Will Mamata’s move change India’s Maoist policy?4 working out a mutually acceptable strategy 4 socio-eco devp directly reaching d "wretched of d earth

Will Mamata’s move change India’s Maoist policy?

Sankar Ray | Thursday, October 13, 2011

Maoists’ Bengal area secretary Akash’s disclosure that he and few of his comrades sat with a couple of interlocutors chosen by West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on September 30 and gave written consent to begin negotiations with the state government with some riders is another feather on Banerjee’s cap.

The interlocutors, led by well-known civil rights campaigner Sujato Bhadra, former secretary, Association for Protection of Democratic Rights, deserve praise for convincing the Maoists of dialogue with the state government for working out a mutually acceptable strategy for socio-economic development directly reaching the ‘wretched of the earth.’

The Maoists’ propose a ceasefire on both sides — Maoists and the joint forces comprising central paramilitary forces like the CRPF and state police including cessation of raids — for a month.
Article continues below the advertisement...

Akash told a few newspersons after inking the statement that if operations by the joint forces are stalled for a month, “we also promise to restrain our arms. The government must take steps to disarm the other armed groups that are operating in the area. We will inform the government through the interlocutors about the movement of these armed groups. Fulfilling the conditions will create a conducive atmosphere for talks.”

Banerjee is expected to endorse the statement but she didn’t like the disclosure from the Maoists as she wanted to break the news. Bhadra, flanked by Chhoton Das, secretary, Bandi Mukti Committee (committee for release of prisoners, mainly political) and poet Prasun Bhowmik, both interlocutors, said the ball “is in the CM’s court.”

However, initiation of dialogue is still an arduous task as the joint forces are gearing up for reinforcing deployment and the Union home ministry is against lenience in anti-Maoist operations, refusing to realise that the situation in Jangalmahal is distinctly dissimilar with that in Chhattisgarh and Jhargram. The majority of dwellers, especially adivasis, are neither Maoists nor their sympathisers. Yet to them Maoists are less a threat than the JF, CPI(M) harmads and AITC Bhairav Vahinis. Indiscriminate beating, snatching of money and belongings and occasional rape characterise the latter.

Another deterrent is the CPI(M) leadership which, like the BJP, wants the Maoists to submit to Kalashnikovs and grenades. CPI(M) central committee member and ex-housing and public health engineering minister, Gautam Deb, who was trounced by a new-comer AITC nominee Bratya Basu by over 25,000 votes, in a memorial oration at Medinipur, stated that the Maoists’ dialect is guns and they should be replied in the same dialect.

Banerjee too warned the Maoists that killings in Junglemahal would not be tolerated but didn’t obstruct the endeavour of interlocutors for a dialogue with the Maoists. Unlike the CPI(M), BJP and hoary-headed IPS biggies, she knows that even a semblance of equitable socio-economic development in Jangalmahal is possible if the Maoists are restrained. Maybe, as a confidante of Ms Banerjee apprehends, “the Maoists will try to dictate terms for development and impose conditions on the government.” But these are apprehensions. Furthermore, any endeavour, even if genuinely philanthropic, has some built-in risk and uncertainty. Cost-benefit analysis of any development project is desirably judged with a risk and uncertainty analysis. The Maoists cannot err by impeding development schemes in Jangalmahal or even the distribution of subsidised rice at Rs2/kg. They repeatedly assured of not being in the way of development programmes.

Security honchos in the central and state intelligence agencies and most of the Z-category IAS officers oppose ceasefire as this would help the Maoists regroup, consolidate and expand. If the adivasis, for argument’s sake, ideologically gravitate towards Maoism, it would be an endorsement of failure of the ideologies of not only the major parliamentary parties but also the likes of the CPI(ML). The Supreme Court too in a landmark judgment stated that there is nothing wrong in subscribing to Maoist ideology. The state should interfere when the expression is violent.

Let’s not be driven by baseless assumptions. A critical supporter of CPI(Maoist) who visited Chhattisgarh told this writer that the oustees “love the Maoists more than Maoism. Ideological orientation is very tough in ethnic traditions.”

We can only wait. If it clicks, the Centre has to recast its counter-Maoist strategy. Even a study commissioned by the Bureau of Police Research and Development, home ministry, ‘Social, Economic and Political Dynamics in Extremist Affected Areas’, concedes that ‘neglect by the central government is a critical factor for the growth of extremism in the region.

— The writer is a veteran journalist & commentator, specialising in left politics and environment