OPED | Friday, November 6, 2009 | Email | Print | 
A fight to the finish
Shikha Mukerjee
Marxists, Mamata adopt desperate measures
As West Bengal explodes in a series of political encounters, beginning with Khanakul in Hooghly on November 1 to Nanur in Birbhum on November 3 in a swathe that touches the constituencies going to the polls on November 7, it is apparent that force rather than reason are the preferred tools of the political class in this State.
The Communist Party of India(Marxist), it appears, is fighting to recover lost ground following the shock of a series of defeats — panchayat elections in 2008, Lok Sabha election in 2009, by-elections and civic elections in between. The Trinamool Congress has not begun its counter offensive as yet. Its response, in so far as Ms Mamata Banerjee is concerned is to threaten bandhs and road blocks.
In circumstances such as these, the appeal by the veteran Marxist leader, Mr Jyoti Basu, seems to have been badly timed, ill advised and entirely inappropriate. His appeal of November 1, calling for a conscience vote by voters, from the Congress, the disgruntled from the Left who had withheld support after 2006 in the interests of West Bengal’s future, its development and progress, instead of altering the political debate has proved itself to be irrelevant.
In the hands of an adroit leader, vastly experienced in sensing moods even before they become manifest, a cryptic message delivered to voters would be a potent weapon. Success, to some degree, could have been guaranteed if Mr Basu was well enough to fan the spark he ignited with his appeal to Congress voters on the eve of the crucial cluster of by-elections in West Bengal.
The onus to rescue the State from the crisis — of opposition assisted violence that has converted the State into a Maoist theatre of war — has moved from CPI(M)’s loyal voters to the party’s disgruntled ranks, to Congress voters and by extension Congress leaders. West Bengal’s politics, hitherto congealed in an ugly mix of hate and violence, may not change overnight; it may not change at all. But the appeal has been launched and its effect may fizzle out or grow.
With violence erupting in West Bengal it is inconceivable that Mr Basu’s appeal will have any takers. On the other hand, given the violence the appeal to restore stability, peace and progress may have a different kind of allure. But, without the formidable skills of Mr Basu in using any weakness to create a breach through which a breakthrough can be achieved, it is difficult to imagine how a clumsy CPI(M) leadership, harassed and often looking hapless by an opposition that is careless of what tools it employs, will handle the inevitable aftermath of violence.
As West Bengal moves inexorably deeper into crisis, it seems as though the two principal foes are fighting a war of annihilation. The turf wars in Khanakul or Nanur or Nandigram or Singur reflect the intolerance of the political parties to the presence of rivals. The issue that made the opposition an attractive idea: The CPI(M)’s alienation from its voters: Because it ignored the peasant’s anxieties over land acquisition, its reckless pursuit of investments for industrialisation, the corruption of leaders and the abuse of power by the cadres, the opportunistic identification with the party, the shelter it provided to anti-social elements: Is no longer relevant.
The issue has changed from rescuing maa, mati, manush as per Ms Banerjee’s slogan from CPI(M)’s exploitation and oppression to a fight for territorial occupation and control. Voters are captives on the territories where they are rooted. Occupation of a particular turf seems to imply that the bulk of voters will also shift allegiance.
The turf wars, the violence that escalated as the Maoist presence grew is familiar, even though it is not a re-enactment of the early-1970s. In the hey-days of the Maoist movement, there was violence, there were killings, there were police encounters and there were raids. The difference was that the CPI(M) was out of power and on the defensive. The difference is that the CPI(M) is in power and still on the defensive, because the Trinamool Congress and the Maoists have targeted the Marxists.
If the deadlock is to end, a political gambit is necessary. Perhaps Mr Basu in his wisdom felt that an appeal for a conscience vote for stability-peace-progress would percolate and take effect, if not by November 7 then by 2011. In a situation where there is no politics other than hate and violence, a call to reason is perhaps futile.
But there is sense in Mr Basu’s appeal, which has provoked the Congress, as a party, to react. In seeking a way to restore to the voter the power to make reasoned, sensible choices that affect, short and long-term interests, Mr Basu is calling for a return to normalcy. He is also asking voters to be discriminating. In other words, he is asking voters to cut off the supply of heat to the political leadership. If Mr Basu were active, the appeal would have had considerable force. His ability to persuade was awesome. He did it over the CPI(M)’s rigid position in 1996 over participating in a non-CPI(M) led Government at the Centre. By forcing his party to “withdraw” from the 1972 elections in West Bengal, declaring that it was entirely rigged, Mr Basu sold the idea of the CPI(M) as a principled political party to voters in 1977 apprehensive over its record for turbulence and agitational politics.
In an indirect way, Mr Basu is also asking the CPI(M) to rethink its position on perpetuating the break up with the Congress. It is, therefore, intriguing that the super sensitive CPI(M) leadership has not ignored the gambit. Instead, Polit Bureau member Sitaram Yechury has officially responded by describing it as sage advice from India’s oldest statesman.
Email | Print | Rate:
|