WEAKNESSES AND SETBACKS-
We should not take for granted intellectuals who claim
Dandakaranya is in the process of being a liberated area or base area or that
democratic mass organisations have been properly developed. This is predominant
in intellectuals like Varavara Rao or other Maoist sympathisers. I also
strongly feel that online organ ‘People’s March; however vibrant or positive to
an extent distorts level of power exercised by the RPC’s or Janathana Sarkars.
In Dandakaranaya the C.P.I.(Maoist) has not established a revolutionary base
area like the Chinese party did in Hunan in the 1940’s or even distributed land
through undertaking agrarian revolution as in the Telengana armed struggle.
Bernard De Mello narrates “The Maoists have not been able to turn any of the
guerrilla zones into base areas. It will be impossible to advance the ongoing
guerrilla warfare or the further spread of guerrilla zones without the
establishments of base areas. In the plains areas, which are less suitable for
guerrilla warfare and the establishment of guerrilla zones, the higher
guerrilla units of the guerrilla army have been unable to continue their
operations and have gradually had to move to the forest and hilly areas. Some
of the existing guerrilla zones are potential candidates for transformation
into base areas. but the enemy must be defeated there and the organs of
political power have to then be established, a formidable task in the face of
severe repression. A counter insurgency can break the very backbone of abase
area and turn it into a white area. Even if the Maoists are were to turn one of
the guerrilla zones into a base area, there is no guarantee that it will remain
so. It can easily revert to a guerrilla zone or even a white area. where the
reactionary government functions.”
“The Movement has made many setbacks, and many mistakes have
been made by the revolutionaries. The Maoists are nowhere near winning over the
vast majority of the exploited and oppressed in rural India.” Gautam
Navlakha was very critical of the party’s custodial killing in Jamui in
Jharkhand.” In 2011 Niyamat Ansari was executed in Manika bloc in Latehar
district. He was beaten to death as soon as the verdict of death was announced
by a summary trail and not even in a people's court. Thus in effect it was a
Kangaroo court and not a people’s court. The matter was not even referred to a
higher committee. Such practice is a virtual anti-theis of the laws defined by
Constitution of the Janthan aSarkar.Such acts prove that the Maoists have not
morally devised a higher judicial system. It is unrevolutionary to justify war
crimes committed by the party’s squads themselves.” “Two major failings state
at the Maoist movement. The firsts is that they are weak politically and
secondly they display a woeful lack of respect for those who differ from them.
When this is combined with overemphasis on guerrilla action ,where a weaker
side has to break the encirclement by carrying out actions to disperse the
security forces, then the political weaknesses and intolerance become near
fatal mistakes.” What counts against them is the failure to master the variance
of Indian conditions from that of pre-revolutionary China in terms of the distinction
between the Indian 'semi-feudalism' with the Chinese version. Also a strong
tendency exists to overemphasize Brahmanic fascism which overrides or dilutes
Class politics with Caste Politics. Identity politics replacing Leninist line
is also revealed in establishing unity with Islamic fundamentalist forces or
Muslim organisations. Democratic functioning still does not completely permeate
in their mass organizations which to an extent still subordinate to the
dictates of the party. In my view the movement has faced reversal in the last
six years never reaching the intensity or scale of 2010 or preceding years.
Newspaper interviews or reports confirm that the Maoist party has received
major blows in their backbone with the killings of thousands of their cadre.
Hundreds of the Revolutionary Peoples Committees have been destroyed and cadre
considerably reduced in the PLGA and the mass Organizations. Dogmatically it
still adheres to tactics of 'Boycott' of elections failing to understand level
of people's revolutionary consciousness. It is not prepared to utilize any
legal tactics. The army can hardly fortify itself today to substitute its
losses to confront the regular Armed forces. Land distribution movements are
sill largely based on squad initiative and not on independent will of tribals.
The Indian red army can hardly navigate beyond prescribed boundaries and it is
hard to foresee how in near future it will defend its gains. I very much doubt
it could in near future encircle the big cities or even the plain areas, in
context of being on the receiving end of such battering by the rulers in power.
In many ways it resembles a cornered tiger entrenched in an agree. Even if
backed by a considerable plethora of intellectuals it has strong critiques
within the civil rights movement and has nor completely adhered to correct
behaviour towards the civil rights or democratic rights movement. Civil rights
activist Bela Bhatia is an ideal example who has written extensively on mass
movements. Without doubt they have also undertaken some unwarranted actions of
innocent people which must be exposed. The Peoples Guerrilla army is beset by
weaknesses and setbacks. The most important aspect is the subjective factors
which were not conducive to undertaking peoples war .Agrarian revolutionary
movement had not sharpened or been consolidated sufficiently to precipitate
formation or integration of a red army .Land re-distribution was mainly
undertaken by the armed squad of the party and not necessarily by the poor or
landless peasantry. This was also the case in the judgments of people's courts
or Jan Adalats. No doubt the armed squad members comprised the mainly of the oppressed
dalit or Adivasi Communities and derived from movements like in Karimnagar or
Adilabad. However there was hardly co-relation between the building of the red
army corpses and the movements of mass resistance of the people. In the 1980's
there was tendency for armed squads to undertake actions which substituted
peoples revolutionary mass action or initiative. Another phenomenon was the
armed squads utilising mass organizations bastions to protect themselves or
providing shelter. Today in 3 major instances the Ruling state forces have
delivered a major blow to the Maoist red army in Malkangiri, Gadricholi and
Chattisgarh. regions. In the Orissa,-Chattisgarh border in October 2016 , it
ripped the flesh of the PLGA through concentric or surgical operations. It was
literally like surprisingly capturing tigers in an ambush, infiltrating the
Peoples Red Army in their very ribcage. Adequate precautions were hardly made
to insulate it’s forces. Also in the last decade hundreds of their important
leaders have been eliminated which the Maoist party admitting that it’s forces
are dwindling, facing huge losses in recent times. In most cases the army has
been unable to replenish its own losses and many members have deserted it to
join Border security forces. Some participants in the PLA float between
government job s and performing armed squad duties. An erroneous tendency has
been adopted towards demanding levy from contractors and assassinating heads of
panchayats or rich peasantry. There exists a striking dichotomy between how the
Chinese red army was built or based in respect to the United front with the
workers and middle peasants and the distribution of land and agrarian
revolution. In Dandakarnya or Jharkhand self governance of life or people
running their own lives is not taking place like it was in the base areas of
pre-1949 China in Nanchang or China. Many offensive actions have
arguably had superficial impact like the elimination of Jawans or security
forces like killing the mosquitoes but not destroying the breeding pit that
planted them. . Still I strongly envisage that it will continue to illuminate
the torch of liberation even with the enemy sweeping the strongest
revolutionary wind. Is mass line being genuinely practiced like the CCP under
Chairman Mao? It is a very complex question but my abrupt answer is yes and no.
Democratic forms of power have been created and armed striking resistance to
confront the enemy and oppressor classes. However still it is not the people
who are the complete determinants of the fate of the guerrilla armed actions or
participants in them. Nor is the people's striking capacity consistently
enhanced by the armed struggle who still cannot undertake self-governance.
Perhaps the most rational account on the Maoist PLGA has been done by Bernard
De Mello and also to a considerable extent by Gautam Navlakha. With strong
conviction Bernard recognizes their accomplishments in confronting the state
and establishing guerrilla Zones. However he finds it problematic how they
would evolve into base areas like in China and how they would integral
with the working class. He also exposed how the party constitution subordinated
a mass organization to its dictates. In a partial sense I agree that the PLGA
practice is akin to that of Che Gueverist focoism. However in quick retort I
would say that Indian conditions like Cuba,
are in variance with pre-1949 China.
Navlakha highlights the great strides in shaping revolutionary democracy but
exposes the glaring weaknesses in approach, particularly in light of working in
urban areas and initiating open mass movements.
No comments:
Post a Comment