PolitiClone
Political Pundits? India

Governance matters

Shikha Mukerjee

Maoists thrive on the Government’s inability to provide meaningful governance. To fight Red terror, the political class needs to concentrate on ground level delivery and forge a consensus that Left extremism poses a serious threat to the nation. Anything less will not suffice

To get down to the brass tacks, perhaps political grandstanding was necessary. But shouldering responsibility a la “the buck stops at my desk,” is not sufficient.

There has to be a process of building a consensus on what is the Maoist problem. Between all the talking heads — Union Home Minister P Chidambaram, West Bengal Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Raman Singh, Odisha Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik, Jharkhand Chief Minister Shibu Soren, Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar and even Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister K Rosaiah running around the mulberry bush is all that is happening with sporadic attempts to launch hunts that are inefficient in rooting out the problem.

The Maoists have the capability of planning an ambush and successfully pulling it off in Sildah, Dantewada, Odisha and earlier in Andhra Pradesh, Jharkhand, Bihar and even Maharashtra. This is not romantic guerrilla tactics. It is good military tactics. While the political class waffles on about how to tackle the Maoists the tactical advantage remains with them. Finding the consensus, naming the problem and quitting the blame-game will be the first sign of a political will to establish the rule of law in India. If the Centre believes that a third of the States are Maoist-infested surely what is at stake is the rule of law itself.

The terms on which the consensus needs to be reached is not the vague articulation of the issues involved, but a specific mapping of the problem. The deliberate regression or digression into the root causes of the Maoist problem is effectively one way of avoiding facing the problem, allowing every one of the talking heads to appear to be good and benign souls, rather than effectively govern.

In other words, a consensus needs to be arrived at is what exactly do all these people think on how the Maoists are the most serious internal security threat to India. Are the Maoists a simple law and order problem? Or are they more complicated and bigger than what any single unit of the Indian federal structure can effectively handle? Are the Maoists articulating the seething discontent of the tribals? Are the Maoists articulating the ghastly failure of delivery of governance to the poorest in the most backward parts of the country? How can an estimated 15,000-strong militia take on the combined forces available to the State Governments and the Centre? Why is the combined security operation ineffective?

By the logic of what the Maoists state and therefore the description of this force as the most serious threat to internal security, the problem is not a straightforward ‘law and order’ problem. Contrary to what Mr Bhattacharjee claimed it to be on Friday, the Maoists are not disrupting the usual law and order situation in West Bengal. In the pockets where they operate and thankfully they do so in limited parts of West Bengal, the Maoists are not disturbing the law and order norms. They are, by their own admission, waging war and doing so by means that are beyond the limited training and capabilities of the state’s police backed by the strength and training of the Central Reserve Police Force.

Mr Bhattacharjee must acknowledge as indeed must his peers that usually law and order requires to be maintained rather than established. In the present situation, which is unusual, what is now necessary to oust the Maoists and restore the first fallen brick of the larger edifice that goes by the generalisation ‘normalcy’. So too must Mr Chidambaram, who is the country’s Home Minister, is in overall charge of ensuring that every citizen can live with a sense of security and without fear.

Downgrading the problem to mere ‘law and order’ is to encourage the Maoists and those who cannot identify them as such, which tragically for West Bengal includes the leading Opposition party and its leader the Trinamool Congress and Ms Mamata Banerjee. By taking back the self-confessed Maoist sympathiser Kabir Suman, allowing him to retain his seat in the Lok Sabha, the message that has been delivered is that the Maoists have a refuge, if not within the Trinamool Congress, but certainly with political freelancers who are part of the party.

It is perfectly in order for Mr Chidambaram to ask the Communist Party of India(Marxist) and the Communist Party of India to clarify their political position vis-à-vis taking tough action against the Maoists. By that same logic, he needs to ask the Trinamool Congress and all other political parties in the Opposition-ruled States, including the Congress in Chhattisgarh, Odisha, why they should not clarify their activities in those States vis-à-vis the Maoists.

By clubbing ‘development’, that is the blueprint of development that has been adopted by every parliamentary political party in general even though there are specific issues of criticism, with concern for ‘tribal’ welfare and conservation and with law and order, what is revealed is the unwillingness of the political system to get tough. These are excuses for inaction and inefficiency.

Yes, it is true that there is an appalling and shameful absence of minimum utilities and services in the backward/tribal areas. Women have to walk miles to get water that is not strictly potable. It is equally true that the conservationist lobby that is protective of ‘tribal lifestyle and culture’ has barely considered these women to be the same as all other women in India. The tribal woman in order to protect a culture is required to fetch water, go into the forests to collect fire wood and eke out a hard, harsh, humiliating existence.

Yes, it is true that mining interests are involved in the equations that apply in the backward areas where the Maoists operate. It is true that there is a mining mafia in the country. It is equally true that the mining mafia has a political nexus.

These are old stories that are being recycled by cynics for their own reasons. The tribals in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, West Bengal, Odisha, Jharkhand and Andhra Pradesh have been subjected the ‘civilising’ agenda for well over a century, despite their rebellions and uprisings. The missionaries civilised them and now the Maoists are doing so, after the Indian state, which includes mining companies, power utilities, other businesses, did its bit. Ex-Maoist leader also a tribal, Gurucharan Kisku summed it all up; he reportedly said: “I quit the party when I realised that it does nothing for Adivasis.” The credibility of his complaint is established by his explanation: “The party is destroying this tribal system and way of life… It is following the proletariat line where distinctness is not recognised.”

Kisku can demand restoration or conservation of the tribal system and way of life. But he has to acknowledge that the way of life is not what it was in its pristine form, whenever that may have been. Kisku knows, as should the political establishment, that these are not islands as in the Andamans. Contamination is the reality and the Maoists are not the best cleaning agent that can effectively do the job.

The political class needs to arrive at a consensus from which a political will ought to emerge to deal with the threat to the way of life it promises to its citizens. Flawed as that model is pampering the Maoists as the protector of tribal culture and life is not the answer. The Maoist threat is, if indeed it is recognised as, a serious one and not only to law and order. It goes beyond that. The Maoists enjoy the advantage of operating on the perpetuation of failure of governance. The Maoists seem to hold the moral high ground because the political class prefers to make deals, score points rather than get down to brass tacks.

My Blog List


PolitiClone Comments

Recent Posts

PolitiClone

Blog Archive

Visitors