The Left and Its Worst Critics

By Prabhat Patnaik 

WITH normalcy returning to Nandigram, and with the heat generated over it in intellectual circles somewhat subsiding, it is time for us to ask the question: why did so many intellectuals suddenly turn against the Party with such amazing fury on this issue?

This question is important because joining issue with them on the basis of facts on the specificities of Nandigram, which is what we have been doing till now, is not enough. It is not enough for instance to underscore the fact, implicitly or explicitly denied by virtually all of them, that thousands of poor people were driven out of their homes into refugee camps for the only “crime” of being CPI(M) supporters; it is not enough to argue against them that there was no semblance of an excuse for keeping Nandigram out of bounds for these refugees and for the civil administration even after the Left Front government had categorically declared that no chemical hub would be built there; it is not enough to point out that the so-called “re-occupation” of Nandigram in November was an act of desperation which followed the failure of every other effort at restoring normalcy and bringing the refugees back to their homes. All these facts and arguments have been advanced at length, and are by now passe. But the phenomenon of several intellectuals who till yesterday were with the Left in fighting communal fascism but have now turned against it requires serious analysis.

WHY IS IT SO DIFFERENT NOW?

There is no gainsaying that the Left Front government made serious mistakes in handling the Nandigram issue; and Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee has said so in as many words. But disagreement with the LF over this could have taken the form of friendly criticism, articles, and open letters, and not of such outright hostility that even put the LF on a par with communal fascism. Likewise disagreements over the LF’s industrialisation policy could have been aired in a manner that had none of the ferocity which has been recently displayed. Differences with the LF, even basic differences, therefore cannot suffice as an explanation of what we have just witnessed.

Likewise, the fact that most of these intellectuals are in any case strongly anti-organised Left, especially anti-Communist [and in particular anti-CPI(M)], belonging as they do to the erstwhile “socialist” groups, to NGOs, to the ranks of Naxalite sympathizers, to the community of “Free Thinkers”, and to various shades of “populism”, would not suffice as an explanation. After all, despite this basic hostility to the organised Left, they did make common cause with it on several issues till recently. Why is it suddenly so different now?

The context clearly has changed. With the perceived decline in the strength of the communal fascist forces, a certain fracturing of the anti-communal coalition was inevitable and has happened, and this no doubt provides the setting in which it becomes possible for these intellectuals to express in the open the hostility which they might have felt all along against the Left. Indeed, this perceived weakening of the BJP may even encourage attempts, on the part of intellectuals hostile to the Left but aligned to it earlier owing to the pressure of circumstances, at establishing a sort of intellectual hegemony over society at large at the expense of the Left. But while the recession of the communal fascist threat certainly creates the condition for these intellectuals to come out openly against the Left, the manner of their coming out cannot be explained only by this fact. It indicates something more serious, namely the process of destruction of politics that the phenomenon of globalisation has unleashed.

MESSIANIC MORALISM

The crux of political praxis consists at any time in distinguishing between two camps: the camp of the “people” and camp hostile to the interests of “the people”. This distinction in turn is based on an analysis of the prevailing contradictions, and the identification of the principal contradiction, on the basis of which the composition of the class alliance that constitutes the camp of “the people” is determined. And corresponding to this constellation of classes, there is a certain constellation of political forces among whom relations have to be forged. It is obvious that the relationship between the political forces representing the classes that constitute the camp of the people at any time, and the nature of criticism among these forces, must be different from the relationship and criticism across camps. Not to distinguish between  the camps, not to distinguish between alternative constellations of political forces, but to club them together on the basis of the identical nature of their presumed moral trespasses, is to withdraw from politics. What is striking about the attitude of the intellectuals arrayed against the organised Left at present is their complete withdrawal from the realm of political praxis to a realm of messianic moralism.

Such messianic moralism is not just politically counter-productive. The withdrawal from the realm of politics that it signifies, strengthens politically the camp of the “enemies of the people”. (In India for instance the attack inspired by messianic moralism that has been launched on the organised Left at a time when the latter is in the forefront of an extremely crucial but difficult struggle against the attempt of imperialism to make India its strategic ally, weakens that struggle, and thereby plays into the hands of imperialism). But messianic moralism, quite apart from its palpable political consequences, is smug, self-righteous, self-adulatory, and, above all, empty. An attitude that does not distinguish between types of violence, between the different episodes of violence, that condemns all violence with equal abhorrence, that places on a footing of equality all presumed perpetrators of violence, amounts in fact to a condemnation of nothing. To say that all are equally bad is not even morally meaningful.

This messianic moralism, this withdrawal from politics, is based fundamentally on a disdain of politics, of the messy world of politics, which is far from being peopled by angels. It constitutes therefore a mirror image of the very phenomenon that it seeks to resist, namely the “cult of development” spawned by neo-liberalism. Manmohan Singh says: politics is filthy; rise above politics; detach “development” from politics. The anti-Left intellectuals say: politics is filthy; rise above politics; detach the struggle against “development” from politics.

DISDAIN FOR POLITICS

This disdain for politics, this contempt for the political process, is what  characterizes substantial sections of the middle class in India today. It is visible in the absolute opposition of the students of elite institutions to the legislation on reservations passed unanimously by parliament. It is visible in the persistent resort to the judicial process to overturn decisions of legislatures, and the exhortations to the judiciary to act as a body superior to the elected representatives of the people. This middle class contempt for politics and politicians is apparent in the rise of movements like “Youth For Equality” that make no secret of it and whose avowed aim is to combat “affirmative action” which they consider to be the handiwork of “opportunist” politicians.

The rise of messianic moralism is a part of the same trend, which is nothing else but a process of “destruction of politics”. Middle class moralism upholds causes, not programmes. It flits from cause to cause. And it apotheosizes the absence of systematic political alliances. Some may call it “post-modern politics”, but it amounts to a negation of politics.

Messianic moralism always has a seductive appeal for intellectuals. To avoid systematic partisanship, to stand above the messy world of politics, to pronounce  judgements on issues from Olympian moral heights, and to be applauded for one’s presumed “non-partisanship”, gives one a sense of both comfort and fulfillment. This seductive appeal is heightened by the contemporary ambience of middle class disdain for politics which the phenomenon of globalisation, subtly but assiduously, nurtures and promotes.

The answer to the question with which we started, namely why have so many intellectuals turned against the Left with such fury, lies to a significant extent in the fact that this fury against the Left is also fed by a revolt against politics. The revolt against the CPI(M) is simultaneously a revolt against politics. The combination of anti-communism with a rejection of politics in general gives this revolt that added edge, that special anger. It is the anger of the morality of the “anti-political” against the morality of the “political”, for Communism, notwithstanding its substitution of the “political” for the “moral”, has nonetheless a moral appeal. The venom in the anti-Left intellectuals’ attack on the Left comes from the fact that this struggle, of the “morality of the anti-political” against the “morality of the political”, takes on the character of a desperate last struggle, a final push to destroy the latter, since “our day has come at last!”.

Ironically it was a group of  US-based academics led by Noam Chomsky who sought to introduce a political perspective to the anti-Left agitation of the intellectuals on Nandigram. It is they who pointed out that in the anti-imperialist struggle, which is the defining struggle of our times (the struggle around the principal contradiction), the organised Left was an essential component of the camp of the “people”, and that nothing should be done to disrupt the unity of the camp of the “people”. But the response of the anti-Left intellectuals to the injection of this political perspective was a barrage of attacks on Chomsky et al for taking a “pro-CPI(M)” position. A political position ipso facto was identified as a “pro-CPI(M)” position. There could be no clearer proof of the proposition that the revolt of the intellectuals against the Left was simultaneously a revolt against politics, a disdain for politics that has become so prevalent a phenomenon in the era of globalisation that it affects as much the proponents of globalisation as its avowed critics. In fact these critics and the votaries of imperialist globalisation share in this respect the same terrain of discourse.

The hallmark of the organised Left lies precisely in the fact it rejects this terrain of discourse, that it accords centrality to politics, that it does not substitute an abstract Olympian moralism for concrete political mobilisation. It is for this reason therefore that the Left’s attitude to these intellectuals must be informed by politics; it cannot be a mirror image of their attitude to the Left.

POSTED BY Administrator ON 07.11.08 @ 1:21 pm | 0 Comments

Nandigram Update 16 November,2007

Return to peace
SUHRID SANKAR CHATTOPADHYAY
in Kolkata
After nearly a year of violence, the Left Front government has begun the healing process in Nandigram.

ARUNANGSU ROY CHOWDHURY

Inside Nandigram on November 16, life is slowly returning to normal.

After 11 months of lawlessness, in the second week of November Nandigram in West Bengal’s Purbo Medinipur district took its first steps towards a lasting peace as embattled supporters of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) returned to their homes in the area. They virtually fought their way into the villages, and homes, they fled almost a year ago terrorised by armed supporters of the Bhumi Uchhed Pratirodh (Land Eviction Resistance) Committee.

The BUPC, led by the Trinamul Congress, was formed to resist the acquisition of land by the government for setting up a chemical hub or a special economic zone for chemical industries but soon found itself yielding space to elements with radical agendas, such as the Maoists.

As of November 16, six companies of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) were in Nandigram and the Maoists fighting on the side of the BUPC were reportedly on the run. Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee said: “The sun is rising in Nandigram, and it is a matter of time before its warmth can once again be felt by the people.” The main priorities identified by the Left Front government led by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) are to provide immediate relief to the affected people, build confidence among them and restore normalcy in everyday life.

From all accounts, the Nandigram fiasco had its origins in a piece of misinformation that sparked a local agitation. Unscrupulous political opportunism hijacked the protest to convert this tiny southeast corner of West Bengal into a battlefield to perpetuate a “liberated zone” not bound by the laws of the land.

ARUNANGSU ROY CHOWDHURY

At a rally by CPI(M) supporters in Nandigram on November 12.

On January 3, an inopportune notice sent by the Haldia Development Authority on its own initiative to the block development officer (BDO) in Nandigram, to identify areas that may be required for setting up a chemical hub, elicited a violent reaction from the local people. The State government then gave a verbal assurance that no land would be acquired without the prior consent of the people.

However, the BUPC, which the Trinamul Congress created, and the informal alliance it forged with naxalites, the Socialist Unity Centre of India (SUCI) and the Jamait-i-Ulema-e-Hind, began driving out CPI(M) supporters from the area. According to CPI(M) sources, these elements took control of the entire Block I and parts of Block II of the three blocks of Nandigram, destroyed roads and access to bridges, dug up culverts and set up road-blocks to prevent any entry into their “liberated zone”. Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee announced as early as February that the notice had been torn up and that the people need not fear losing their land anymore. In spite of this assurance, the BUPC continued to operate in the area.

On March 14, two and a half months after the trouble began, the government sent a police force to the area to restore road links. The resistance to this from the local people, instigated by the BUPC, turned violent and in the catastrophe that followed 14 people, including two women, were killed and 75 were injured (Frontline, April 6, 2007).

The government, faced with mounting political pressure, withdrew the police force. Taking advantage of this and the absence of administration in the area, the BUPC took over and began its reign of terror – looting, extortion, violence – against all those who raised their voice against it.

Trinamul Congress chief Mamata Banerjee turned down the State government’s repeated offers for talks. Meanwhile, the BUPC continued to target CPI(M) supporters and leaders. More than 3,000 people, including women and children, who were driven out of their homes, took refuge in relief camps set up by the CPI(M). The experiences of the people who escaped indicated that extortion and violence were the order of the day in the once sleepy hamlets.

Fresh violence

After nearly a month’s relative calm, fresh violence erupted in the end of October. Matters took a turn for the worse on November 7, and in the bloody battle that continued until November 10 four people were killed and 14 were injured. It ended with the BUPC losing its hold over its “liberated zone”. By the time the first CRPF patrol entered the area on November 12, the battle for Nandigram was over but the situation remained extremely tense.

SUSHANTA PATRONOBISH

Governor Gopalkrishna Gandhi (right) and Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee at the opening of the Kolkata Film Festival on November 10.

Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee said he had requested the Union Home Ministry as early as October 27 for the deployment of the CRPF. Had the Centre heeded his request and sent the forces immediately, the violence could have been avoided, he said. The primary task of the CRPF in Nandigram now is not to restore law and order but to build confidence among the people and prevent any further outbreak of violence.

On November 12, for the first time in 11 months, the CPI(M) held a meeting in Nandigram, in which local leaders such as Ashok Bera, Robin Maity and Niranjan Mandal participated. The repeated assurance that flowed from their microphones was: “All those of you who have left your homes, please return. You will not be harmed.”

The CPI(M) leaders said the assurance was meant not just for the over 2,500 of its supporters rendered homeless by the BUPC but for all residents of the three blocks regardless of party affiliation. Ashok Guria, a leading member of the Purbo Medinipur district committee of the CPI(M), is reported to have said: “Nandigram does not belong to the CPI(M) alone. The flags of all the political parties will be kept aloft here from now on. Only weapons and those who wield them will have no place here.”

Intellectuals’ outcry

Both the Left Front government and the party that leads it, the CPI(M), came in for strong criticism, particularly from a section of intellectuals and artistes, including film-makers Goutam Ghosh and Aparna Sen, for the recent violence. In Kolkata, first they led a procession urging a boycott of the International Film Festival, which coincided with the latest phase of violence in Nandigram, and then a protest march on November 14 condemning the government’s stand on Nandigram.

DESHAKALYAN CHOWDHURY/AFP

CRPF personnel at Adhikari Para village in Nandigram on November 13.

The CPI(M) said the same intellectuals, artistes, litterateurs and celebrities who condemned the government and the party now had remained silent for the past 11 months when thousands of families, including women and children, were driven out of their villages at gunpoint. In fact, another group of intellectuals, including screen legend Soumitro Chatterjee and leading novelist Sunil Gangopadhyay, took out a counter-procession on November 15.

The opposition parties, too, were not far behind the intellectuals. In Kolkata, approximately 180 km from Nandigram, normal life was once again affected on November 12 by a strike called by the Congress, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the SUCI on Nandigram. The Trinamul Congress went a step further and gave a call for a non-cooperation movement.

This was the third strike in two weeks, the earlier ones having been called by the SUCI and the Trinamul Congress on October 30 and 31. BJP leader L.K. Advani, who visited Nandigram on November 13, publicly announced that the situation there was a fit case for President’s Rule.

Mamata Banerjee, true to her style of politics, resigned yet again; this time from her South Kolkata parliamentary seat. She said it was in protest against the “continuing violence” in Nandigram. But Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee rejected the letter on the grounds that it was addressed to the Prime Minister and not the Speaker.

The government’s detractors seemed to have found their voice in Governor Gopalkrishna Gandhi, who, though acknowledging that no quarter should be given to the cult of violence associated with Maoists, said in a press statement, “The manner in which the recapture of Nandigram villages is being attempted is totally unlawful and unacceptable.”

According to the CPI(M), on the Nandigram issue this is the second time – since expressing “cold horror” at the police firing on March 14 – the Governor has stepped out of his constitutional line and taken a partisan stand on the situation.

A statement by the CPI(M) Polit Bureau said the Governor was well within his constitutional right to communicate his views to the State and Central governments. “However, he has chosen once again to go public with a statement which is uncalled for. The content of the statement makes it clear that this is not the role expected from the office of Governor under the Constitution.”

ARUNANGSU ROY CHOWDHURY

At Bhangabera on November 16, Nabo Samanta, whose elder brother Sankar Samanta was the first CPI(M) member to be killed in the first phase of violence in Nandigram, points to what remains of their house which was destroyed allegedly by activists of the Bhumi Uchhed Pratirodh Committee.

Asked at a press conference on November 13 about the “forcible repossession” of land by CPI(M) followers, Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee said: “I wanted to avoid this right from the beginning, but it was desperation which drove them to use force. The BUPC were paid back in their own coin. When they harassed CPI(M) followers for 11 months just because they were CPI(M) supporters, when they drove them out of their homes, were they [the BUPC] unarmed? Were they peaceful?” Bhattacharjee, however, refused to comment on the Governor’s statement.

On November 16, a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court, comprising Chief Justice S.S. Nijjar and Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghosh, delivering a judgment on a petition on the March 14 police firing in Nandigram, termed the police firing as “totally unconstitutional” and directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to continue its inquiry into the incidents and submit a report within a month. The CBI had begun its inquiry on the direction of the High Court on March 15 when it heard a petition filed by the National Alliance of People’s Movement.

The court also ordered a compensation package of Rs.5 lakh to each of the families of the 14 killed, Rs.2 lakh to those raped and Rs.1 lakh each to the injured.

Criticism & constraints

What perhaps surprised the CPI(M) was the reaction of its partners in the government, notably the Revolutionary Socialist Party (RSP) and the All India Forward Bloc (AIFB). They held the CPI(M) alone responsible for the latest violence in Nandigram and RSP leader and State Public Works Department Minister Kshiti Goswami even threatened to quit the Cabinet.

One question that is asked is why the police were not deployed in the beginning to restore law and order. The government’s response has been that it was wary of this option in view of what happened on March 14. Besides, it said, the opposition parties always accused the State police of being partisan. The Trinamul Congress even demanded that if the CRPF is deployed in the State, it should not be placed under the command of State police officers, which is the normal practice.

It was in this context, sources said, the government wanted to avoid police action as far as possible, and tried for a political settlement. The RSP and the AIFB, too, supported this position.

Sources said a number of peace committees had been set up at the district and local levels and some of them had started functioning as well, giving out the hope that the situation would return to normal without any further use of force. However, that was not to be.

The location of Nandigram, according to government sources, presented a difficulty for the government machinery to intervene. In the south is the Haldi river and the west opens into the Bay of Bengal. On the northern side is the Talpati canal, which links the river with the sea. “The place is very vulnerable, and if extremist forces like the Maoists enter through the waterway, they can cause havoc in the region,” a government source said.

The Chief Minister was certain about the presence of Maoists in Nandigram. He said: “It is a fact that a strong group of Maoists from Jharkhand under the leadership of Ranjit Pal [the Maoist leader who is an accused in the March 4 murder of Sunil Mahato, Lok Sabha member of the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha and is listed as absconding] was operating in the region. They were heavily armed and even planted landmines in and around the area.”

A strong indication of Maoist presence, according to sources, was the detection of a landmine at Gangrachar in Sonachura by the CRPF. According to reports, more mines were placed around Sonachura – the BUPC stronghold – in an attempt to keep the region isolated.

Sources said that on November 14 the CRPF uncovered what was virtually a landmine-manufacturing factory and seized 150 detonators, tin cans, batteries to charge detonators and various other ingredients. An indication of the presence of extremists from Andhra Pradesh was the discovery of a leaflet in Telugu laying down detailed guidelines for armed combat. According to the sources, the Maoists were not only fighting under the BUPC banner but also training people in firearms. They had even built bunkers in some places, the sources added.

Return of administration

Another criticism raised by the government’s detractors is “administrative failure on the part of the government”. CPI(M) State secretary, Left front Chairman and Polit Bureau member Biman Bose told Frontline, “West Bengal has 341 blocks, of which one and a half blocks were affected. Can a State government’s performance really be judged on that alone, given all the factors that led to the situation there?” The government has drawn up a strategy to restore administrative normalcy in the region. It has put up relief camps, and the local administration has been instructed to go from house to house if necessary to restore confidence in the people. Block and panchayat offices have been told to resume their activities, and gradually the police are being moved into the region.

“My work now is to ensure peace in Nandigram and get administrative control there,” said Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee and added that “troublemakers from outside” would not be allowed to remain in Nandigram.

The situation in Nandigram is slowing returning to normal. By November 14, bazaars in the area showed tentative signs of commerce and children could be seen going to school after almost a year of enforced holiday. Steps have also been taken to restore infrastructure and resume development work.

“Our immediate priority is to use the funds for development work, which have been lying unutilised for the past 11 months, and thus generate immediate employment for as many people as possible,” a senior CPI(M) functionary said.

However, one issue that the government had to address was the destruction caused to houses in the area, he said. Most the people returned to virtually non-existent homes; many of the homesteads had been set on fire or looted of their meagre belongings such as clothes and utensils.

To provide immediate relief, on November 14 a sum of Rs.1 crore from the Chief Minister’s Relief Fund was disbursed to at least 700 of the most badly affected families cutting across political party lines. Those whose houses have been gutted are being given Rs.10,000 and those whose houses have been partly damaged are being given Rs.5,000.

Each family will also receive Rs.1,000 to cover immediate requirements for daily life. “With winter approaching, we will also have to consider clothes and blankets for the affected,” Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee said. Netaji Sangha, a non-political organisation of Kolkata, has stepped forward with a donation of Rs.50,000 to repair homesteads and many others too have made similar offers.

Asked whether the 11-month-long unrest in Nandigram would detract future investors, Bhattacharjee said: “Not a single investor – even those with whom we are currently in discussion – have backed out.” On November 14 he announced that West Bengal was set to have its first ever biotechnology park, which is coming up as a part of a collaborative effort between the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Kharagpur and Berkeley University of the United States.

“Berkeley is famous of carrying out some of the most modern researches in tropical diseases such as malaria, dengue, and so on, and this will be of enormous benefit to the State,” he said.

There is a nagging fear among many that the peace in Nandigram may last only as long as the CRPF remains. The Chief Minister, however, appears confident that a definitive solution has been arrived at. To a query at a press conference whether such incidents would be tackled differently in future, he replied that “there shall be no recurrence of Nandigram”.

With kind permission from Frontline, India’s national magazine, from the publishers of The Hindu, Chennai, India

POSTED BY Administrator ON 12.03.07 @ 11:53 am | 1 Comment

Nandigram Update 13 November,2007

The challenge of Nandigram

Three days after the Left Front in West Bengal appealed for peace and for the “safe and secure return” to villages in the Nandigram area of all people forced to live outside, and in the aftermath of the beginning of peace talks at the local level, violence has erupted again in this area of rural West Bengal. The Maoists have resumed their armed campaign of terror; working people have been injured and killed in political violence; and, ever-willing to give chaos a chance, Trinamool Congress leader Mamata Banerjee has been reported as saying that her party would “paralyse West Bengal” indefinitely. For 11 months, the campaign spearheaded by the Bhumi Ucched Pratirodh Committee (BUPC, or “Committee to Prevent Eviction from Land”) has brought administration and development work to a halt, and has sought to cut the area off from government and state power. According to one estimate, 15,000 children could not be given pulse polio doses; Rs.2 crore worth of expenditure on health infrastructure has had to be abandoned; health facilities have been unable to function; and Rs.2 crore worth of investment on electrification could not be made. People of the region, particularly peasant families owing allegiance to the Left Front, were systematically evicted from their homes and villages, with the number of refugees swelling to 3,500.

In February 2007, the government announced that the chemical hub would not be established in Nandigram. Even that announcement brought no respite. On the contrary, the forced withdrawal of the police from certain areas provided a new opportunity for the Maoists to set up an armed presence in the region, and for the opportunist alliance represented by the BUPC to regroup and continue their campaign of violence and externment, and of preventing the administration from functioning. No government worth the name can stand aside when people are indefinitely denied the right to occupy their homes and pursue their livelihoods in peace, and, when finally the internal refugees seek to return to their homes, their paths are blocked by arms and landmines. The Central government, which depends on the Left for survival, has eventually responded to the request by the Government of West Bengal by releasing a battalion of the Central Reserve Police Force for deployment in the Nandigram region. Intelligent and speedy deployment of these paramilitary forces can contribute to the resumption of peace directly by means of their armed presence and, more importantly, as a confidence-building measure among the people. This newspaper has editorialised on the part played by political slowness in responding to a tricky situation as well as administrative mishandling of a volatile situation in the tragedy of Nandigram in March 2007. But once the State government made it absolutely clear that the chemical hub would not be established in Nandigram, what raison d’etre could exist for the disruptive activities of the BUPC and the continuing violence of the opposition in West Bengal? What is now manifest is that the peace process in Nandigram has its determined enemies.

The role of Governor Gopalkrishna Gandhi has, for a second time, come under the spotlight. In March 2007, he clearly stepped out of line in publicly airing his philosophical and tactical differences with the State government over Nandigram. He does not seem to have learnt any lessons from that experience and, in fact, his latest speaking out of line has had the effect of adding fuel to the flames. Let us concede that Nandigram represented a situation where the moral urge not to remain silent came into conflict with the restraints imposed by the constitutional office. Yet, of the restraints imposed by the office, there would seem to be little doubt, and a public statement critical of the government’s handling of the issue could not have been made without transgressing them. The Hindu has consistently regarded this as a major question of principle in the constitutional realm. The classic 1867 exposition of the role of the British monarch by Walter Bagehot applies equally to the office of the President and the Governor: “To state the matter shortly, the Sovereign has, under a constitutional monarchy such as ours, three rights — the right to be consulted, the right to encourage, the right to warn. And a king of great sense and sagacity would want no others. He would find that his having no others would enable him to use these with singular effect.” The right to advise and the right to warn are to be exercised in private and in confidence, and not through public statements. This restraint required of the head of state is not a mere constitutional formality but is based on sound democratic principles. In the first place, the head of state must not, through statements critical of its functioning, place himself or herself in conflict with the representative government, which has a greater democratic legitimacy. Secondly, the head of state should appear non-partisan and remain above the fray when controversial and divisive questions are being debated in the political sphere, and avoid any public statements that could give comfort to one side or the other. The Governor’s public statements on Nandigram both challenged the wisdom of the government’s approach and came down on the side of the critics of its action. Further, Mr. Gandhi laid himself open to the charge of remaining silent when the supporters of the Left Front were at the receiving end. His conduct through this crisis has been constitutionally indefensible. Yet the Left Front government must not get distracted by this. Its top priorities must be to re-establish peace, ensure human security, and resume development work in Nandigram. The CPI(M) has a special responsibility in this regard — among other things, to be manifestly fair in its dealings on the ground, and to restrain its cadre from any campaign of reprisal.

© Copyright 2000 - 2007 The Hindu (Editorial dated Nov 12,2007)

POSTED BY Administrator ON 12.02.07 @ 12:58 pm | 0 Comments

Nandigram Update 12 November,2007

Karat blames it on Mamata & Maoists

Statesman News Service

NEW DELHI, Nov. 12: Fully backing and justifying, as expected, the ruling CPI-M’s bid to “recapture” its control over the strife-torn Nandigram in West Bengal, in an allegedly bloody operation, the party general secretary, Mr Prakash Karat, today accused the Trinamool Congress of allegedly taking the help of Maoists to create disturbance in the area, insisting that normalcy would be now restored there soon.

Mr Karat alleged that Miss Mamata Banarjee-led Trinamool had been fomenting trouble as it had “failed” to win the confidence of people of Nandigram democratically.

“Trinamool Congress has taken the help of Maoists to consolidate their hold in the area,” Mr Karat told reporters here after the two-day meeting of Politburo. He charged that the Maoists had been used to drive out common people from Nandigram. They later consolidated their positions, preventing even the administration from entering the area, he alleged.

The Marxist party chief claimed that the Maoists had built bunkers and set up training camps in Nandigram. He said even the national security adviser Mr MK Narayanan had yesterday spoken about involvement of Maoists in Nandigram violence. He said even the Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh, has recently said that the Maoists were the single biggest threat to the national unity.
Mr Karat said that for the past 11 months, an “abnormal and disturbing” situation has been prevailing in two Nandigram blocks, which were under Trinamool Congress control with the help of Maoists. The “pretext”, he claimed, was the protection of farmers’ land, although no industrial project was to come up in the area.

Justifying the ruling CPI-M cadres’ action, Mr Karat said: “If anybody thinks that somebody can drive us out physically from areas which had democratically supported the Left, it will not be possible.”

He said it was “unfortunate” that over the past 11 months, “a number of people”, including 27 CPI-M cadres, were killed in various incidents. “If somebody wants to dislodge us with the help of Maoists, we are not going to oblige them,” he said. Asked about repeated violence by his party cadres, the CPI-M chief wanted to know what the Maoists were doing. “Is there violence from the CPI-M only.”

Wondering what was the land struggle by Bhumi Ucched Pratirodh Committee all about in Nandigram, Mr Karat said, “There is no SEZ there. There was a proposal for a chemical hub. The government has already selected another place for the chemical hub.”

POSTED BY Administrator ON 11.29.07 @ 5:05 pm | 1 Comment

Nandigram Update 11November,2007

At last NANDIGRAM is freed !

November 11, 2007

Nandigram is freed at last from the hoodlums of the Trimool Congress-Cong-BJP-SUCI-Jamiyat-Naxal-Maoist combine which made terror since January 3 this year on the pretext of ‘Save Farmland’ by destroying bridges, cutting roads and thus preventing police and civil administration from entering almost whole of Nandigram-I and Nandigram-II Block.

Here is a brief day-to-day account of events since November 6.

Nov 06:  In a desperate bid to return to their homes, the make-shift camp-dwellers of Khejuri (who had been driven out of their homes in Nandigram) started retaliatory measures and heavy exchange of gunfire went on day-long in areas like Satengabari, Ranichak, Jambari, Brindabanchak, Simulkundu, Gokulnagar, Baharganj and Kanungochak. Some people were able to enter their villages.

Nov 07:  Fight continues; refugees returning to their homes. This was the picture of Nandigram throughout the day. There was clear evidence of Maoists retreat. The Trinamool supporters who reigned supreme during the past 11 months and uttered, “If police ventures to enter the villages, ‘RaktoGanga’, meaning ‘pool of blood’ will flow” now wants police intervention. They even gheraoed Nandigram police station. A reporter reports from Maheshpur and adjoining areas that people are very happy after returning to their homestead land. After 11 months they will boil rice and lentil and have a hearty meal. They spent Id and Durga Puja days at camps. Today they are rejoicing like those festive occasions.

The Chairman of the Ruling Left Front, Mr Biman Basu made a clarion call to all those returning from camps after 11 months of suffering and agony that they should not resort to any revenge action towards the Trinamool activists who were responsible for their ouster, loot and arson. He said that everyone has right to live in his home in peace and amity.


Nov 08:  Today Nandigram was calm and quiet. There were large peace rallies around many villages. Almost all evicted villagers of Nandigram Block-II have returned. The families of the BUPC members who ran away out of fear towards Nandigram Bazar also start returning to their respective villages. In Kolkata, Govt. declared compensation of rupees 2 lakhs each  to the kins of those killed on 14th March and  erring police officers would be punished. Pratirodh Committee leaders like Suvendu Adhikary and others met the DM at Tamluk and resolved unanimously that the police would enter anywhere if required. The areas like Garchakraberia, Sonachura, Kalicharanpur, Maheshpur  which were made out of bound for police since 3rd Jan, will now have police camps. (They demanded that the camps should be set up within one hour). The villagers themselves will repair once-dug-out roads and culverts. Suvendu gave word that they will dismantle all camps put up by the Committee in and around Nandigram as shelter for their armed goons.

For the first time in 11 months Tekhali Bazar in Nandigram-I Block opened with local traders offering their commodities for sale and customers making beeline for purchase of bare necessities of daily life.

Maoists retreated to Garchakraberia. Trinamoolis are still strong in Sonachura, Bhangabera, Kalicharanpur, Doudpur. Medha Patkar, Manas Bhuian, Mukul Roy who started from Kolkata were not allowed to enter Nandigram. Still one thousand Ghar-chharas (homeless) are waiting anxiously for returning back to their homes.

CPI(M) Central Committee member, Mr.Shyamal Chakraborty said, “As soon as police could evict those outsider Maoists, peace will come to stay at Nandigram.”  All the parties including Front partners advocated for removal of police posts from Nandigram after 14th March. Now all want police! Front partners endorses what is happening in Nandigram and Govt’s package announced save RSP.


RSP leader and Minister-in-Charge for PWD, Mr. Kshiti Goswami lamented, “The way peace is being restored in Nandigram now is one-sided and forced.…….The peace has not returned by democratic means.This peace cannot be permanent. The Police could enter earlier (knowing fully well that his party in unision with the Opposition demanded withdrawal of police from Nandigram after 14th March which the state Govt. conceded).”

This conduct of a Minister of the ruling Left Front speaks eloquently their party’s bankcrupcy. It is evident that they are playing at the hands of the Opposition, ruining the very basis of a qualition govt.

Nov 09:  Police enters for the first time after 14th March, crossing Tekhali bridge over Talpati canal. They patrol the areas of Gokulnagar, Maheshpur and Tekhali. Homecoming people are busy repairing their deserted homes. At the same time they get themselves busy preparing for the light festival, Deepavali. Sound of bombs are heard from afar. The villagers are seen filling with earth the 11 months old dug-roads in Kiyakhali village. In the evening, village women Kalpana Mondal, Laxmi Mondal, Rina Midda of Ranichak lighted candles upon their homestead land after insurmountable suffering of 11 months. As night approached, scattered gun fighting ensues. The villagers are of the view that permanent peace can be ensured only when Maoists could be driven out.

Still homeless are camp dwellers of Garchakraberia, Sonachura, Adhikaripara, Garupara.

Siddikulah returned from Kolaghat on way to Nandigram, Medha met Governor and declares to sit at Dharmatala and Mamata kept her mouth shut for the whole day.

Governor’s press statement at night brought life to Trinamool camp which was morose throughout the day. CPI-M state leader Shyamal Chakraborty sharply criticized the statement.

Nov 10:  Emboldened by the Governor’s last night statement of “Recapture theory”, an armed rally of the Maoists came forward towards Maheshpur taking about 500 innocent people as human shield. Maoist Ranjit Pal and Trinamooli Sisir Adhikary were in the leadership. But in the face of strong resistance from the villagers, they fled away and 500 odd men who were forced to take part in rally, run away towards CPI-M camp and joined them.

Nov 11:  By the afternoon the whole of Nandigram is freed excepting only Nandigram market area (the city proper). Those 500 men and women who fled yesterday from the clutches of Maoists, led the procession of homecomers to the places like Sonachura and Garchakraberia, which were stronghold of the Trinamool-sheltered miscreants. The first few hundred CRPF men also reached Tamluk, the District HQ today. All criminals now centred at Nandigram Bazar, their last shelter.

 

 

POSTED BY Administrator ON 11.18.07 @ 2:42 am | 33 Comments

Unfinished Agenda

PRAFUL BIDWAI

The Tehelka sting operation underscores the urgency of simultaneously pursuing the prosecution of the culprits and fighting Hindutva politically in a spirited way.

THE Tehelka expose on the Gujarat carnage of 2002 is a wrenching, stomach-churning reminder of the events, individuals and institutions behind the worst episode of state-sponsored communal violence in independent India. It re-establishes what has been recorded by more than 20 independent citizens’ inquiries and by reports of the National Human Rights Commission, but it does so in a different manner — through the personal testimonies of 14 men who were centrally involved in planning and executing the violence.

The fact that they express not an iota of remorse for their actions, but instead boast and brag about them — and often exaggerate their individual roles in acts of extreme violence — speaks of the extent to which Hindutva has dehumanised and morally corrupted its adherents. It also bears testimony to the deep communalisation and debasement of Gujarati society. Such individuals could not have survived and flourished as “normal” human beings and political leaders and lawyers in an environment that has not lost all its moral bearings and its sense of minimal decency and justice.

The expose also points, alarmingly, to the present, in particular, the sordid state of prosecution of criminal cases and the continuing collusive role of the state machinery in covering up the gory events of 2002 and minimising the culpability of those responsible.

This should be a matter of agonising distress for all of us citizens — regardless of ideological or political persuasion. The Gujarat carnage was a grave and serious crime against humanity. It offended all that is crucial and vital to democracy, the constitutional values of secularism and pluralism, and the rule of law and principle of neutrality of the state machinery as regards religious and ethnic identities.

The very thought that India has failed for five and a half years to bring the pogrom’s culprits to book should make us want to hang our heads in shame.

At any rate, to recapitulate the Tehelka revelations, they establish that the top leadership of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) consciously decided to organise a massive no-holds-barred attack on Muslims all over the State in “retaliation” for the burning at Godhra of a coach of the Sabarmati Express carrying kar sevaks from Ayodhya — although there was no evidence that extremist Muslims had carried out that act.

The Sangh Parivar’s plot included a strategy of shielding the would-be attackers through the help of senior police officers and prominent lawyers. Its leaders and cadre had manufactured, procured, stockpiled and distributed a range of weapons. Top BJP and VHP leaders, including Members of the Legislative Assembly, mobilised and led mobs through the streets of Ahmedabad and Baroda. The police did nothing to stop them. On the contrary, they egged them on, stood guard or participated in the violence themselves.

The bloodthirsty mobs used arson as their principal means of attack, burning alive hundreds of Muslims and setting fire to their homes. Their frenzy was doubly charged by a communal consideration: cremation is supposed to be un-Islamic. Sexual violence played a critical role in the pogrom.

The cover-up began even as the rioting was under way. Top leaders and senior police officers, made sure that the first information reports (FIR) filed on murder, rape and arson would be so vague and faulty as to ensure that nobody would be prosecuted. They organised shelters and sanctuaries for some of the mass killers. Some of them were not even arrested.

Along with previous reports, the Tehelka disclosures pose a major challenge to the Indian state and its secular credentials. The Central government and the secular parties must respond to them in two ways: legally and politically.

Legally, the Tehelka tapes are admissible as evidence on how the conspiracy to massacre Muslims was hatched in Gujarat, how it was executed, and on how the culprits committed the crimes they did. Various groups representing the victims are moving the Supreme Court asking that it summon the tapes. The government must fully back them and speed up the prosecution of the relevant cases. It must also analyse and use the fresh evidence contained in the expose against specific individuals, including Sangh Parivar leaders, policemen and other officials.

Even more urgent is the task of reviving the judicial process in a number of cases where it has been suspended for the past four years. The Supreme Court under former Chief Justice V. N. Khare admitted petitions seeking the transfer of 14 such cases out of Gujarat. But only the Best Bakery trial has been moved to Maharashtra.

Cases related to other grave incidents of violence and mass killings in Sardarpura, Gulberg Society, Naroda Patiya, Sabarkantha and Naroda Gaon are still on hold. The accused continue to roam free. These must be immediately transferred and tried rapidly if justice is to have any meaning.

Yet another task is to rectify police records and use supplementary evidence which has been generated during the proceedings of the Shah-Nanavati Commission. Some valuable evidence has indeed emerged there, including records of all cellular phone calls in the critical period pertaining to the violence, which can pin down the role of specific individuals and reinforce the prosecution’s case against them.

However, it is even more important to fight the perpetrators of the Gujarat pogrom politically by taking on the Sangh Parivar. This task is long overdue. The secular parties collectively failed the victims of Gujarat in 2002 when they did not get together and mobilise strong protests all over the State demanding that the Centre dismiss the Gujarat government under Article 356 — although it was beyond dispute that the functioning of the government was blatantly violative of the Constitution.

Had all the top leaders of the secular parties gone on a hunger strike in the centre of Gandhinagar or Ahmedabad in pursuit of this one demand, the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government would have very little choice. Some of its own constituents were rattled by the violence. In the 1970s, Morarji Desai forced Indira Gandhi to dismiss the Chimanbhai Patel government for far weaker reasons.

The secular parties, in particular the Congress, yet again failed the cause of justice in 2004 when the newly installed United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government did not take any initiative on Gujarat in spite of the fact that one reason for the victory of some of its major constituents was the public’s disgust with the BJP on account of the Gujarat violence and its ultra-sectarian and divisive communal agenda.

Many anti-communal activists were utterly disappointed when Prime Minister Manmohan Singh chose not to mention Gujarat in his first addresses to the nation. He is yet to utter the ‘G’ word. This must change. The Congress must respond to the Tehelka disclosures more boldly and upfront.

For the moment, the Congress seems hesitant to take on Narendra Modi out of fear that this would polarise the Gujarat situation and line up “Hindu sentiment” behind the BJP in the Assembly elections due in December. This timidity is based on devious reasoning and “short-termism” typical of the party and its advisers on Gujarat affairs. Five years ago, the same worthies had counselled Shankersinh Vaghela, formerly an RSS and BJP man himself, to adopt the “soft-Hindutva” line — and lost both the secular and Hindu communal votes.

Narendra Modi today is extremely vulnerable. The Congress, jointly with the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) and other secular parties/groups, can put up a winnable fight against him by aiming to eliminate or reverse the narrow 3 percentage-point lead the BJP had in the last Lok Sabha elections (itself down from 10 percentage points in 2002). Narendra Modi faces hostility from his parivar. Not just the VHP and RSS but significant sections of the BJP oppose him. They comprise at least 11 MLAs and two MPs, including two former Chief Ministers, a State ex-Home Minister and a former Union Textiles Minister.

Beneath the leadership-level changes lie major shifts in the BJP’s social support-base. Two large caste groups, the Kolis and Leuva Patils (Patidars), have moved away from it. The Kolis who belong to Other Backward Classes are among the State’s largest castes, comprised largely of small and marginal farmers and landless labourers. Traditionally Congress voters, the Kolis, gravitated towards the BJP in the mid-1990s and voted en masse for it in 2002. By the 2004 parliamentary elections, however, 55 per cent of their vote went back to the Congress.

The prosperous Patidars dominate Gujarat’s agriculture, small and medium-scale industries, and diamond polishing. Their vote is decisive in one-third of all constituencies. They account for 37 of the BJP’s total of 127 MLAs; the party’s Koli MLAs number 15.

Both groups are upset with Narendra Modi because of his extremely abrasive style, readiness to humiliate, refusal to share the loaves and fishes of office, and his government’s failure to allow the fruits of growth to trickle down.

(With kind permission from Frontline)

POSTED BY Administrator ON 11.06.07 @ 7:47 pm | 0 Comments

Nandigram Update 4 November,2007

Maoists are taking the reins in Nandigram

Sunday, November 4, 2007

Reports pouring in from different sources show that Maoists are taking control of Nandigram at their own hands. Trinamool and Congress are  no longer in commanding position. What is going on in Nandigram-I and Nandigram-II Block area is occupation of newer areas in those two Blocks of West Bengal by the Maoists, who are seen to operate mainly in those parts of the Purulia and Bankura districts which are bordered with Jharkhand State and densely covered with jungle, where they could apply the policy of ‘hit and run’.


This has been corroborated by the statement of the CPI(Maoist), issued by one Somen on behalf of its State Committee, in support of Trinamool’s 12-hour State-wide Bundh call on 31st October. The Statement said that the fighting in Nandigram  was anti-SEZ and anti-imperialism. It also called for armed resistance.


The CPI(Marxist) Central Committee member Shyamal Chakraborty commented on this saying, ‘It’s now open secret that Maoists have consolidated their hold over Nandigram. The Chief Minister said recently that notorious Ranjit Pal who was convicted for murdering a Jharkhand MP, is operating in Nandigram with his henchmen. The Govt. has this intelligence report. Besides, more groups of anti-socials have entered Nandigram at different times and organizing local dacoits and musclemen terrorizing and torturing the villagers who do not obey them’.


It may be mentioned that when the disturbance started first in early January, there was no clear indication of Maoists presence; though the manner in which the whole of Nandigram-I Block was cut-off by damaging culverts and bridges, digging pathways, setting road blocks, itself suggested involvement of some mastermind behind the curtain. The movement started by Trinamool-Congress combine under the banner of Bhumi Raksha Committee.


One month later, the CM declared that there will be no land acquisition, there will be no Chemical Hub in Nandigram. But the Committee did not wind up. It continued its action of extortion, torture, rape, brutal murder. And in this process, they invited Maoist activists from Jharkhand, Bihar and Purulia. It was maoists’ plan to cut off Nandigram from the rest of West Bengal and siege the area at least until the Panchayat Elections next year, so that the CPI(M) could not take part in election process and file nominations. This was clearly stated by Suvendu Adhikary, a Trinamool leader.


Shyamal Chakraborty said, ‘Maoists have no base in WB. Wherever they are operating in Purulia, Medinipur or Bankura districts, are doing so with the help of Trinamool, Congress or Jharkhand Party. In daytime they are members of these parties, and at night the same people acts like members of Maoist Party. This is a unique phenomenon in West Bengal. And this combine recently butchered Com Bhagirath Karmakar in Purulia. They are responsible for eliminating many an activist and leader of the CPI(M) Party during the last five years’.


Shyamalbabu said, ‘We do not want to apply force. We still want political solution to this crisis. Our Chief Minister once again called upon all the political parties to have dialogue and reach a consensus with a view to ending  the impasse. We fervently hope that the parties will respond favourably, considering people’s sufferings and stopping of all development work in Nandigram’.

POSTED BY Administrator ON @ 5:59 pm | 5 Comments

Nandigram Update 31 October,2007

Two Things Happened
Wednesday, October 31, 2007

On Monday, the 29th October, West Bengal Chief Minister Sri Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee met journalists in a press conference wherein he stated that the State Government has written to the Union Government requesting them to send one battalion of Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) to deal with the lawlessness in Nandigram. He further stated that Union Home Minister Mr Shivraj Patil talked with him today over phone in this regard. Later in the evening the State Home Secretary Mr Prasadranjan Ray informed that one company CRPF is arriving within a week.

On Tuesday the Union Minister for I & B Mr Priyoranjan Dasmunshi in a letter to the Home Minister made a strange unconstitutional request not to concede to the request of the W.B Govt. for sending para-military forces.

Why Mr Dasmunshi?

Why Mr Dasmunshi, you have to resort to this unconstitutional and ludicrous step?  Please clear your throat and speak out openly what you and your party want in Nandigram – unfettered loot and violence or peace and normalcy.

POSTED BY Administrator ON 11.01.07 @ 7:26 pm | 2 Comments

Nandigram Update 30 October,2007

Why Peace Is Still Eluding In Nandigram?
Tuesday, October 31, 2007

First question first. When there is no question of acquisition of land for proposed SEZ in Nandigram area of West Bengal (popularly known as ‘chemical hub’) and for which alternative space has already been discussed and proposed in the all-party meeting in the 1st week of September,2007 (viz, Nayachar),  why ‘Bhumi Uchhed Pratirodh Committee’ is still there in Nandigram and why they have unleashed terror in entire Nandigram-1 and Nandigram-2 Block area causing hardships to the life and living of common people of those areas ?

Nearly 10 months has elapsed since 3rd January,2007 when first incident broke out by attacking police, burning police vehicle and local CPI(M) party office.[On the morning of 3rd Jan., a meeting was held in the Garchakraberia panchayat office to discuss a central team’s visit to declare the area “nirmal” (clean) in recognition of its sanitation facilities. Spreading rumour that land acquisition has begun, the leaders of the opposition parties lead 3000-strong people into violence.]

The Chief Minister has repeatedly declared since 1st week of February that the Govt. will not acquire land in Nandigram. Govt. Notice has been published long ago to this effect. The Central Govt. has declared repeatedly that there was no proposal for SEZ in Nandigram. Why then the area is still cut-off from the rest of West Bengal, all development work stalled, 1500 villagers are still in make-shift refugee camps on the other side of the Talpati canal under Khejuri Block in indescribable agony and sufferings, whose only crime is to be the supporters of the left parties. Are they not human beings? Does not they enjoy human rights under the constitution of India? Where are those self-styled human rights activists? Where are those so-called intellectuals who made uproars after 14th march incident? Have they covered their eyes with black cloth?

Why then these critics of the ruling Left Front do not see the sufferings of hundreds of children, old and infirm, women, who had to leave their houses under threat for life and live sub-human living almost half-starved and bereft of minimum amenities, while they have their own houses and land a few kilometers away.Recent reports show that armed hoodlums have been hired from various places of Paschim Medinipur and Purulia districts, who are being trained by some Maobadi cadres in the ‘sieged’ Nandigram. These shooters numbering around 100 are creating terror anew after Puja festivities (and temporary lull) are over.

All new terror has been unleashed since 24th October and is continuing till date. It seems that BUPC is not Bhumi Rakkha Committee anymore. It has become Bhumi Dakhal Committee meaning committee for grabbing land.

Could anyone ask this nexus of Trinamool-Cong-Naxal-Maobadi-Zamiyat the pertinent question: what do you want in Nandigram now when there is no question of land acquisition anymore?  Are you exercising your democratic rights by ousting poor people from their homestead land and robbing all they had and then torching their houses?  Then these people also has democratic right to protect their life. If these poor souls start exercising their democratic rights, what will happen?

POSTED BY Administrator ON 10.30.07 @ 6:44 pm | 11 Comments

Status of Nandigram - April 29,2007

Nandigram Update

Sunday, 29 April, 2007

Today at Satengabari,Ranichak, Jambari village in the Nandigram II Block 22 houses of CPI(M) supporters were ransacked, looted and torched. As a result, 2 CPI(M) supporters (Dilip Mondal(19) and Mahitosh Karan(42)) were killed brutally, 3 others kidnpped,6 women wounded and tortured. Among them were one 60 yr old lady, Heron Bibi, whose arm were broken. House of Sri Pratap Sau, CPI(M) leader were looted and set fire.

Why this happened?

On 25th April Smt Mamata Banerjee, TMC leader conducted a meeting at Garchakraberia where it was announced ‘we must remove all red flags from Khejuri, Nandigram and Haldia.’ That the incident was pre-planned can be seen from the fact that the incident occurred at 6 am and by 7 am TMC finished to send complaint letters to the President, Prime Minister and the Governor.

But why this violence was necessary for the anti Left-Front conbine after 14th March and after repeated declaration, notification by the Administration that no land will be taken at Nandigram for the proposed Chemical Hub. Why the opposition are boycotting repeated all-party peace meetings called by the local administration, the DM, SP or the BDO.

Because after the incident of attack on the CPI MLA of Nandigram Constituency Md Ilyas on 27th April at Chowrangee Bazar, Nandigram, the villagers began to question the TMC leaders what were they going to achieve. As a result local leaders of the opposition were at low spirits. To bolster the leaders and to terrorise the villagers this plan was hatched by Kolkata-based Babus and Bibis.

But when will people of Nandigram be able to live in peace. Will no sane Indian question the leaders of Bhumi Raksha Committee, when the Govt. has already officially notified long before 14th March that land of Nandigram will not be touched, why the roads (23) are still dug, culverts and bridges destroyed, the Left Front especially the CPI(M) supporters, cadres, leaders were driven out of their homes from the villages of Nandigram I & II Blocks and the houses looted and torched, Panchayat Offices burnt, CPI(M) Offices in different places were attacked and set fire, armed looteras on motorcycles hiding their faces with cloth patrolling the pathways of the villages, searching and scanning of any new person entering the cordoned area. No Govt. Official including the Police are allowed to move into the area to discharge official duties since Jan 3rd. About four thousand people are forced to stay in makeshift camps in undescribable agony. Their only ‘crime’ is to support the CPI(M) Party. The students of these families are not being able to attend schools, many could not appear at the annual exams, as a result they have lost one academic year. All developmental work has been suspended in the area. The Govt. fund sanctioned by different Central and State Agencies amounting to about ninety million rupees could not be utilised to ameliorate the inhabitants’ living condition.

Will you please question? Will the leaders of strange extreme-right-extreme-left-moderate combination answer? Has they got any answer. If they had, they would attend the all-party peace meetings convened by the Administration with the aim to restore normalcy.(A total of 9 such meetings were called so far).

It appears that neither this movement in Nandigram is in the interest of the farmers nor for protecting bhumi or land. The movement is for wresting power in the village level, which has been the stronghold of the Left for years. To achieve this narrow end they want to sustain an environment of terror for a long time. But they forgot the adage "You can fool some people for some time, but not everyone for eternity." 

POSTED BY Administrator ON 05.04.07 @ 8:26 am | 3 Comments