Khaleej Times
24 March 2007
WEST Bengal's Left Front, led by the Communist
Party of India-Marxist (CPM), has barely pulled
back from a potentially self-destructive disaster
following the Nandigram carnage by adopting
an 8-point agreement.
This acknowledges that the March 14 Nandigram
incident, in which 14 people were gunned down,
"was tragic" and won't be repeated;
the government "will not acquire any land
in Nandigram for any industry" and the
police "will be withdrawn in phases".
The agreement says the Front's partners will
"meet more frequently" to take "all
important political decisions... after discussion."
The agreement became possible primarily because
of the public outrage Nandigram caused and the
tough stand taken by the CPM's main partners-Communist
Party of India, Forward Bloc, and Revolutionary
Socialist Party. They condemned the police firing
as undemocratic and "brutal and barbaric",
and threatened to withdraw from the government.
Critical here was the role of the Grand Old
Man of Bengal politics, former Chief Minister
Jyoti Basu. He said the CPM is running "one-party
rule in this state. It doesn't look like a coalition
government at all..." He reprimanded Chief
Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, and told the
Front's non-CPM leaders to quit if the CPM doesn't
change course.
The agreement represents a victory for the people
- and forces of sanity. The victory was costly.
And yet, it doesn't settle all issues: Will
the Front completely abandon its Special Economic
Zones (SEZs) policy? Will it refuse any truck
with Indonesia's Salim group - a front for the
super-corrupt Suharto family-for whom 10,000
acres was to be acquired in Nandigram?
Will it revise Bhattacharjee's "industrialisation-at-any-cost"
orientation, with total disregard for social
and environmental consequences? And will the
CPM consult its allies on policy issues in advance,
rather than throw the weight of its 176 seats
in the 294-member Assembly, against their 51
seats?
It's necessary to place Nandigram in context.
The immediate cause of the violence there wasn't
land acquisition, put on hold after popular
protests in January. It was the CPM's attempt
to regain control of the area for its "cadres".
The "cadres" brook no challenge to
their power. But on January 7, they faced the
people's anger. Many were driven out. They were
itching to come back.
Nandigram wasn't solely a fight between the
CPM and assorted Opposition groups, including
the Right-wing, thuggish Trinamool Congress,
backed by the Jamiat-Ulema-e-Hind and other
factions, which had collected arms and blockaded
the area. Like the TMC, the CPM too employed
strong-arm methods, revealed by the arrest of
10 of its cadres. The blockade was a spontaneous
people's initiative. As CPM general secretary
Prakash Karat admitted, the local "people
turned against us."
The plain truth is, CPM apparatchiks instigated
Black Wednesday's operation to settle scores
in the "cadres'" favour by using the
state's might. They imposed collective punishment,
an obnoxious method, on the residents.
The 4,000-strong police didn't use non-lethal
anti-riot water cannons, rubber bullets and
smoke grenades until their utility was exhausted-as
mandated by police manuals.
The police shot to kill. Most bullet injuries
were above the waist level. Many people were
shot in the back. At Bhangabera Bridge, the
police pumped 500 bullets into 2,000 people.
The Central Bureau of Investigation has gathered
evidence that CPM "cadres" also fired
into the crowd, many disguised in police uniform.
It recovered 500 bullets from them. It also
found a 657 metre-long "blood trail",
which suggests "a gunny-bag holding a body
was being dragged".
It will take long to heal the wounds of Nandigram.
It's worst outrage to have occurred under Left
Front rule in West Bengal. Even Karat concedes
that the firing was "disapproved by the
people of West Bengal... [who] have a high democratic
consciousness."
The pivotal question is whether the CPM will
learn the right lessons from Nandigram. Or else,
it'll forfeit its greatest gains, which have
ensured its victory in election after consecutive
election for three decades - a record unmatched
in any democracy.
Sadly, Bhattacharjee hasn't lost any of his
zeal for "industrialisation-at-any-cost".
Bhattacharjee has a crude, dogmatic view of
history, which sees industrialisation of any
kind as progress. He fails to understand that
corporate-led neoliberal industrialisation doesn't
produce the collective Blue-collar worker (Marx's
proletarian) and that it lacks the employment
and social potential of classical capitalism.
Rather, it bases itself upon Whiter-collar workers,
is extremely capital-intensive, and creates
enclave-based growth.
Neoliberal industrialisation involves capital
accumulation through expropriation of livelihoods.
A progressive state must not condone it; rather,
it should discipline and regulate capitalism
in the interests of society.
But for Bhattacharjee, the Tata car plant at
Singur, being built on a neoliberal pattern,
is the model. In reality, it's a stark case
of crony capitalism, with subsidies equalling
a fourth of its capital costs! It's also an
instance of
elitist, socially inappropriate, high-pollution
industrialisation.
Bhattacharjee is also an unreconstructed believer
in "stages" of historical development.
For him, semi-feudal India must first achieve
capitalism and then attempt socialist reform.
He says he's working strictly within "a
capitalist framework".
This view severely underestimates the possibilities
for social transformation available within India's
backward capitalism and for progress towards
a more just society free of social bondage and
economic serfdom.
For Bhattacharjee, the ideal model to follow
is China, with its giant SEZs like Shenzen,
unfettered freedom for multinational capital,
and legalisation of private property. He should
know better.
Shenzen is a workers' nightmare, where no labour
rights exist. The mere loss of an identity card
can reduce workers to destitution. Chinese vice-minister
Chen Changzhi has just revealed that 80 per
cent of the 1.84 million hectares of farmland
earmarked for industrial development was illegally
acquired.
The Left, especially the CPM, must decide whether
it wants to fight for socialism, or merely manage
capitalism Chinese-style, however honestly.
If it chooses the second option, it will go
into historic decline. It must also make a decisive
break with the undemocratic organisational culture
it has inherited, which punishes dissidence
and encourages a "my-party-right-or-wrong"
attitude.
Unless the Left undertakes ruthless self-criticism,
it can't effect course correction.
