.

The maoists state their primary motive as, “to create an equitable and just society on the principles of marxism, leninism and maoism”. What that means is to significantly move away from current democratic setup of the state, modify the constitution, and establish a people’s republic in India. In their literature, and public statements, the party has outlined their vision of a just Indian society. The basis is a communist state, where focus is on equal distribution of resources and which eliminates oppression in all forms. Guns are a prop, a necessity, and a facilitator to fulfill that aim.

What pulls people to join the naxalite ranks is a difficult question to answer. It might either be an attraction to the maoist ideology, or as an alternative (and occasionally only feasible) means to protest against discrimination. In the last two decades the demography of active cadres underwent a significant change. An ideology that has been discarded for all practical purpose even in its native country, maoism is no more attractive for the urban educated youth. It is true that the large numbers of masses who support and join the maoists are genuinely angry with the system, and read about Mao and his ideas after they join the movement. Being dogmatic about ideology has been one of the greatest criticisms of the maoist parties. But ideology is something that keeps the party together, that decides the course of party action. Ideology is important, so that the large number of armed cadres follow a well defined path.

On the question of violence

“No real communist is for violence per se. The communists are for a peaceful social system built around equality and justice. But when they seek to work for such a system, they are attacked most brutally”

– Com. Azad, Spokesperson CC, CPI(Maoist), EPW 14^th Oct 2006

“… liberal TU leaders like Niyogi and Samant are openly murdered; the one-lakh strong coal miners union, SIKASA, is banned; and strikes in public sector units have ESMA clamped against them and their leaders arrested. In such a situation, where all peaceful forms of activity become increasingly meaningless, does not the undermining of armed struggle play into the hands of the ruling classes and fascist forces? “

– Peoples March, Jan-Feb 1999

The use of violence is what distinguishes the maoists from most other mainstream movements in our country. Even the maoists admit that they were forced to take up arms to defend their actions. Violence is necessary for their survival. However the use of guns has an ugly side as well. More often than not it is targeted against the people of the same class, who are supposed to be protected by naxalism, the informers, the degenerate elements and lumpen proletariat. The moral and ethical questions on violence remain to be answered. There are practical costs as well. Violence by one side breeds and fuels a more brutal counter-violence from the other, and then it becomes very difficult to control the cycle of violence. The rise of private armies like Ranveer Sena in Bihar is just an example. It is questionable whether a bunch of dedicated naxalite can ever defeat the mighty Indian army, without causing large collateral damage. The focus on armed conflict makes the military wing the most powerful wing in the organization, and military victories becomes the primary factor in planning future strategies. As a result, the constructive activities of the movement, the building of mass base and social reforms, implementing their development agenda gets a lower priority. The maoists have far higher stakes in securing a better life for the people who are caught in the crossfire. The violent tactics has also drawn a large number of sincere activists away from the movement; it also led to too many bright members losing their life to police bullets. The violence acted as a major stumbling block for its growth into urban areas, and gaining wider legitimacy.

What should the Indian State do to address the situation

1. Respect and Empower the popular Non-Violent movements in India: In an interview in September 2006, ex-prime minister of India, VP Singh remarked that, “Yes. I want to become a Maoist“. Coming from an ex-prime minister, it shows the helplessness that is felt by the leaders of peaceful people’s movement across the country. Is our state gradually closing the doors of genuine non-violent protest movements? In the August-September 2006 issue of people’s march the maoists, replying to a criticism by NBA (Narmada Bachao Andolan) for their violent methods had this to say, “The point is that in the face of a gigantic Rakshasha the people have only two options: get swallowed up by it or resist it. The NBA have allowed the former, the Naxalites are attempting the latter. It is time these advocates of non-violence reflect on their two decades of passive struggle and see, relatively what the Naxalites have achieved — if they are honest to the people.” The article quipped that NBA has failed to stop the state from raising the height of the dam. He non-violent struggles fail, or perceived to be failed in their just demands, this only strengthens the people who espouse violence.

2. Land Reforms: The naxalite movement started off as an agrarian struggle, and unequal distribution of land still remains their primary grievance.” During the talks with the AP government, the issue of land reforms figured prominently. 62% of our population is dependent on agriculture. Many states and the center have enacted legislations for land reforms. Imperfect implementation by the executive, and insincere and lack of clear direction from legislature ensured that farm land still remains in the hands of a chosen few. National Sample Survey indicates that 43% of all families dependent upon agriculture are landless or own less that half an acre. By contrast, barely 2% of families more than 30% of total arable land. The only state that has been successful in tackling leftwing extremism is, ironically, West Bengal. The credit goes to the large scale land reforms under Operation Barga that were undertaken by the UF government between 1967-70 and by the CPI(M) government after 1977. Analyzing the impact of land reforms, led by land and revenue minister H. K. Konar on the naxalite movement in the state, D Bandhopadhyay has written that, “…the fact remains that Konar succeeded in weaning away the poor peasantry from the naxalite movement. When they found that they could get land legally by joining one of the recognised political outfits, without any militancy, they promptly eschewed the violent mode of naxalism.” (Land reforms in West Bengal, EPW May 27-June 2, 2000) Significantly, when naxalism came back to West Bengal after nearly two decades, it found support in pockets of Midnapur, Purulia and Bankura districts, places which were bypassed by the state’s land reforms initiatives.

Genuine land reforms remain till date the best and only successful antidote to the spread of naxalism.

3. Addressing the isolation of tribal population: The tribals have always been a neglected lot in India. Using strict environmental legislation, India had made a large section of its indigenous population landless in their own land. These legislations were used by the forest officials to extract bribes from the tribals living in the restricted forest. Large development projects, dams, industries and infrastructure projects that ran through their land were instrumental in uprooting a very high number of adivasis. Conversely, in most cases the benefits went to settlers from outside. In large parts of our country, tribal areas have reported massive malnutrition and starvation deaths. It is no surprise that almost 90% of ground level naxalite cadres in Chhattisgarh are tribals. The maoists did not need a lot of persuasion to gain their trust and loyalty. The nature of our state apparatus ensured that. It is important that the rights of tribals are respected by the state. The pending forest-rights bill and the tribal bill are a step in the right direction.

4. Divestment of power through Panchayati Raj: Effective implementation of panchayati raj can also go a long way in divesting power to the people of this country. They can help in bringing true democracy. Greater power to take and implement decisions to the community at the village level can draw people away from the necessity of taking up arms. The poorest have the largest stake in development projects in their village. They must have the right to take decisions for their own benefit. The panchayats should also be the implementers of social security schemes, such as, NREGA. It is also very important that the panchayati raj institutions don’t remain in the control of local power centers and existing feudal hierarchy. The efficacy of panchayati raj will be a hindered, if the posts are occupied by the same powerful castes.

5. Talks: After a decade of sustained campaign by civil society groups, the congress-led government of Andhra Pradesh invited CPI(ML)(PW) and CPI(Janashakti) for talks in April 2004. The talks didn’t last more six months, and both parties blamed each other. It is possible that both parties wanted the talks to fail. That experience should not deter the state away from any future talks with the maoists, who are more united and stronger now than they were in 2004. The demands raised by the maoists regarding distribution of land among the poor and landless are a pointer where the state can agree on the maoists agenda. The maoists on their part can work towards genuine peace, and if the government implements programs to benefit the poor, that’s actually good for the movement.

6. Development in the right direction: The government claims that it is spending huge amount of money to develop he backward districts. However, if development is not in the right direction, if it is implemented in a top down fashion, it can actually push people towards the maoists. For example, the state of Chhattisgarh signed MOUs with private companies to set up steel plants in the naxal infested regions of the state. However, the villagers have alleged that they were forced to give up their land without adequate compensation. It is very important to reorient the development projects in a way that education, health, agricultural land and water become accessible to all. Inclusive development in a pattern that will benefit all sections of the society without victimising one or the other is the need of the hour. The government has taken a number of initiatives, like BDIS (backward district initiative scheme), in this regard. NREGA also has a lot of scope to help the rural poor. It is important to ensure effective implementation of these programs, because if they fail, it will embolden the naxalite assertion that democratic bourgeois cannot give anything to the poorest.

The Future

In the past, our state has always been two steps behind the maoists. What the maoists are doing right now might not be visible now, but it may affect us a couple of years later. Some other crucial decisions taken in the ninth congress were to build up mass organizations, to explain their views to the world, and to utilize the energy of urban poor to spread the revolution. It might be a matter of time when the maoists gain foothold in the cities as well. Do we have reasons to be afraid? Let us take the recent slum demolitions in New Delhi as an example. Is it unimaginable that some of the anxious youth, fed up with all his families cries going unheard, decides to take up arms to fight for his/her rights? Is it entirely unfeasible that some youth, unable to give expression to his/her angst to the rising income gap in the city, makes up his mind that violence is the only answer to get justice, to get your rights. For them naxalism, if not the ideology then the way the group can achieve things, is attractive. It is important that our state recognizes this before the naxalites do.