Naxal Resistance

This blog is a mirror site of http://indianvanguard.wordpress.com

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Categories

  • Blog Stats

    • 85,558 hits
  • Top Posts

  • Advertisements

Archive for September 17th, 2007

EMINENT JOURNALIST IN SUPPORT OF DR.BINAYAK SEN

Posted by Indian Vanguard on September 17, 2007

Source: Bastar

Eminent columnist and writer Praful Bidwai and Mukul Sharma,Director of Amnesty International,India after visiting areas where Dr.Binayak Sen had conducted important activities in the health field felt that he is being wrongly held by the State Government.

Advertisements

Posted in Binayaksen | 1 Comment »

Legacy of the Maoist Communist Centre- Commemorating 25th death Anniversary of Comrade Kanhai Chaterjee

Posted by Indian Vanguard on September 17, 2007


By Harsh Thakor

On July 18th 1982, 25 years ago ,Comrade Kanhai Chaterjee left for his heavenly abode. He made a historic contribution to The Indian Communist Movement as with Amulya Sen,he was the founder of he Maoist Communist Centre which was formed I Octobr 20th 1969.This organization is one of the constituents of he historically formed C.P.I(Maoist) in 2004.Kanhai Chaterjee literally lived and breathe revolution.Few Orgaisnationjs I hehistory of he Comunst Movement have launches such daring actions on the enemies.It si a tribute to he outstanding tenacity o their comrades that they survived for 35 years,traversing every thorn in the bush.

It was his innovative thinking that made him critical of Charu Mazumdar’s C.P.I(M.L.)and it’s tactical line of individual annihilation. Comrade K.C.chalked out a path for the M.C.C whereby they formulated a strategy of heir own. The methods of work they adopted resembled Comrade Mao Tse Tung’s Red Army in the revolutionary war. Few revolutionary books or observers cannot remember their striking similarity with the Chinese Peoples Liberation Corpses, particularly he way they fled to the mountains. It was Comrade Kanhai Chaterjee who believe staunchly that the time was not appropriate for the forming of the party.He felt their had to be greater development in the revolutionary movement to form a party. In his view first an agrarian revolutionary movement had to be launched. Today it is significant that both the Charu Mazumar C.P.I(M.L) and the Maoist Communist Centre are recognized as the founding parties and not just Charu Mazumdar’s
party.(The Peoples War and Party Unity Groups staunchly defended the Charu Mazumdar Party as the re-organised party.)

History of the Formation of the Party.(Compiled from PeoplesMarch-Nov 2004 issue)
The Maoist Communist Centre was originally called the ‘Dakshin Desh ‘group
It was originally apart of he A.I.C.CR but eventually pulled out.

Comrades Kanai Chatterjee and Amulya Sen, while working amongst the masses in Kolkata, Howrah and Hoogli and comrade Chandrashekar Das raised the banner of revolt against the line of the CPM 7th Congress. The “Chinta” group was formed in 1965 as a secret revolutionary centre within the CPM carrying out revolutionary propaganda amongst its rank-an-file. In 1965/66 six issues of the magazine were brought out whichdealt with the following topics: (a) the class character of the Indian state, (b) China’s path is our path, (c) neo-colonialism and the weapon of PL 480’s role, (d) the Programme of the 7th Congress, the nature of the revisionist leadership and the peasant question in India, etc. The CPM’s English and Bengali organs launched a massive attacks on the articles that appeared in the “Chinta”. This resulted in big discussions throughout the rank-and-file. In late 1966 the secret magazine, “Chinta”, was closed down and a magazine named “Dakshin Desh” was brought out openly. The group came to be known as the “Dakshin Desh” group. In early 1967, before the Naxalbari uprising com. Kanai Chatterjee had a long discussion with Com. CM. At this meeting they had a common understanding on advancing the peasant movement and decided to maintain close relations.

But the relations did not grow. From 1967 to 1969 the then “Dakshin Desh” group built up the movement in Kolkata, Howrah, Hoogli, Midnapur, Bardhwan,Birbum and 24 Parganas, together with some work in Assam and Tripura. They built the peasant movement firstly in Sonarpur during the later part of the 60s and then in Kanksa in Bardhwan district. Thereafter they established some contacts with Bihar, it began work there. In October 1969 the MCC was formed. It was Com. Kanai Chatterjee who laid the basic line for their
Centre in the very first issue of “Lal Pataka” brought out in 1969. The important topics dealt with were: (a) the importance of Maoism (then called ‘thought’) in the present era, (b) in the present situation the tactical line and tactical slogans, (c) the correct policy towards the participation in elections and a correct analysis of the boycott of elections, saying that
though it was a question of tactics, it acquires the significance of strategy in the concrete conditions of India, (d) the Correct line regarding the armed agrarian revolutionary war, that is, protracted people’s war including army building and base areas (e) correct orientation towards forms of struggle (open and secret, legal and illegal, peaceful and armed), (f)
the programme, tactics and methods of the peasant struggle, (g) approach and method towards the UF, (h) political propaganda (i) on the women’s question, the student movement and the nationality question in India, and (j) methods of leadership..(excerpted from Peoples March Nov-Dec 2004 issue) The founding documents of the M.C.C. stressed te importance of base areas in he revolutionary process.”If we are to build armed agarian revolution,a peoples army and red base areas ,we will always have to remain firm on some basic principles regarding their inter-relation.The building up and consolidation of the armed agrarian revolution,peoples army and base areas -thes tasks are related to each other. “If we are to build up an agrarian revolution no peoples army can be built up.Similarly an agrarian revolution cannot be built up without a Peoples Army..Again without a peoples army no base area can be built up. Similarly without base areas the very existence of peoples army cannot be maintained. It is only through agrarian revolutionary
guerilla struggle and the establishment of the peoples army that a red base area can be built up Again throug this work alone can the revolutionary high tide can be accelerated throughout the country,and depending on the base areand with the help of he Peoples Army,the agrarian revolution alo can be consolidated,deepened an expanded.”This statement was he chief demarcating factor of the M.C.C withthe C.P.I.(M.L).

Some references from July-Oct 1997 issue of Vanguard regarding polemical differences of M.C C with Peoples War Group.

Quoting Kanhai Chaterjee “It is wrong to say that Dakshin Desh Group left the A.I C.C.R because of it’s difference es on the issue of immediate formatin of he [party.A.I.C.C.R.did not recognize any group with aseparate identity like he ‘Dakshin Desh Groups as it’s constituents.No representative of this group was amember o he Est Bengal Co-ordination Committee. Or of he A.I.C.C.R.”

The M.C.C made the following criticism of the C.P.I(M.L) ‘Naturally as the party was formed without following the revolutionary process, method and style, some known degenerated elements could capture some posts in the leadership from he beginnings. This facilitates undeclared groups and a tendency of group mentality and bureacratism replacing democratic Centralism.’

Kanhai Chaterjee stated “We have to give utmost importance on organ sing extensive political campaign and political exposure campaign on a large scale. Only this will take us towards he path of Peoples War and inspire the masses to politics of Socialism,peoples Democracy and armed peoples dictatorship under the leadership of the working class.In view of he present semi-colonial and semi-feudal society of India the exposure of the economy an politics at present and the propogation of the politics of agrarian evolution or peoples democratic revolution will take the centre sage in the whole programme.

Phases of struggle of M.C.C

The first phase can be stretched from 1964 to 1968 and began when the revisionist line was established at the first Congress of the CPI (M). i) drawing a clear line of demarcation with the revisionists in the political and organizational fields, (ii) linking the daily revolutionary practice of Indian revolution to the theory (iii) developing a political and
tactical line not merely as a formality, but giving it a concrete structure in various spheres of activity and (iv) based on these revolutionary policies, style and method, and in the course of revolutionary struggles and guided by a revolutionary theory, to build a revolutionary party. The second phase, which stretched from 1969 to 1978, was a period of implementation of the party’s line, policies and plans. It was a period of gaining practical
experience towards the path of establishing the ‘Red Agrarian Revolutionary Resistance War.’ Work was begun on this basis in the Sundarbans, 24 Parganas, Hoogli, Midnapur, Kanksa, Gaya and Hazaribagh. Of these experiences the most encouraging was that of Kanksa and Hazaribagh. Here, a wide movement was built on issues like wage hike, seizure of crops, fertiliser problem, confiscation of grains from landlords and against
various forms of political and social oppression. Also, a wide mass movement was built, some notorious landlords punished and steps were taken towards disarming of the enemy and arming the people.

However although claiming to defer from Charu Mazumdar’s line in their actual working process ,their practice was virtually The same. The Maoist Communist Centre also deployed the tactic of “Individual annihilation of the Class Enemy.’It was Comrade Kanhai Chaterjee who made a rectification of the line where the formation of mass organizations and bulding of mass movements was indispensable.The M.C.C did not build separate peasant organization but had a strategy to build he KrantiKari Kisan Comitees.These Committees tried the landlords and re-distributed land to the landless
peasants. Punishments weRe awarded to guilty Landlords.Mass Fronts were also bilt in he student,youth women and Cultural Front.The Nari Mukti Sanggh,a mass organization of women led a significant movement. It was in 1978 when the MC.C made a self-correction and decided to form mass organizations like the Revolutionary Peasants Committee. The mistakes of the past were analysed. The third phase, which stretched from 1979 to 1988, was a period of taking the lessons, both positive and negative, of the second phase and enriching both the theory and practice. In this phase the MCC focused on Bihar; and with the perspective of building a people’s army and base area, the Bihar-Bengal Special Area Committee was established, the ‘Preparatory Committee for Revolutionary Peasant Struggles’ was formed and soon Revolutionary Peasant Councils emerged. In this phase militant struggles developed and the landlords’ authority smashed, thousands of acres of land seized and distributed to the landless, and property of the
landlords seized and distributed..

Relation with C.P.I(M.L)Peoples War .(Compiled from Peoples March) It has been a long and tortuous path of over two decades of discussions between the two parties. The process witnessed many ups and downs. It saw even some dark periods. But finally it emerged triumphant. The first ever meeting between the latter two parties began in 1981, when the then leaders, comrade Kanai Chatterjee of the then MCC and com KS of the
then CPI(ML)(PW) met for over 12 days. After this very first meet both leaders, though belonging to different streams, stated that the grounds to merge are strong as both were basically traversing a similar path. Both parties set out the procedure for preparation of the documents and then merger. Meanwhile, the erstwhile CPI(ML)[Party Unity] also had good
relations with the then MCC, both having regular touch. This too continued until the early 1990s, after which relations soured and clashes began. Though the desire for unity of the PW and the MCC was strong it did not progress much, because of various reasons. In 1982 com. KC died out of illness caused from the rigours of underground life and com. KS was arrested. After that the PW was rocked by two major internal crises in the CC, on both occasions involving the general secretaries of the party. Though attempts to further the unity process continued, particularly in the brief period between the two crises (1988-90), it was only after its resolution that talks were again taken up in seriousness from 1992. This continued for three years, after which it finally broke down due to some differences on international issues. Both parties issued a joint statement for the failure
of the talks, outlining the differences and its suspension for the time being but vowing to take it up again later. Then relations to some extent also soured between the MCC and the PW, particularly after the merger of PW and PU.

Then in 1998 the two major parties within the M-L trend, the PW and the PU, merged to form a single party of this trend. But already the situation at the ground level in Bihar had deteriorated and after 1998 the clashes between PW and the MCC continued and intensified. Then the two parties entered the period now referred to as the “Black Chapter” of the Indian revolution. Large numbers were killed from both sides. This situation caused much damage to the revolutionary movement. This process continued even when various genuine supporters of the movement opposed the retaliatory methods adopted by both parties. Many intellectuals and progressive elements who support revolution appealed to both the parties to stop these clashes. Different communist revolutionary groups and parties in the country appealed to resolve the clashes. Many South Asian Maoist parties, and other international Maoist forces also appealed to stop the clashes. In due course the process of rethinking was already going on inside the MCC. At the time of the PW/PU unity itself the PW took a decision to unilaterally stop clashes, but neither did it make it public nor convey it to the MCC, so it had little impact. In this overall backdrop the MCC took the initiative in openly declaring a unilateral ceasefire in January, 2000. Thereafter, PW also responded to stop the clashes. Hence the negative relation between the two parties started turning into a positive one. In the meantime the PW held its 9th Congress in August, 2001. Also the MCCI had to face a major two line struggle with a small faction from within on certain ideological-political and other issues.

Finally, the process of talks between the two parties was once again started in August 2001. The other important reason for the growing closeness of the two were the decisions of the PW Congress which rectified some of its earlier understandings and also adopted Maoism in place of Mao Thought. In the very first meeting the delegations of the two parties offered a serious self-criticism, and decisions were taken to initiate joint activities at the Bihar/Jharkhand level. The written self-criticisms were taken publicly throughout the rank-and-file of the Bihar/Jharkhand party and the situation further developed in the positive direction. Throughout the period of the latter part of 2001 and entire 2002 major joint activities were taken in Bihar-Jharkhand including the successful three-day economic blockade of the two states in protest against POTA. Talks also continued between these two parties through this period. Finally, it was in the important Feb. 2003 bilateral meeting that a decision was taken to take concrete steps for starting discussion on ideological- political issues of line with the clear direction and purpose of merger of the two parties. In
this meeting a serious and extensive self-criticism was put forward by both parties for the “Black Chapter” and this too was carried publicly. Both parties vowed never to repeat clashes with class friends no matter how severe the difference. At this meeting the grounds were also laid to advance and finalise the process of merger They were, firstly, on the ideology of the Party — Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. The other documents decided to be drafted were on the Programme, Strategy & Tactics, Political Resolution on the International and Domestic Situation, and the Party Constitution. The task of drafting the five documents was divided amongst the two parties. Then, in four rounds of negotiations, between the high-level delegations of the two Parties and the respective CCs, final agreement was reached after detailed discussions on these documents on all major issues at a joint meeting of the two CCs on Sept.2004. The documents were adopted and decided to be translated into about 10 regional languages to be discussed throughout
the party. Some minor differences that remained were referred for further discussion and study to be clinched at a later date. Finally the joint CC meeting of both parties took the decision of merger and a Central Committee (Provisional) was established.

Work on Mass Fronts

In the open mass work the Maoist Communist Centre formed the first revolutionary Student Organisation in Bihar ,the Revolutionary Students League and a strong Cultural organizations,the Krantikari Budhijibi Sangh and the Krantikari Sanskritik Sangh. .It also set up various units of the Krantikari Kisan Commitees,which carried out Peoples Courts against class enemies and distributed land to the tiller. They also consolidated it’s
peasant movement . Another Significant contribution og the M.C C was the work of their women’s front organization,the ‘Nari Mukti Sangh”They played a major role leading tribal revolts of women.in Bihar However by the late 1990’s its student and youth front was totally destroyed by enemy forces.The party recruited 500 wholetimers and more than 10000 members.The Emergence of revolutionary student organisations was of great significance in Bihar. The Revolutionary Students League led by the Maoist Communist Centre was the first ever Revolutionary Student organisation which carried out the first ever Go to Villages campaign in Bihar by a student front in 1989.In that campaign they upheld the Chinese Revolution in commemorating the 40th anniversary year. A Village campaign was also held in1993 protesting against the Death Sentence on M.C.comrades in the Dalechauk Baghera Uprising in Aurangabad and against the demolition of the Babri Masjid in December 1992,where a cycle rally was also held.Memorable Comrades of the Maoist Communist Centre.

.In 1978 Comrdae Jeeblal and several cadres were responsible or he rectification line in the M.C.C.Comrade Jeblal Mahto was martyred .Comrade Mahato was a peasnt activist who was killed I apolice encounter. Comrade Kamdeo,was the son of a middle peasant. Who left college to work as arailway labourr.On August 7th 1984 he was engulfed by the police while satging ameeeting of the Krantikari Kisan Commitewe.He was shot in cold
blood with his hands tied behind his back.His last wordswere ‘Long ive the Revolution.’
Cpmrade Rameshwar Yadav was the son of a middle peasant. In 1976 he joined the M.C.C an became an important peasant leader .He led armed actions with immaculate skill. Ironically he was killed on Republic day while conducting a meeting in Lenjoa village in Hazirabagh district.

KrantiKari Kisan Committee.Notse compiled From Aloke Banerjee’s article fromWorld to win and A.I R.S F.publication(Naxalabari.-Not just the name of a village”-commemorating 30 years) Struggles were adopted through a huge network of villages. In the initial stages a Krantikari Kisan Sanharsh Committee was formd.(Preparatoty Committee for Revolutinary Peasnt Styruggles)When the peasants were organized in large numbers under this banner,these committees wee developed into full fledged Krantikari Kisan Commitees’.(Revolutionay Peasnt Councils) The 2 slogans raised were “All land to the Real Tillers’ and ALL Power to the Peasant Commitees”.The rape and molestation of wome was taken up in al earnest .Notorious dacoits were punished. The forcible harvesting of crops planted by landlords on gair-Mazruia land was also challenged and they were
seized by he Revolutionary Comitees. All types of disputes wre challenged at the village level Armed Red Defence Corpses were active in supporting the strugglesSelf 0defece squads were formed of the village youth. The main areas struggle were Hazaribagh, Gaya and Aurangabad.

One famous action was carried out on landlord Rameshwar Singh.For years the peasants were trampled by the landlords iron feet. On January 6th 1983 the Kisan Committee gathered at is ‘Kacheri’. He was arrested and tried. They not only killed him but burnt his house. This was the firs time that he people seriously saw the need of combining mass struggles with armed movements.

From Gaya to Dhanbad,the struggle spread to Bokaro,Aurangabad,Hazaribagh and Giridih.Later in land seizure movements starting in fulls wing from 1986 to 1990,7000 acres of land were re-distributed.They also raised spectacular squad actios.In August 2001 an armeds quad under the leadership of the Maoist Communist Centre stopped a truckload og grain and distributed half thes acks of pulses to the masses,before they wee forced to retreat by the arrival of police enforcements.The next ,night they repeated the experience
halting,8000 strong,5 trucks on the Grand Trunk Road.Slogans were shouted calling for confiscating the moneylenders good sto distributr amogst the poor,to establish the authority of the revolutionary peasnt committees and protect the people from starvation. Before the goods were distributed,thirty jeeploads of police arrived at the scene.For hours there was afierce combat as the revolutionaries had laid mines.M.CC combatants herouically resisted the might of the police forces.(From Aloke Banerjee’s Article-‘Inside M.C.C Country’)

A special court in Gaya had meted out a life imprisonment to a number of members of the Krantikari Kisan Committee which had led an uprising in the 1990’s that had seen the militant involvement of thousands of poor anmd middle peasants.The M.C.Ccalled for a 72 hour bandh in Bihar and Jharkahnd in protest.Rialwyy tracks were blocked,Schools and colleges boycotted,courts boycotted,shops and markets closed Etc. Revolutionary raids in retaliation were organized by the M.C.C during the 3 day bandh. IN Lohardaga,Gumla
etc.(Aloke Banerjee-‘Inside M.C.C country.

This trend spread all over and hundreds of landlords were brought to he book. Guilty landlords we shaved and paraded in public. The most notorious we sentenced to death. Some even repented and were forgiven. hey would now operate under he watchful administration of he Committee. All the ‘Kacheri’s’ were razed to the ground. Famous examples were Moha Khan of Kadirganj I Gaya,Madhumati ingh of Balia,Surakasha Singh ofPachmi,,Main Singh the owner of 2900 acres in Pipra and the Mahant of Bodhgaya.The famous words ‘Utha Hai ToofanZamana Badal Raha’ were now echoing all over.(A storm
has risen ,the times are changing).The M.C.C also called ahistoric 72 hour bandh I Bihar and Jharkhand against he death sentence ofn membersof the Krantikari Kisan Committee who had led ahistoric uprising.Schools,colleges,courts,offices,shops and markets remained closed.All movement of vehicles virtually ceased.Railway services came to a
standstill.Thousands of people lay on the railway tracks.Business came to a standstill. Revolutionary raids were organized in Lohardaga ,Gumla and elsewhere.

Memorable Actions(Compiled fro ‘A World to Win Article by Aloke Banerjee and from A.I.R.S.F.booklet-‘Naxalbari is not just the name of a Village’ The M.C C.launched a series of military type attacks on the police and military forces..On December 2002 , The M.C C was able to disarm 66 jawans in a raid when they captured 50 weapons after attacking a police contingent in Jharkhand. In his appraisal of the Movement of M.C.C Prakash
Singh(Former Inspector General of Police in his book The Naxalite Movement in India) States:The M.C.C has been running a parallel judicial system in certain pockets.These are described as Jan Adalat or Peoples Courts.Farzand Ahmed of India Today writes this example,”Silence descends as Laxman, the area commander of M.C.C , a sinister figure with his face covered appears.The 2 acused, with their hands tied behind their backs are brought in.Laxman launches into his ideological monologue ‘In today’s system, the toiling masses working hard but get nothing to eat. On the other hand, these bastard thieves lift goats and diesel. He then asks the villagers to select 5 judges. The 5 judge bench hears he charges and announces its verdict -5 lathi blows and 5 slaps by each children publicly.The verdict ,confirmed by the people by avoice vote is quickly executed, accompanied by the requisite

slogan’Naxalbari Ek Hi Rasta.’

One of he most famous actions carried out by the M.C.C was in Dalechauk Baghera in Aurangabad on May 29th 1987.The Yadav activists of the Maoist Communist Centre slaughtered 42 Rajputs in retaliation for murders. Aurangabad is a feudal centre.I Seshani Village the landlords launched an atack on Seshani vilage on April 19th 1987.This was in retaliation to the policies of the Krantikari Kisan Commitees who banned the selling of 150
acres of land owned by the Mahanta of Jnibigha village. This land was brought by Lootan Sinh. The Kisan Commitee destroyed the office of Babu Lotan and his tractors wee burnt. A red flag was hoisted over his land. The landlords were also enraged by an earlier clash with the M.C.C and the fact that hundreds of Mahua trees were owned by the Kisan SAmiti.In a attack he landlords launched an attack on M.C.C activists in Seshani, killing 8
activists and 2 children.

Following this the Red Defence Corpes launched an attack on Dalechauk Baghera. That area historically had the most notorious landlords like Satyendra Narayan Singh,Ram Narseh Singh and Lootan Babu.Triveni Singh,SAmresh Singh and Abhan Singh wee other tyrants. It was the Krantikari Kisan Commitees that challenged their might. Another similar incident took place i Bara village in Gaya district o February 12th 1992,when 37 upper caste members of the Bhumihar caste wee hacked to death.

According to Prakash Singh(Former Inspector General of Police0 in his book’The Naxalite Movement in India’:The party has built an armed wing known as the Lal Raksha Dal and manged to stockpile about 7 to eight hundred firearms of different descriptions,including a couple of A-K 47 Rifles. ..
Jharkhand.

Here the M.C.C led a famous movement. They negotiated with leaders of the Jharkahand Mukti Morcha LIKE Sibu Soren and Vinod Mahato that a separate state was no solution for the tribals and what was fundamentally required was uprooting the social system.nI Jharkhand the .M.C.C waged many a famous struggle ,seizing and re-distributing landlord’s land. They defended the formation of separate state of Jharkand but only when it was connected to the overall class struggle.Sibu Soren was unsympathetic but Vinod Mahato was impressed with the M.C.C. Between 1987 an 1990,over 7000 acres of land in
Chatanpur were re-distributed among the villagers.Forset offices were attacked .In 1991 the landlords formed the Sunlight Sena in retaliation .The M.C C retaliated. Their armed squads liquidated the entire Sena in the region.

Assesment of the Maoist Communist Centre.

Strengths

The fact that for 35 years it survived he onslaught of the Indian State with phenomenal tenacity inWest Bengal,Bihar Etc leading an arm3ed struggle in Bihar is one of the greatest achievements in he annals of the orld Communist Movement.The military action sit conducted are comparable to the intensity in Peoples Wars in Nepal ,Peru and Phillipines and the style of functioning to some extent resmbled the Chinse Comunist Party in heir revolutionary Armed Struggle.It’s mass fronts joined the All India League for
Revolutionary Culture and the All India Revolutionary Students Federation.It’s final merger into the C.P.I(Maoist) is a historical achievement.

It must be noted that the heroic actions carried out in Bihar and Jharkhand today is virtually the line of the Maoist Communist Centre until the 2004 merger into the C.P.I.(Maoist). The erstwhile Party Unity or Peoples War Group never carried out as intense military actions.Eg Historic Jehanabad Jail break.and the Giridh Armoury raid (commemorating the 75th annioversary of the Chittagong Armouy raid It is the M.C.C which has made he biggest contribution to the bulding of the Peoples Liberation Guerilla Army in Bihar and Jharkkhand.

To me one of the most significant historical contribution sof M.C C was their challenging the authenciy of the C.P.I(M.L) formed by Charu Mazumdar.THe fact that the recently constituted C.P.I(Maoist) considers both the Charu Mazumdar Party and the M.C C as the percusors of the re-organised party proves the historical contribution of the M.C.C.In the authors view the revolutionary party has not been re-organised,nor has it developed a
mass military line. It is fascinating that even 10 years ago the C.P.I(M.L) Peoles War wrote a polemical critique on MC’C’ refusal to recognize the Charu Mazumdar C.P.I(M.L) as the re-organised party.The peoples War Group thought that it was a left sectarian stand of the M.C.C , unable to understand how sectarian the Charu Mazumdar C.P.I(M.L) was with regard to comrades and organizations outside the A.I C.C R. Weaknesess

The most important question of historic assessment was their original difference with the original C.P.I(M.L) and later why it developed serious differences with the Peoples War Group or Party Unity Group to the extent that even inter-group clashes occurred on a wide scale.This reflected he defective military line of both the erstwhile Peoples War Group and the M.C.C. True they resolved it ultimately but did they analyse the root cause
of the clashes and rectify those aspects of the line that caused them?

Although M.C.C led a historic armed struggle it’s movement was vitiated with serious defects. The organization was unable to develop a correct mass military line .Several actions were performed which did not take into account the state and development of the agrarian revolutionary movement in their respective areas. Such actions instead of basing themselves on people’s mass movements, substituted them. A correct strategy has not been adopted to develop base areas f rom guerilla Zones. It has not successful defended or consolidated base areas as he Chinse Communist Party did. In this light it is very important to study the method the Chinese Communist Party adopted while carrying out their armed revolutionary struggle. This year is 80 years since the famous Chinkanshang uprising in China. (In 1927 Mao’s Red Army retreated to the mountains. That was the year the seeds of armed struggle was launched with he Autumn Harvest or Nanchang Uprising on August 1st 1927..It is also the 80 th anniversary year of the formation of the Chinese Peoples Liberation Army) It would also be significant to compare how the Maoist Communist Center consolidated their base areas in comparison with he Chinese Communist Party in their base areas i the 1930’s.The Chinese Red Army. always stressed on the relation of the armed movement with the Agrarian revolution. Even during armed struggle or conducting armed actions they consolidated agrarian revolution and re-distributed land. In this light it is also important to compare the period in China of consolidation and preparation of the peasant mass movement before armed struggle was launched .I uphold their merger with Peoples War Group and heir self -condemnation as
remarkable but I don’t hink they have made aself-critical analysis of the agrarian revolutionary or military line.The M.C.C often adopted the line of the ‘Individual annihilation of he class enemy’, in contrast to the mass line. Significantly it was known as he ‘Jungle’ party as it hardly resorted to open activity.

Athough mass organizations were formed they were utilized as mere front organizations of the M.C.C and not given a distinct open identity .Legal and open mass struggles were neglected to a considerable extent. The relation between armed struggle and open mass activity was hardly developed . Open mass struggles were reqired during repression of democratic rights,communal riots ETC.During the 1993 Babri Masjid riots,there were hardly any open mass movements organized in opposition (although mass fronts launched some protests)A separate revolutionary peasant organization was not formed. There was also confusion between caste and clas Struggle.Acts were launched against oppression of down trodden cates without taking into account class analysis.(1987 Dalechauk-Baghera massacre of RAjputs being he best example)Work on the trade Union sphere was neglected and hardly any emphasis was placed on building revolutionary struggle with the urban areas.(WEst Begal is he best example)

One theoretical weakness of the Maoist Communist Centre was it’s replacing the term ‘Mao Zedong Thought’,with ‘Maoism.’Even the C.C.P did not replace Mao Tse Tung Thought with Maoism in the Socialist and Cultural Revolution Period.This denies the fact that it is the ‘era of imperialism’ as profounded by Comrade Lenin. It also joined the Revolutionary Internationalist movement ,a Communist International Organization,which
was prematurely formed, without adequate development of the World Communist Movement.

Let us end the article dipping our blood to all the martyrs of the Maoist Communist Cente and bow down to he immortal contributions of Comrade Kanhai Chaterjee. Red Salutes to Comrade Kanhai Chaterjee on his 25th death anniversary day.(Founder of Maoist Communist Centre)and all the Martyrs of the Maoist Communist Centre.

Pay Homage first to Founding members Kanhai Chaterje,Amulya Sen,Chandrashekar Das.
Pay Homage to mass activists ,leaders like Revolutionary Student League leader Com Arjun,(Martyred in 1995.He joined R.S L in 1987 playing a major role in the student movement by initialisng ‘Go To Village Campaigns’.Murdered on 10th July 1995 by Sukar Paswan and his criminal goons in Bageshwari,Gaya after being kidnapped)Comrade Manoj ( C.Y.L.activist and later armed squad member.Killed in encounter on July 1998). C.YL.activist Baijnath Singh,Krantikari KIsan Committee activists Jeeblal Mahato, (1978) Rameshwar Yadav,KamdeoEtc. ,(August 7th,1984) By Harsh Thakor With reference to
‘Naxalbari is not just the name of a village’-commemorating 30 years of Naxalbari
‘Peoples March’ ‘A World to Win -Article by Aloke Banerjee. ‘Naxalite Movement in India’by Prakash Singh. This year is the 20th anniversary year of the Famous Dalechauk Baghera
Uprising on May 29th 1987. It is also the 10th death anniversary year of Comrade Baijnath,who fought valiantly in the Revolutionary Student League and the C.Y.L but sadly commited suicide due to socio-economic misfortune.He was born in 1967,so it
is also his 40th birth anniversary year.

Important notes with regArd to ChinEse Recvolution in light of studying both the postive and negative aspects of the line of M.C.C We must remember the method of functioning of the Chinese Red Army in the period of pre- armed struggle and armed struggle phase. It is relevant to compare the armed struggle of the C.P.I. (Maoist) with the armed struggle of
the Chinese Red Army. And asses the similarities and differences. With Here are some compiled notes from ‘Red Star over China’ and “Edgar Snow’s China.”Significantly it is he 80th anniversary year of the period when armed Struggle was launched in China.

“By spring peasant struggles began to erupt in Hupeh, KInagsi, Fukien and Hunan, with a militant tendency. In 1927 the Autumn Harvest uprising was organized which propagated a programme.Before 1927 Mao had written a thesis on the peasant movement through his ‘Report and Investigation of the Peasant movement in Hunan’14 great deeds were mentioned .The greatest one was that the poor peasants were organized against the enemies. In addition to that political prestige of landlords was smashed, landlords compelled to audit accounts, grain hoarding opposed, police chiefs offices taken over and magistrates elected, most brutal oppressors paraded through the streets, usury stopped, landlords militia conquered banditry eliminated, oppressive landlords fined, male tyranny over woman fought against, mass education amongst illiterates promoted, superstitious customs fought against, marketing and credit co-operatives organized, and roads and irrigation projects built financed by landlords.

Attempts at armed risings in Canton and Nanchang were ruthlessly suppressed.
Collecting fragments of the peasant associations Mao launched the first rural armed insurrection, called the Autumn Harvest Uprising. Implementing complete separation from the Kuomintang, organisation of a peasant worker revolutionary army, confiscation of the property of small and middle, as well as great landlords, setting up the power of the Communist Party of Hunan and organization of the Soviets By September a widespread uprising was organized, through the peasant uprisings of Hunan, and the first units of
the worker-peasant army were formed. Recruits were drawn from the peasantry, the Hanyang miners and the insurrectionist troops of the Kuomintang. This was called the ‘First division of the Workers and peasants army.’ It is significant that the miners were included as it illustrates the importance of the work I the Working class area. By 1922 the Hunan party had already organized more than twenty trade Unions among miners, railway workers, municipal employees, renters and workers in the govt.mint. Numerous
struggles were organized with youth and students.” “‘In the 6th Congress of the Party resolutions wee made approving of the emphasis on the agrarian movement. Work as expanded to new Soviet district A democratic programme was propagated in the Soviet of Chingkanshan in November 1927.Mao’s first army front committee refused to adopt the
putschist tactics of raiding, burning and killing the landlords. In May 1928 Chu The’s forces combined with Mao’s and a plan was drawn to build a six hsien soviet area to consolidate the Communist power in the Hunan,Kiangsi,Kwantung border districts.2 tendencies were combated.0ne to advance to the capital of Changshah,the other to retreat to the South of the Wanton border. It was advocated that land had to be divided, masses armed Etc.Kuomintang officials wee killed and Soviet governments established areas
which included a population of fifty-70 millions of peasants were bolshevized. A mass effort to establish political, economic and social reforms was launched.Landlords, usurers and local militarists were liquidated Debts were canceled, deeds torn up, and land distributed amongst peasants and soldiers.

Fascinatingly, originally the Red Army was armed with traditional arms like pitchforks and spears. (Similar to Naxalbari Movement in India).”

“The 4th army went on to carry successful campaigns after the 4th Red army was formed in Chingkanshan.A soviet was established in Tongue where unity was built with local red troops. The existence of militant mass movements prior to the arrival of the Red Army assured their successs, and helped to consolidate Soviet power. The influence of the Red Army now extended, through the agrarian mass movements and partisans. A conference was held in Lucien in December 1929, which developed the plans for the future of the Red
Army. It paved the way for the creation of soviet in Kiangsi.Question of land policy was argued at length, an s well as the struggle against opportunism. The Kiangsi provisional Soviet govt was formed which was enthusiastically received by the peasants.”

In the later period it is worth recounting how the Chinese Red Army was victorious in the 5th campaign against Chiang Kai Shek.The Red Army retreated from Kiangsi so swiftly and secretly that the main forces of red troops, estimated at about 90,000 men, had already been marching for several days before the enemy headquarters was aware of what was happening. Partisans replaced the regular troops in Southern Kiangsi when practically the whole red army was constituted near Yutu, in Southern Kiangsi the order
was given for the Great Long March. Besides the army, thousands of red peasants, children, and women including non –communist elements joined the march….’

“By 1935 It is worth recounting the achievements of the Red Army formed ‘Soviet Society’. Land was confiscated from the officials big landlords, tax collectors Etc and the immediate demands of the poor peasantry was satisfied. he Reds not only created the economic base for support amongst the poor and landless peasantry by giving them farms but in some cases won the gratitude of the middle peasants, by abolishing tax exploitation. I n
some cases small landlords was won over to their side in the anti-Japanese movement. Both the landlord and rich peasant was allowed as much land as they could as long as they cultivated it with their own labour.In districts where there was no land scarcity, the lands of resident landlords and rich peasants was not confiscated, but the wasteland and land of absentee owners was distributed Poor farmers were given loans at very low rates of interest, Usury was abolished and several thousand agricultural implements made in the
Red Arsenals. Thousands of pounds of grain were supplied to landless peasants breaking wasteland. A primitive agricultural school was built, too. Co-operative farming was introduced Corruption was stopped, opium was eliminated that had been so predominant earlier, beggary and unemployment eliminated, foot binding abolished, child slavery abolished, prostitution banned, introduced divorce laws I, education made free and universal Etc.”

“The fact that the Reds had their base in the mass of the population was reflected in the fact that in all the older Soviet Districts the policing and guarding was done by the peasant organizations alone. There were few red Army garrisons in the Soviet Districts all the fighting strength of the army being kept I the Front. Local defense was carried out by the village defense corps, peasant guards and partisans The Intensive organization of the
peasantry created a rear guard and base which freed the Red Army to operate with extreme mobility for which it was noted… Wherever the Reds went they radically changed the situation of the tenant farmer, the poor farmer he middle farmer and all the have not elements .All forms of taxation were abolished in the new districts only a progressive single tax on land was collected .The Reds gave land to the land hungry peasants and also seized the land and livestock from the wealthy classes and re-distributed it to the
poor.”

“A structure was established within the Soviets. Each village elected its delegates to the higher Soviets clear up to the delegates elected for the Soviet Congress. Various committees were established under each of the district Soviets. An all powerful Committee, usually elected in a mass meeting shortly after the occupation of a district by the Red Army, and preceded by an intensified propaganda campaign, was the revolutionary Committee. It called for elections and re-elections, and closely cooperated
with the Communist Party.Commitees were formed in every branch organ of the Soviets, right up to the Central Government. The Communist Party had an extensive membership amongst farmers and workers and not only in the government. There was also an organization of Young Communist-The young vanguards and the Children’s brigades. Mass Organizations like Communist Youth Leagues, Etc were organized. Peasant guards were also incorporated into such an organized structure. The mass base of the soviet Movement was built upon the organization of workers and peasants Unions, with the
principal role in the hands of the peasantry.’

“The Chinese Communists never regarded land distribution as anything more than a phase in building a mass base. They ultimately aimed to establish a Socialist State In Fundamental Laws of the Chinese Soviet Republic; The first All-China-Soviet Congress in 1931 had written an established programme showing this. However the social, political and economic organization of the Red districts had always been a provisional affair and still the main task was to build a military and political base for the extension of revolution
on a wider and deeper scale, rather than try out Communism in China.” Collective production brigades were established Activities were carried out beyond production and distribution. Great areas could be quickly planted and harvested collectively. In ‘Saturday Brigades’ not only children’s organizations but every Soviet official, Red Partisan, Red Guard, omens organization members, and any Red Army detachment participated. An economic, cultural and political Unity was incorporated through this process

The mass line of the Red army is depicted by a red Devil. (members of the children’s or youth corpse) ‘Are there any landlords left here?
The Young comrade Hsiao Key replied, ‘No, no landlords. They have all run away and been killed by our Red Army’
This answer reflected how the masses felt that the Red Army was their own army.
During the Long March, often the peasantry sent groups to urge the reds to
detour and liberate their districts. The broad masses only understood it was
a poor man’s army and hardly understood the Red Army’s political
programme.The Red Army had destroyed land deeds, abolished taxes and armed
the poor peasantry.”

Posted in Kanhai Chaterjee, MCC | Leave a Comment »

PEOPLE RALLY TO MARTYRS FUNERALS

Posted by Indian Vanguard on September 17, 2007

January 1999

Of late, even as the police stepped up their operations to exterminate the peasant youth activists in rural Telengana, the people began to pour out into the streets in massive protests against the killings and arrests. Thousands of oppressed masses have taken part in the funeral processions of their beloved leaders, who have been killed either in cold blood after being arrested or in heroic battles with the state’s armed mercenaries. The massive out- pouring in the funerals is an expression of the love and affection the people have for their selfless and dedicated leaders, who dared to sacrifice their lives for the liberation of the masses from the oppressive and exploitative social system. They also point to the resolve of the masses to fulfill the cause of the martyrs. These, and the other massive protests against police terror, bury once for all the lies and myths spread by the ruling classes and their spokesmen – Chandrababu Naidus’ and Advanis, H G Doras and Aravind Raos and the new intellectual apologists of Indian “Democracy” like Balagopal – that the CPJ (M-L) [People’s War] has no support among the masses, that it is getting isolated form the masses due to its indiscriminate and excessive use of the gun, and so on. The following are a few examples of this growing involvement of the masses in claiming the corpses of the martyrs and holding processions.

On 17th March’ 1998, in Chityala area of Warangal Distt., Comrade Kandikonda Sudhakar was arrested and shot dead by the police based on a tip-off from an agent. Within no time the news spread like wild-fire in the entire area and 5,000 people from the neighbouring villages of Challagarige, Repakapalle, Jookal, Chityal, Kakdaplli etc., held a ‘Rasta Roko’ on the Chityala-Parkal Road. Two Slate Road Transport Corpn. buses were reduced to ashes. The demonstrators then went to Chityala Mandal centre 10 have a glimpse of the dead body of their beloved leader. When the police stopped them from proceeding towards the corpse, the people were enraged and thrashed the police. Particularly the women beat the S.I. and the police men with stones and chappals. Infuriated by the indiscriminate lathi-charge by the police, the people seized the lathis, beat back the police and took away the dead body of Comrade Sudhakar. They also beat up the MRO and the police who were conducting ‘Panchnama’ at the site of the murder.

After seizing the martyr’s dead body from the police, over 5,000 people went on a torch-light procession from Challagarige bus stand to his native. village of Muchnipati. Red flags and banner fluttred as slogans like “Comrade Sudhakar Amar Rahe!”, “All encounters are police murders” rent the air as the funeral procession went on from 9 in the night to 4 in the morning.

In Nizamabad, the very day after the martyrdom of Comrade Raji Reddy (Vinod), a member of the district Committee, and Comrade Janardhan, the commander of, Banswara central guerilla squad, in an armed confrontation with the police near Sangojipet village on 10th Oct. 1998, over three hundred people held a torchlight rally condemning the encounters in Muppenapalli village in Warangal distt. A public meeting was also held in the village. Torch-light rallies were taken out in Royyuru with 600 people, in Mullakatta and Rampur in Khammam distt. with 300 people led by the local guerilla squad; In Gurrivula, Laxmipuram, Devardula, Tupakulagudem, hundreds of people held rallies with torches blazing in their hands.

In Feb 1998 when the news of the martyrdom of Comrade Kumar Swami (Sudarshan) and Comrade Sammakica (Sri Latha) in Nerellavagu in Warangal distt. reached their native village Vodithala in Chityal, 2000 people from the surrounding villages of Jadallped, Kothapet, Bausingpalli, Gandhinagar, Pasigadda, Kothapalli, Nainpaka etc. took the corpses of their beloved leader, draped them in red cloth, and went on a procession carrying red flags and banners and doing wall writing all the way.

Police Terror Begets Mass Resistance.

After the annihilation of Maheswar Rao, a notorious class enemy of Melpally town in Karimnager district by the armed guerillas of People’s War, the police unleashed a reign of terror in the town and the neighbouring villages. The people, of course, did not take it lying down but put up resistance through various forms. For instance, when 13 youths from Jaggasagar village were arrested, about 1000 people, including a large number of women, surrounded the Police Station and held a sit-in finally securing the release of their Comrades from the hands of the police.

In Adilabad between April to July 1998, there has been mass people’s resistance to the reign of terror unleashed by the AP police and the para-military forces.

In Sirikonda village in Indravelli Mandal, when a peasant named Keshav Rao was arrested, tortured to death and the corpse was being taken away by the police in a bullock cart to be thrown out side the village, the people of the entire village surrounded the police station and resisted the police by resorting to stone-pelting. The demonstration and blockade of the police station went on for four hours upon which the DySP arrived with a big posse of police. Undeterred, the people surrounded the police car and demanded the suspension of the SI who was responsible for the murder of Keshav Rao and to pay compensation to the family of the deceased. When repeated threats by the police were of no avail, the DySP, seeing the mood of the people, had to bow to their demands and announced suspension of the SI.

In Boath area, the police had to release the arrested mass organisation activist in Kante village when the entire village people revolted. In Nigni village, the people prevented the police when they began arresting the youths indiscriminately.

In Kothapalli village, the police tried to take away an adivasi youth in the early hours but this attempt was foiled by the men and women of the village who surrounded the police with their traditional weapons like axes, knives, sticks, etc. Seeing the stubborn attitude of the people, the police were forced to free the arrested youth.

In Patnapur village also the people stopped the police from arresting a local youth, through their collective resistance. In Sirpelli village in Sarangapur Mandal, when the Banjara tribals stopped the police from taking away the local youth, two of the three were let off and one youth was taken away. He was held in police custody for three days and tortured but had to be finally released after the people once again put up collective resistance. In Ravindranagar village, the police who came in the guise of guerilla squad to gather information about the guerillas from the masses, had to beat a hasty retreat when the people began to attack them after seeing through their game.

In the wake of the annihilation of the president of the district Central Co-operative Bank in Nirmal by the People’s War guerillas – the police raided several villagcs in Sarangpur Mandal, indiscriminatly beating and torturing the people. The police had to give up their attempts to arrest few local youth when the people put up collective resistance.

In Valsapur village in Huzurabad area of Karimnagar, when the poor and landless peasants seized the lands of the landlords and began to till them, the police attacked them and arrested six persons. About two hundred people from the village went to the P.S. and organised a Dharna upon which another 15 were taken into custody.

On June 16,1998, when people of Rangapur village in Jagtyal area of Karimnagar were proceeding to a public meeting concerning “Separate Democratic Telengana”, 40 members were arrested by the police. When the news reached Rangapur, 120 people from the village demonstrated near the MPP President’s house and the PS. Some of them were released immediately while cases were filed on others.

Peasants March Ahead in the midst of White Terror

In the past two years the reactionary ruling classes have stepped up their white terror on the struggling peasantry in the vast rural tracts of Telengana and North East AP killing over 600, arresting thousands, molesting women, indiscreminately beating up people destroying houses and other property of the people. Agents are planted in the villages to collect informations regarding the movements of the guerilla squads and of those who are actively involved in the revolutionary activities. Armed mercenary squads are formed to attack and kill the activists and their kith and kin. But this reign of terror, which has further intensified after the khaki shorts came to power at the centre with the help of the World Bank’s lap(top) dog, Chandrababu Naidu of AP, failed to produce the results anticipated by them. Their attempts to decimate the People’s war and its underground mass organisation activists in the villages and thereby suppress the growing people’s movement by rendering the people leaderless, ended up in total fiasco.

In the midst of combing operations, covert operations, and a spate of encounters, the peasants came out into hundreds of struggles relating to land and livelihood apart from establishing their revolutionary organs of power in more and more villages all over the areas of armed struggle. Apart form land occupation struggle, struggles also broke out on other issues such as wages, remunerative prices for agricultural produce, against reduction in subsidies etc.

In Nizamabad district, between January and March 1998, 916 acres of the land of the landlords in 18 villages were seized and distributed to 540 families. Another 40 acres of fruit orchards, 20 acres of forest land were also distributed and three tractors and two sugarecane crushers were retained as the collective property of the concerned village.

On May 10,1998, 600 people occupied a 12 acre mango plantation belonging to landlord of Kotancha village in Warangal and distributed the mango crop among themselves. In the see-saw battle that has been going on between the people and the landlords, these lands had changed hands several times since 1990 when red flags were first planted by the people led by the RYL and RCS. The landlords tried to cultivate the land with the help of police protection amidst a spate of “encounters”. The entire people of the village again occupied the land after destroying the crops but could not till the land due to incessant police threats since 1995.

In Vallabhpur in Karimnagar district, 16 acres belonging to the village landlord were occupied by two hundred poor and landless peasants who collectively till the land with 20 ploughs. Among them were 60 women. A five-member ‘land struggle committee’ was also formed.

54 acres of land belonging to three landlords were distributed to poor and landless peasants in Rampur village in Warangal district. 2 acres were divided into residential plots arid were distributed to the homeless.

All these lands were actually occupied in 1990-91 but remained fallow in the past few years due to police threats. The landlords who fled the villages again surrendered to the people and agreed to part with their surplus lands.

On March 10, 1998, about 400 peasants belonging to seven villages around Metpally in Karimnagar marched to the town market and held a rally demanding remunerative prices for the turmeric crop. The traders in Korutla and Metpally market yards have been exploiting the peasantry by paying far less than the market price for the turmeric produce. All the traders having formed into a syndicate, have been carring out ruthless exploitation.

Several strikes of bonded labourers were organised demanding Rs. 13000/- as annual wages free medical assitance, two pairs of dress per year Rs 60000/- as compensation for the labourer who dies due to snake bite or any other reason a torch light three pairs of’ chappals and a blanket every year three days leave every month, stopping night time work, etc.

In Enugumantle village in Karimnagar, about 200 bonded labourers struck work for two days and organised a meeting. The landlord and the rich peasants who employ bonded labourers agreed to pay Rs. 12,000/- as annual wages, Rs. 30,000/- as compensation in case of accidental death. All other demands were also accepted. In several villages, after labourers went on strikes lasting from two to five days, the daily wages were increased form Rs.25/- to 35/- for men and Rs. 20/ to 30, for women. The struggles were led by the viplava Rytu Cooli Sangam (YRCS) and Mahila vimukti Sangam

(MVS) in Venkatraopet, Ranapur, Nagaram, Lingala, Rompikunta, Tenugupalli in Karimnagar district.

Famine raids were also organised due to the growing starvation and misery of the peasants due to drought. In the months of January-February, 1998, there were famine raids in eleven villages in Nizamabad districts in which 2,100 people participated and confiscated 1511 quintals of paddy and maize and other essented goods.

Collective Feasts among different Castes

Caste and religion have always been barriers to the unity of the oppressed masses in India. The ruling classes as well as imperialism have been using caste to divide the people and thereby perpetuate their rule smoothly. The caste question is not just an aspect of the superstructure but also forms part of the very production relations, i.e., the economic base of the society. Hence caste has deep roots and cannot be rooted out without waging a conscious and consistent struggle even in the areas of intense class struggle. Although significant changes are occuring in the rural areas where revolutionary movement is advancing such as disappearance of untouchability, open discrimination etc., caste prejudices still exist in the villages to a considerable extent. Even though the oppressed of all castes have been waging united struggle against the landlords on their common demands for years, even today inter-caste marriages and eating in each others houses among the dalits and the other castes is not a common feature. Specific programmes related to the caste question should be taken up in order to achieve further integration and slowly bring’ them out of the feudal and outdated caste ideology and prejudices.

As part of this collective feasts were organised in some villages in Warangal the months of Sept.-Oct. 1998. One such collective feast was organised in Peddapuram village in Parkal area of Warangal in Sept.1998. Three quintals of rice were cooked and 1300 people belonging to all castes dined collectively. In Akkanapet village, 800 people took part in the collective feast. The two bags or rice used for this purpose were collected from the rich peasants and the landlords. The dalits served the meals in both villages. Such programmes were taken up at a more modest level in scores of villages in Telengana in the past few months. The landlords and the vested interests are shaken by the unity that is being forged even culturally between the oppressed castes. They even tried to disrupt the collective feasts by provoking the police. In one of the villages the police arrived in two vans, threatened the people who were coming back from the collective feast, and arrested a few of them.

Posted in MARTYRS FUNERALS | Leave a Comment »

The private armies and the politics of ban

Posted by Indian Vanguard on September 17, 2007

In the late ’60s the lower caste peasants from Bihar drawing inspiration from Naxalism in West Bengal raised the banner of revolt against the traditional exploitation of the landlords. The upper caste landlords and intermediate castes formed many private armies. The Rajputs were the first among the upper castes to form the private armies, the Kuer Sena in 1969. The formation of Kuer Sena was followed by the Brahmarishi Sena of Bhumihars, Lorik Sena of Yadavs, and Bhoomi Sena of Koiris. [1]

The Bathani Tola massacre of July 11, 1996 was a turning point in the State’s troubled caste history. The Ranvir Sena men killed 21 Dalits.

In the intervening night of 1 and 2 December 1997, Ranvir Senas perpetrated Laxmanpur Bathe massacre in which 59 Dalits including 26 women and 19 were children under the age of 10 slaughtered.

In the Shanker Bigha massacre in Jehanabad on 25 June 1999, 23 Dalits were killed by suspected Ranvir Senas

On 10 February 1999, 12 Dalits were massacred at Narayanpur in Jehnabad. The Narayanpur massacre was a political landmark in Bihar’s rocky history. The National Democratic Alliance government dismissed the Rabri Devi government only to be reinstated later.

The Ranvir Senas have been reportedly involved in 33 massacre cases claiming over 280 lives. [2] Pregnant women and children appear to be the Ranvir Sena’s special targets, for it apparently views attacks on them as an easy means to check the increase in the Dalit population. [3] Four central Bihar districts of Jahanabad, Arwal, Gaya and Bhojpur, as well as Goh block of Paliganj and Paliganj block of Patna district bore the brunt of the Ranvir Sena.

The Ranvir Sena Chief Barmeshwar Singh, alias Mukhiaji, has been arrested and facing in a large number of criminal cases, which included those related to massacres. The state government opposed the bail application of Mr Singh before the Patna High Court in April 2006.

However, unlike the Peoples War (PW) neither the Central government nor state government of Bihar banned Ranvir Sena. The Centre declared the MCC and PW as “terrorist organisations” under section 18 of the Prevention of Terrorist Act, 2002 and under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 2004.

The Amir Das Commission was set up on December 27, 1997 to probe the alleged political links of the banned outfit of upper castes, Ranveer Sena, whose activists had reportedly butchered 61 Dalits at Laxmanpur Bathe on December 1, 1997. Until today, not a single report has been submitted. Instead of seeking the truth, Bihar government has disbanded the Commission after its term expired in the first week of April 2006.


[1] . Caste war in Bihar: Role of private armies, The Hindustan Times, available at http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/6253_150369,00160003.htm

[2] . Voters panic as Ranvir Sena chief joins fray, The Statesman, 24 February 2004

[3] . Caste war in Bihar: Role of private armies, The Hindustan Times, available at http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/6253_150369,00160003.htm

Posted in Ranvir Sena | Leave a Comment »

Central Bihar and land lord sena

Posted by Indian Vanguard on September 17, 2007

Private armies are an exclusive phenomenon of Bihar. It is often said that where social-democracy ends, revolutionary-democracy begins its journey. This most backward Indian State has proved to be a forward post of revolutionary democracy, with the lowest rung of the society being drawn into the vortex of peasant struggles. From blood-thirsty landlord-armies to trigger-happy paramilitary forces, protagonists of ?total revolution? to ?His Majesty?s Opposition?none could enforce the ?peace of the graveyard? on the flaming fields of Bihar and it seems none would be able to drive these unconventional actors to the backstage of historical action.

Emergence of the Senas

There are different opinions about the emergence of Senas in Bihar, which are as follows:

? Some consider that the Senas came into existence in response to the Naxalite terrorism.

? Some attribute the rise of Senas as, fallout of the green revolution. According to them the greater productivity could not remove the basic inequalities that existed between the landlords and the landless. The demand of fair distribution by the peasants led to the formation of Senas to suppress the landless labourers.

? Some others advocates that the adoption of the overt political participation i.e. a tactical shift by CPI(ML)-Liberation in 1989, left the field open for the emergence of various Senas in Bhojpur district of Bihar. The Liberation was operating underground from early 1970 to 1988. The Kisan Sangh, the Kisan Morcha and the Ganga Sena were smaller in size and operated in small areas. The Ranvir Sena became the most dreaded of all.

Causes

The Dalits and the poor peasants could no longer accept the existing oppressive feudal social system. The radical peasant organisations mobilised the aggrieved parties to fight for their dignity, freedom, proper wages and redistribution of land. The intolerance of the upper castes led to the formation of various Senas one after the other to resist the revolt of the poor.

Sena usually means an ?army?. However, in the semi-feudal social structure of Bihar, Sena refers to Caste-based private gangs. These are non-party socio-political formations, which are considered to be reactionary and counter-revolutionary by nature in the struggle waged by peasants. This phenomenon thrives on a strong nexus between the landlords, politicians, administration, criminals and contractors.

These Senas came into existence during the early 1980s. However, the historical records reveal that Senas have existed in the past too. The Rajputs were the first to form the Kuer Sena as early as 1979 in Bhojpur district of Bihar. The Bhumihars have formed about eight Senas in central Bihar. Except the Ranvir Sena, all other Senas stands eliminated in prolonged struggle waged by the radical peasant organisations.

Now there are two types of Private Armies in Bihar. First and the most common are the armies of the landlords. The landlords employ the musclemen to keep the peasants and the tenants in their place, and to ensure that taxes and rents are paid regularly. Second is the dominant caste Senas or private caste militias or armies, which have become a part of the agrarian struggles of Central Bihar. They are constituted mainly to repress and suppress the militant peasant organisations.

Profile of Major Senas in Bihar


Sunlight Sena

This was formed by the Muslim Pathan landlords of Garwah, Palamu and Gaya in alliance with the Rajput landlords of Palamu. It is still operative in the above mentioned areas. The armed squads of the MCC, Party Unity, and the Liberation have waged a relentless war against this Sena.

Bhoomi Sena

The rich Kurmis had formed the Kisan Suraksha Samiti in early 1980 and later converted it into the Bhoomi Sena. Some Kurmi landlords, bad gentry and professional criminals had taken initiative to form an armed gang. They accumulated a huge quantity of arms, recruited some Kurmi youths and launched a professional armed gang, named the Bhoomi Sena.

However, the Bhoomi Sena was dealt a heavy blow by CPI(ML) armed squads. Many of their leaders were executed. Their efforts to expand their activities to other parts of Patna and Gaya did not succeed either. In Jehanabd, they were given a serious blow by the armed squads of CPI(ML) (Party Unity). For all practical purposes, they are now confined to 7 to 8 villages of Poonpoon and Masaurhi blocks of Patna district, where, too, they are now in a process of retreat. Their disintegration has been hastened all the more by their internal bickerings. Their social base among the Kurmies has also become considerably weak.

Lorik Sena

This was formed by the upper backward caste Yadavas in 1983. The Lorik Sena appeared initially in Hilsa-Ekangarsarai blocks of Nalanda district. But soon it spread its activities to other parts of the district as well as to some villages of Ghosi block in Gaya and Dhanarua block in Patna. Ramashraya Singh is the brain behind this Sena.

Armed with guns and rifles, the Lorik Sena began its operations in the true traditions of Sena culture in Bihar. The Lorik Sena is named after one of the legendary heroes of the Yadava community who had fought against a tyrant Yadava landlord of his time along with the Dalit masses.

This gang in their killing and extortion spree did not spare Yadava either. Roving with guns and rifles, they would extort money from the Yadava peasants, and would even threaten them with dire consequences in case they refused to join the gang.

Thus, it did not take the Yadavas too long to realise that the Lorik Sena was more a liability than an asset. The Lorik Sena has got largly disintegrated in the areas where it has originally emerged, however, in many other parts of the central districts of Bihar, powerful Yadava gangs are nowadays sporting the Lorik Sena badge.

Ranvir Sena

Ranveer Sena is a private army of upper caste landlords mainly Bhumihars and Rajputs, which came into existence in August 1994 in Belaur, a village of 1,200 population, with the full backing of the middle caste and local level district administration. The main objective of the Sena has been to teach the Dalits a lesson and wipe out Naxalism. The forerunners of Ranveer Sena in Bhojpur were Brahmarshi Sena and Kuer Sena, which could not sustain for long. The formation of Ranveer Sena is indication of class polarisation from above. This is not solely an individual caste?s Sena as happened to be the case with other private Senas. The class aspect is fairly pronounced in Ranveer Sena?s support base and functioning. Bhumihar and Rajput caste people have never seen eye to eye and have a history of being mutual foes throughout Bihar. They first time joined hands to form Ranveer Sena. Further, it is the class interest, which goaded the ruling stratum of the middle castes to extend support to the Sena.

Brhameshwar Singh, on whose head there is a Rs. 5-lakh reward, is the supreme commander of the Ranvir Sena, which has a more than 400-member killer squad. The landlords finance the Sena through ?generous? subscriptions. Each member of the Sena squad is said to be drawing between Rs. 1,100 and Rs. 1,200 per month for work that involves shooting Dalit men, women and children.

Two years after its formation, the Ranvir sena in August 1996 slaughtered 10 Dalits at Tiskhora Village to mark its appearance in the flaming fields of central Bihar and subsequently drove all the Dalits from Belaur village.

The change of policy of the Liberation ? which had earlier proved catastrophic for the atrocious landlords in Bhojpur District in 1970s and `80s ? helped the Ranvir Sena to swell its ranks and expand further.

http://www.ipcs.org/newDatabaseIndex3.jsp?check=7&database=1005

Posted in Ranvir Sena | 3 Comments »

Books

Posted by Indian Vanguard on September 17, 2007

Telungu booklet: Salwajudam special

Salwa Judam a ‘New front of Hiden War’ The Inside story

Posted in Books | Leave a Comment »

STOP SALWA JUDUM!! STOP VIOLENCE IN DANTEWADA!!

Posted by Indian Vanguard on September 17, 2007

Since June 2005, the Government of Chhattisgarh, with the support of the Home Ministry has been waging a counter-insurgency operation against the Naxalites in the guise of a ‘spontaneous’, ‘selfinitiated’,’ peaceful’, ‘people’s movement’ named the Salwa Judum in Dantewada district of Chhattisgarh. The district administration claims that upset with the Maoist strike call on collecting tendu leaves and opposition to development works like road construction and grain levies, people in some 200 villages began mobilizing against the Maoists, going on processions and holding meetings.

However the fact is that the Salwa Judum is being actively supported by the Chhattisgarh Government. Far from being a peaceful campaign, Salwa Judum ‘activists’ are armed with guns, lathis, axes, bows and arrows. Up to January 2007, 4048 “Special Police Officers” (SPOs) had been appointed by the Government under the Chhattisgarh Police Regulations. They actively participate in the Salwa Judum and are given military and weapons training by the security forces as part of an official plan to create a civil vigilante structure parallel to that of the Naxalites.

Though exact figures are not known, over the last two years, atleast 1, 00,000 people have been displaced and the lives atleast 3, 00,000 people from the 644 “liberated villages” has been completely disrupted, because of Salwa Judum. People are forcibly picked up from their villages and are confined into ‘relief camps’, where they face acute shortage of food, water and other basic amenities. The condition of several thousands who have been forced to migrate to neighbouring states and districts is even worse. All those villages which have not come into camps are deemed “Maoists” villages and denied all health, education and other facilities, including access to markets. A large number of people have thus been denied their fundamental rights

There has been a complete breakdown of civil administration and the rule of law in Dantewada district and Salwa Judum ‘activists’ have become vigilantes who assert the right to control, intimidate and punish anyone they consider to be a suspected Naxalite. Cases of murder, loot, arson, rape and other violence and atrocities by Salwa Judum go unreported. The Government does not accept responsibility for the actions of the Salwa Judum ‘activists’, it sponsors, encourages, promotes and assures them full state protection and grants them impunity to operate as an extra-legal authority within the district. The Maoists also retaliate with attacks on camps, SPOs and police. According to State government’s own figures, Salwa Judum has only intensified the violence from both sides.

The Government’s only response to Maoist insurgency has been to militatrise; step up police operations and to pit civilians, in the name of Salwa Judum, against Maoists and against each other. By resorting to such measures, the government has seriously challenged the efficacy of democratic and constitutional means of finding solutions to people’s problems. It has completely failed to address the root of the discontent, the deprivation and alienation of Adivasis, which form basis of the Maoist foothold in Dantewara.
􀀀 :
We demand that the Chhattisgarh Government:

Disband and disarm Salwa Judum immediately
Stop appointing Special Police Officers
Stop recruiting children and adolescents below 18 years of age
Allow Adivasis to return home to their villages; wherever houses and property has been destroyed or
damaged, government should re-build them.
Stop harassment and allow free access to journalists, civil society organisations, and medical and education
workers to Dantewada.
Repeal the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act 2005
Create a conducive atmosphere for dialogue to find political resolution to political issues
Stop arrests, detention and false implication of Human rights activists, social workers etc and release all
such persons.
We demand that the Government of India:

Stop aiding and abetting Salwa Judum in the name of promoting “local resistance groups”.
Institute a high level independent enquiry into all acts of violence-rape, arson, loot, murder and
disappearances by Salwa Judum and paramilitary forces and initiate criminal proceedings.
Recognise the right to life and dignity of internally displaced people living outside Chhattisgarh and ensure
their safety
Create a conducive atmosphere for dialogue to find political resolution to political issues

We demand that the CPI (Maoist):
Stop all forms of violence
Create a conducive atmosphere for dialogue to find political resolution to political issues
Stop recruiting children and adolescents below 18 years of age
Allow safe return of villagers to their home including Salwa Judum supporters.

Appeal to Members of Parliament
Raise this issue in the Parliament and demand a Parliamentary debate on Ministry of Home Affairs policy of
promoting “local resistance groups” in general and Salwa Judum in particular. Institute Joint Parliamentary
Committee to investigate the role played by the state police, political parties and Ministry of Home Affairs in
creating the civil war situation

Appeal to all concerned citizens
Please visit Dantewara and assess the situation yourself.
Raise your voice against Salwa Judum and the flagrant human rights violation in Chhattisgarh wherever you are.

About CPJC:
The Campaign for Peace and Justice in Chhattisgarh is a campaign group formed by individuals and organisations
who are deeply concerned about the gross violation of human rights going on in Chhattisgarh in the name of
fighting ‘internal terrorism’. We are extremely concerned by the violence unleashed by the state backed Salwa
Judum which has pushed Chhattisgarh into a civil war situation and the repressive Chhattisgarh Special Public
Security Act, 2005 which is being used to crush all voices of dissent in the state.
_____________________________________________________________________ Campaign for Peace and Justice in Chhattisgarh, C/O F-10/12, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi Email:cpjcindia@gmail.com; Website: www.cpjc.wordpress.com Ph: 011-26680883

Posted in CPJC, Salwajudam | Leave a Comment »

AN APPEAL TO HONOURABLE CHIEF MINISTER OF CHATTISGARH INDIA

Posted by Indian Vanguard on September 17, 2007


Dear Sir ,

INDIA: Please order an investigation into the killing of eleven children and a youth in Nendra village in Chhattisgarh

Name of the victims:
1. Soyam Rama, aged 16 years – father’s name Dula
2. Soyam Raju, aged 2 years – father’s name Penta
3. Vajam Rama, aged 11 years – father’s name Ganga
4. Madakam Ramily, aged 5 years – father’s name Ganga
5. Madakam Buddaraiah, aged 14 years – father’s name Unga
6. Midiyam Nagaiah, aged 5 years – father’s name Bajari
7. Sodi Irma, aged 12 years – father’s name Yarma
8. Podium Adama, aged 7 years – father’s name Unga
9. Vetti Raju, aged 9 years – father’s name Masa
10. Madakam Ithe, aged 13 – father’s name Kessa
11. Soyam Raju, aged 12 years – father’s name Bheemulu
12. Mr. Soyam Nareya, aged 20 years – father’s name Tammaiah
[all are residents of Nendra village, Dantewada district in Chhattisgarh and belongs to the Scheduled Tribe of India]
Alleged perpetrators: Members of the Indian Reserve Battalion [Nagaland] stationed in Chhattisgargh and those attached to the Salwa Judum – Dantewada
Date and place of incident: March 13, 2007 at Nendra village, Dantewada district in Chhattisgarh

I am writing to request you to immediately take actions against those who were responsible for the massacre of eleven children in Nendra village, Dantewada district in Chhattisgarh. I am informed that on March 13, 2007 eleven children and a local youth was gunned down by the members of the Indian Reserve Battalion [Nagaland] stationed in Chhattisgarh and the members of the local faction of the Salwa Judum.

I am concerned that the villagers did not even complain about the incident since they have lost faith in the state administration. I am also concerned about the escalating violence in Chhattisgarh, which is fanning out of control. I have been informed that the state government has nearly failed in addressing the law and order situation in the state and is now increasingly resorting to promoting private armed militia groups in the state.

I therefore urge you to immediately intervene in this case so that a proper complaint is registered regarding the incident and the case is investigated and the perpetrators punished. I also urge you to make sure that the Chhattisgarh state government takes all necessary steps to regain the faith of the local communities in the state.

Towards this end the operation of Salwa Judum in the state must be immediately stopped and the state must declare and practice non-tolerance to violence used by the state as well as by the Naxalites.

The state administration must also ensure that the tribal communities staying in remote villages in the state are not forcefully evacuated and their resources are not allowed to be exploited indiscriminately.

I trust that you will take action in this case.

Your’s sincerely,

NAGARAJ.M.R.

Posted in Salwajudam | Leave a Comment »

Tackling the State forces and Ranvir Sena

Posted by Indian Vanguard on September 17, 2007

People’s March January 1999

(A tale of Resistance Struggle of the last two years in the planes of Central Bihar)

In Bihar, State has adopted from the beginning, two methods to crush the armed peasant resistance struggle:

First, by organising caste-based landlord-army and providing them administrative and political support and Second, by launching state repressive measures itself. In the beginning of the movement, the first aspect was primary and direct intervention of the state played a secondary role. Govt. launched repressive operations but they were time hound and confined to a limited area. The command and coordination of the police forces were not much centralised and organised. But after Arwal massacre in 1986, when the police opened fire on a peaceful mass meeting killing 23 and injuring dozens; the state came out in its true colour more openly before the struggling masses. After ’86, the state repression started taking a more organised and planned course. This began with the banning of MKSS a militant peasant organisation of Bihar. The initial response of the erestwhile CPI(ML) [Party Unity] was to launch mass resistance against the repression and preparing for armed resistance by : a) expanding the mass base vertically through mobilising middle peasants and other sections of people -in rural areas politically; b) expanding the base horizontally, i.e. expanding the area of resistance; and c) strengthening the party and the guerilla squads. Since 1992 the state offensive intensified and organised and the revolutionaries also began resisting militarily by attacking police forces and other govt. offices. Since then armed clashes between the state forces and the communist guerrillas became more frequent.

Since last three years revolutionaries are fighting the landlord army Ranvir Sena as well as the Bihar Police forces and Para-military forces. We shall, however, deal here with the resistance struggle of last two Years against the state forces and the Ranvir Sena. Ranvir Sena is a new phenomenon. We will deal with the resistance against the State repression and Ranvir Sena simultaneously.

Nov. 8,1998, CPI(ML)[PW]’s armed squads surrounded village Rampur (Karpi, Jehanabad) and annihilated seven active supporters of Ranvir Sena – the notorious landlord army of Central Bihar. Barely a kilometer west there is -a police picket at village Aiyara (Karpi) to protect the Ranvir Sena goons and there is another police picket about two kilometer South of Rampur at Imamganj Bazar. One section of armed squad engaged the Aiyara police picket in encounter, another section blocked the Imamgan-Rampur route and the rest punished Arjun Singh and other Ranvir goons who had killed three agricultural labourers, while they were working in their field, on July 25, 1988 at Rampur.

Emergence of Ranvir Sena.

Ranvir Sena, now, has earned a lot much disrepute because of the medieval barbarity it displays in its operations. It is a private ‘army’ of the landlords and reactionaries based on Bhumihar caste – politically and economically the most dominant caste in the Central Bihar and a good part of North Bihar. As the revolutionary peasant movement developed, the landlords and feudal reactionaries driven by the fear of losing their age-old authority in the countryside, took offensive -and formed various private armies. Not only the old type landlords belonging to caste-Hindus organised goons of their respective castes also followed them, sometimes with more- ferocity. In Bihar, the widespread culture of arms and strong cast feelings facilitated such armed formations on caste basis Govt., with all its might, encouraged and backed such landlords armies and the latter have their patrons in the ranks of their caste leaders in various bourgeois parties and also in the bureaucracy.

Thus, revolutionary peasant movement had to confront Bhumi Sena formed by landlords and reactionaries of Kurmi Caste, Lorik Sena of reactionaries belonging to Yadav caste, Kunwar Sena, Krishak Sevak Samaj and Sunlight Sena of landlords and reactionaries of Rajputs, Kisan Sangh of reactionaries of Kurmies, Yadavs and Bhumihars etc. The reactionaries and the landlords belonging to Bhumihar castes had also tried to organise a Sena earlier. Bhumihar landlords formed Brabmarshi Sena and Swam Liberation Front. But both these armed formations were not so well organised and could not survive due to people’s resistance and its own internal contradiction. Ranvir Sena was formed in Bhojpur by the end of 1994. Incidentally, it should be mentioned that almost all the major landlord armies in Central Bihar first developed in the area under the influence of Liberation group where the feudal and reactionary forces found a more congenial atmosphere and in the presence of a compromising and class-collaborationist policies of a ‘left’ force they developed faster. Thus, Bhoomi Sena and Kisan Sangh, the two-better organised armed gangs developed in that part of Patna district which is dominated by the Liberation group and Ranvir Sena developed in Bhojpur district, the socalled citadel of Liberation group. Bhojpur struggle, in the beginning, challenged the feudal and upper caste domination but later on as the revisionist leadership took a U-turn, the struggle was degenerated into that of mere wage and other partial social and economic issues. Land and arms – the two legs of landlords in Bihar – must be seized to cripple and ultimately smash the feudal authority. As long as these two continue to exist, they would work as the breeding ground for private armies. The other factors such as grip of certain caste army on bureaucracy and state body politics, caste feelings which encourage the middle and sometimes even poor peasants to join the caste army etc. add, in the main, flesh to the frame. Liberation group didn’t do this job -they didn’t launch arm seizure programme, and land seizure programme as a campaign. So, the breeding ground was always there. Moreover, the parliamentarism of Liberation group which gave rise to various class collaborationist policies, encouraged Ranvir Sena to continue with its killing spree.

Repression & resistance in the last two years

Ranvir Sena struck first at Sarthua (Bhojpur) on January 25, ’95 and killed 6 supporters of Liberation group. Till the end of January 19, ’97, within a span of two years, Ranvir Sena massacred more than 150 people at 13 places including Bathanitola of Barki-kharaun village in Sahar (Bhojpur) where 22 persons – mostly women and children were butchered – in the most barbaric manner.

For two years the Sena confined its operations in a few blocs of Bhojpur. By the end of ’96, it began to cross river Sone and tried to expand in Magadh – the stronghold of erstwhile CPI(ML)[Party Unity]. It first chose village Jalpura (Pali, Patna) at the bank of river Sone where landless and poor peasants have fighting since long for 700 acres of gair-mazurua land of river bank. People had won the struggles. The district administration, to divert the struggle intervened and distributed 300 beeghas of land among the landless. The landlords and reactionaries were then beginning to surrender. People were resisting the move of the administration and demanding for the distribution of entire land. In this period, precisely Ranvir Sena stepped into the village with the help of nearby reactionary dominated villages like Massourha, Kaab, Raghopur etc. They burnt the Sarkanda and on 28th Jan.’97 attacked the landless tola of Jalpura looting the property and forcing the landless to flee and leave the village. On Feb. 1, ’97 the armed squads of CPI(ML)[PU] attacked the supporters of Ranvir Sena who were forcibly cultivating a part of disputed 700 acres of land. Immediately after an encounter took place at about 11 a.m. between the armed guerilla squads and Ranvir Sena-police combine (a police picket has been in the village in the protection of the landlords). Soon reinforcement took place and almost 200 policemen joined the encounter. The encounter lasted for 7 hours in which 5 Ranvir Sena supporters and activists and one police were annihilated.

This was the first big blow to Ranvir Sena in Magadh in the very beginning. On 31st January 1997 in Jehanabad-Gaya border, 45 Kms. away from Jalpura, at village Machhil (Hariharpur Tola) of Makhdampur PS., another batch of Sena massacred 3 supporters of mass organisation, including the village secretary. On Feb.15, ’97, armed squads of PU annihilated 6 of Ranvir Sena at Turri where the assailants planned for massacre. In the month of March, 1997 Ranvir Sena struck again at village Haibaspur (Patna district) on 23rd, killing 10 dalit agricultural labourers and at village Akopur on 28th March ’97 (Arwal, Jehanabad) killing 3 agricultural labourers – supporters of Liberation group. On 10.04.97 police and Ranvir goons jointly massacred 7 poor people at Ekwari (sahar, Bhojpur). In retaliation to these massacres, squads of Party Unity attacked village Raghopur (Bikram), which is the village of BJP MLA Janardhan Sharma, one of the chief patrons of Ranvir Sena and smashed the house of MLA and annihilated 6 sympathizers of Ranvir Sena on April 20, ’97. As the squads were retreating, the police force ambushed them near village karnpura (Palli, Patna) on April 22, ’97. Squads immediately retaliated and a small police party fled. Squads burnt down the police jeep. But on April 23rd ’97, police attacked the village Indo. The squad stationing there retreated after an encounter, but another squad which had taken a shelter nearby, came to rescue the Indo squad and was trapped in the encirclement. In this encounter at village Indo (Massourhi) 6 comrades of a guerilla squad were killed including Corn. Lalit (Commander) and Corn. Brind (Deputy Commander). In protest people burnt down the railway stations Nadma and Chakand.

Meanwhile as the attacks of Ranvir Sena began in magadh, especially Patna and Jehanabad district the police repression also intensified. Raids, illegal arrests, looting people’s properties, spoiling cereals, beating and abusing, and fake encounters became a routine. For 12 March ’97 incident, police arrested 4 members of peasant mass organisation including village secretary Rustom Javed from village Tali, Jehanabad and beat them severely. They beat Corn. Rustam Javed to death in police custody. It evoked massive mass resistance in the form Bandh, road blockades and protest demonstrations.

On the eve of Arwal day 19th April ’97, police in civil dress alongwith a notorious police agent Sriniwas of village Rampur (Karpi, Jehanabad), who is now, also, Jehanabad district leader of Ranvir Sena, attacked a torchlight procession at Imamganj Bazar. They shot corn. Pawan Nat, a local activist of mass organisation and in retaliation people immediately shot the driver of the police jeep (who was in fact the driver of Jehanabad S.P.). Mass meeting at Jehanabad, scheduled on .19th April, 97 was foiled and leaders were arrested and severely beaten. On 18 May ’97 police killed a sympathizer 6f PU in fake encounter at village Dadpur (Ghoshi, Jehanabad) after an encounter between guerilla squads and the raiding police in which a constable was killed and two policemen were injured. Again on 24 May ’97 CRP forces tried to encircle and kill a guerrilla squad at village Azad Beegha (Bela, Gaya) in which the later retreated after four hours of encounter.

The fresh repression campaign unleashed by the police encouraged the attacks of Ranvir Sena on the struggling people. At many places they called on their caste bretheren to foil the economic blockade imposed by struggling masses on selected landlords and reactionaries. To foment the caste sentiments, they even killed an innocent shopkeeper belonging to Bhumihar caste, Jitendra Singh of village Rampur (Karpi) on 15th August ’97 and on 16th blocked the Jehanabad-Arwal road accusing Naxalites behind this murder. Immediately PU came with posters denying the charges and declaring a memorial meeting. The plot was exposed very soon. Then they tried to mobilise their caste men from Bhojpur and other places to break economic blockade at Aiyara (Karpi). It also failed as the police intervened to save its own face.

Meanwhile Ranvir Sena increased their movement in squads in PU’s area. One such armed band of goons encountered a guerilla squad in the fields of village Ankuri (Pali) in which five of their gunmen were killed in Sept.’97.

Observing increased police and Ranvir Sena’s repression Party called on the rank and file and the people to resist the state and the reactionaries both by mobilising masses and also militarily. Against the police-Ranvir nexus a massive mass mobilisation was sought at Ara – the centre of Ranvir goons – on Nov.11 ’97 on the eve of November Revolution celebration programmes. Police of Magadh region and Bhojpur made all efforts to prevent the meeting. They held 55 vehicles full of demonstrators near Dulhin Bazar (Patna), more than 18 vehicles at Arwal (Jehanabad), 20 vehicles at Kinzar (Jehanabad) and many vehicles elsewhere. As people protested at Dulhin Bazar, heavy lathi charge ensued injuring many men and women activists of organisation and peasant masses. Even a two year child was not spared. mikes, banners and flags were seized and destroyed. People resorted to stone throwing. At Arwal few activists were detained. However, at Ara 1000 people gathered and demonstrated on the roads shouting slogans against the Ranvir Sena and the police. In the mass meeting, Ranvir goons hurled four bombs and two granades which fortunately didn’t explode because of wet land and some technical faults. Police during all these happening remained a mute spectator. Resisting police atrocities during the course of this programme guerilla squad exploded the parts of Arwal bloc (Jehanabad) on Nov. 13.

Party Unity in August, 97 gave a call to seize the arms of the police and the reactionaries. For three months it became the main task. During these three months in Magadh alone more than 50 arms were seized from the police and the reactionaries. The campaign includes the raid on the Bishunganj police picket (under Makhdampur P.S. of Jehanabad) on Oct. 8 ’97. The squads pasted a poster after the raid which reads “This raid has been carried out with a view to disarm the repressive police forces which imposed an undeclared ban on mass movements and has launched a campaign of encountering of revolutionaries, bulldozing houses of activists and sympathizers, illegal arrest of struggling peasants, looting and seizing of property of villagers in the name of attachment of property.”

Similar raids also took place in Koel-Kaimur region (that is Palamau, Garhwa, Rohtas, Bhabhua, South Aurangabad, Lohardagga and Gumla districts). After one such successful raid at Kandi (Majhiaon, Garhwa), second raid was attempted at Dabara (Lesliganj, Palamau) on Nov.28, ’97. In this raid senior RCM of Magadh Corn. Promod alias Umesh Yadav (34), who was also in-charge of Sainya Sanchalan Team (SST) of Magadh, and Com. Ranjit alias Prayag Ram (25), an ACM and Commander of one of the Bishrampur squads became martyrs.

Baffled by the defeats at the hands of CPI(ML)[PU], Ranvir Sena planned a big massacre in desperation. Their aim was to terrorise the masses by displaying more barbarity and brutality. They chose village Bathe (Arwal, 3ehanabad) at the bank of river Sone. In the night of Dec. 1,’97, the marauders attacked Batan Beegha tola of Bathe and killed 58 persons including 32 women, 14 children and 8 old men. In one of the most barbaric acts they raped at least three pregnant women and killed even the babies of one and half to three years. As a rehearsal of this diabolical design, they massacred 6 poor peasants and agricultural labourers of Orani Tola – Mangabeegha (Karpi, Jehanabad) on Nov.22, ’97. Bathe massacre evoked nation-wide reaction and the democratic and progressive forces protested the killing and the police-Ranvir nexus. Outside Bihar at Delhi, Calcutta, Mumbai and Punjab, several protest marches, meetings and seminar were organised. In Bihar revolutionary and democratic forces formed “People’s Campaign Against Bathe Massacre” which organised a number of mass protest programmes.

As was expected, police launched a repression campaign against the masses in the name of averting any possible retaliatory Naxalite move against the Sena. Bihar Govt. demanded 50 companies of para-military forces and was provided 45 companies immediately. The aim of the police combing were:

i) The sensitive area, that is the area where Ranvir leaders and patrons were in target, should be free from Communist guerilla squads.

ii) Creating terror among the people by implicating them in false cases, beating men and women, destroying houses and properties etc., so that they may not give shelter to guerilla squads.

iii) Preventing mass protest programmes to augment terror and prevent the spread of resistance.

Administration set up police pickets at the houses of targeted Ranvir gang leaders. They guarded Sone bank for several days to ensure that guerrillas may not cross Sone and reach Bhojpur in big numbers. In a planned manner the police forces harassed the middle peasants of Bhumihar caste and left the big-fishes untouched to foment the caste sentiment. Govt. also tried to project it as a caste struggle.

Almost each and every village of Jehanabad district and blocs of contiguous Patna district were raided. On Jan. 6 ’98 they raided 45 villages in a day in Makhdampur bloc in search of guerilla squads. At many places the police forces exchanged fire among themselves in terror and projected those as encounters with Naxalites. On Dec. 27, ’97 during such raid in an encounter at Kodhiara (Pali) two squad members Corn. Bhtali Mazhi (27) and Corn. Pappu (21) became martyrs. In retaliation of this incident Ranti bloc (Jehanabad) was blown. According to an estimate more than 500 people were arrested within two months.

As the crop season came nearer, district administration tried to form ‘Peace Committees’ in village Aiyara-Rampur. Party called upon the people to boycott such ‘Peace Committees’. People in this area had a bitter experience regarding such ‘Peace Committees’. During Kansara struggle also, district administration formed ‘Peace Committees’ and reactionaries then could caught and massacred four bidi labourers (in 1986) who were uncareful and unprepared. People at Rampur, Aiyara boycotted such peace committees as they were designed to sabotage economic blockade. But a few agricultural labourers couldn’t understand the intrigue and believed the reactionaries. At Rampur the reactionaries called on three agricultural labourers to work in their field on July 25th ’98. As they were already in the ‘peace committee’ they believed the reactionaries. While working in the field, they were shot by the Ranvir goons.

Nov. 8 ’98; incident was a retaliatory action against this killing of three innocent agricultural labourers whose only fault was that they believed their enemies.

Ranvir Sena is the most organised and brute reactionary armed force which has been made during revolutionary resistance struggle. It is different from the earlier private armies like Bhoomi Sena, Sunlight Sena, Lorik Sena, Kisan Sangh etc. Some features of the Sena can be observed thus:

i) Sena’s grip on bureaucrats is much more than its predecessors. Not only a section of upper caste retired police officers and bureaucrats but also a good section of present bureaucrats and police officers are their sympathizers. Their caste men in various political parties are their patrons. BJP especially played an active role in organising and defending Ranvir Sena.

ii) They are better organised militarily and their gunmen are paid stipends.

iii) They begin their organisation secretly and even their second rank leadership and main hit-men don’t live in the countryside generally. They prefer dens in the towns and came to village when any operation is planned.

iv) Their main form of attack and the means to create terror is massacre. No private army adopted massacre as its primary form of oppression.

v) It is politically more matured as it is trying to pose the whole revolutionary movement as the struggle between the agricultural labourers and owner peasants. It has organised an open front in the name of ‘Rastravadi Kisan Mahasnagha’.

CPI(ML)[People’s War] (which has been formed after the merger of erstwhile CPI(ML) [People’s War] and erstwhile CPI(ML)[Party Unity]) has called upon the people to smash Ranvir Sena politically, militarily and economically. The Party has reaffirmed its conviction in the correctness of the twin tactics of selected enemies may include village level secretaries, presidents and active members of Ranvir Sena. It is necessary to expose the political leaders and parties who patronise the Sena and also bring them under attack when opportunity comes. The party has also taken measures to arm people who can defend themselves against possible Sena attacks. Party has called upon the people to expose police-Ranvir Sena nexus and attack this whenever they get chance. There is one argument which comes naturally after a massacre from the ranks and the people that this massacre should be answered by a similar massacre by the revolutionary forces. But this is a deviation. If the revolutionaries adopt this policy, they’ll not be able to polarise and isolate those ordinary owner peasants who have gone over to other side in the name of caste. It is basically because of this correct tactics of handling other private armies and also Raijvir Sena, that the CPI(ML)[PW] has able to prevent this struggle from degenerating into caste struggle. This is perceively why the Ranvir Sena has not been able to corner the support of the majority of their own cast men. But again in dealing with such caste armies one must understand the caste-class complexity in Bihar society. An ordinary owner peasant of upper caste is in socially dominant position and he may be very much interested in maintaining the existing social order. So, in such a situation he may take active part in ‘killing-spree’ of Sena. The revolutionary forces must take the’ steps carefully in such complex situation where caste and class are interpenetrating. The struggle against the Ranvir Sena or any other landlord’s armies is not just for better wages or gair-mazurua land, nor it is a caste struggle. It is a struggle between the two opposing forces in the countryside – the landlords and feudal reactionaries on one hand and the toiling masses on the other. It is a struggle for political, social and economical authority in the rural areas, launched by the agricultural labourers and poor and middle peasants. Unless and until the feudal authority is completely smashed and people’s authority is established, private armies, in one form or other, will continue to emerge.

As the armed resistance struggle is becoming stronger day by day, police repression is also intensifying. Police combing is being carried on with more intensity and bruteness. On Sept. 8 ’98 almost 500 police encircled a guerilla squad at village Bara (Karpi, Jehandbad). The encirclement had a radius of 3 Km. After a long encounter the squad retreated safely. Similarly at Pipardanha (Pali) on Oct. 8 ’98, the guerrillas successfully broke and came out of a similar encirclement. In a recent spurt of repression beginnings from Rampur incident and the annihilation of a Sub-inspector at Bhagwanganj (Massourhi, Patna), more than 50 sympathizers and activists of MKSP and PW were arrested. During raids the para-military forces are not sparing even the pedestrian and old persons. Mass programmes are banned in an undeclared manner. Meanwhile, in another daring action armed squads of PW blew the house of Kisan Sangh President Ram Dayal Yadav on August 20, ’98 and annihilated him along with his three henchmen. In another land struggle at Pathra (Wazirganj, Gaya) two comrades Pankaj alias Arun (Commander) and Prem alias Arun (Squad member) became martyrs.

Braving police repression and the onslaught of Ranvir Sena, CPI(ML)[People’s War] is, on the one hand, mobilising larger sections of peasantry on the question of land, agricultural development and against the imperialist exploitation in agriculture and trying to launch massive mass movements on these issues and, on the other hand, is strengthening the subjective forces, i.e., the party, the armed squads and various mass organisations to take on the state and the reactionary forces.

Posted in Ranvir Sena | Leave a Comment »

An Infirm Patient Gasps for Oxygen [A reply to CPI (ML) Red Flag]

Posted by Indian Vanguard on September 17, 2007


In the September ’98 issue of ‘Red Star’ (RS), in the article entitled “Let the doctor treat himself first” [A response to CPI (ML) PW’s criticism against CPI (ML) Red Flag] the author seeks to justify his party’s inconsistencies and its serious deviations to the right. It seeks to avoid clear-cut answers through obfuscation of the main issues involved.

The questions that arise from the reply are:

(i) Does the CPI (ML) Red Flag (henceforth referred to as RF) accept the strategy of area-wise seizure of power, through a protracted people’s war? If YES, how are its present tactics linked to that strategy ? If no, what is its strategy for seizure of power in this so-called phase of ‘neo-colonial capitalist development.’

(ii) Does it accept agrarian revolution as the axis of the new democratic revolution ? If not, how then is seizure of power to be achieved ? If YES, what steps is it taking to further this key task?

(iii) Clearly state what is the predominant mode of production within India today. If it is fast heading towards ‘capitalist development’ ( R.S. page 13, Sept. ’98), however ‘distorted or neo-colonial’ that may be, what is the implication of this so-called ‘qualitative CHANGE’ on the STRATEGY of Indian Revolution?

(iv) With a basically legal party organisation (including leadership) how does RF expect to intensify the class struggle in a country like India which has few democratic institutions or traditions ? Besides, how does it expect to face fascist forces, maintaining a legal existence?

(v) Can Bolshevisation of the Party be achieved independent of the intensification of the class struggle?

Having posed these questions, let us now take up some of the major issues raised by RS in its Sept.’98 issue:

(1) On Strategy and Tactics:


In the section entitled ‘On armed struggle’ (RS pages 19, 20) while pitting the earlier Telangana armed struggle against the present-day armed struggles, RS concludes that “though PW and some other organisations may continue to have dalams and their numbers may even increase, no real break-through is possible in leading the NDR to victory.” First, to pit an armed struggle of the past with that of the present is outright distortion – hailing one, while calling the other ‘sectarian.’ Second, to state that the present is bound to lead to failure, without suggesting any alternative for seizure of political power, is nothing but defeatist. Third, if the earlier armed struggles are really being hailed, how is the RF at least applying those principles to their present practice?

But, it is apparent that RF is not really serious about armed struggle. This is evident when, in a later paragraph, it says that the “present Indian situation is BASICALLY (emphasis ours) different form that of pre-1949 China. “If it is BASICALLY different, is RF questioning the very Chinese path of protracted people’s war? It would appear so! PW clearly states that in essence the Indian revolution will follow the Chinese path, and the differences that exist have been clearly outlined in the PW document ‘Strategy and Tactics’.

What then is the RF’s alternative to the present armed struggle ? It is a pathetic call “for a mighty ideological-political campaign to combat the counter-revolutionary imperialist offensive in all fields including socio-cultural fields to prepare the masses for revolution.” Such counterposing of mere propaganda activity to intensification of the class struggle is an indication of the depths of impotency to which the RF leadership has descended. Such propaganda has been going on for the past two decades. For how many more decades does the RF leadership plan to confine its party’s activity to primarily propaganda?

Propaganda against imperialism is of course imperative, but that cannot indefinitely remain the essence of a proletarian party’s activity. Besides, PW has been actively conducting such propaganda and ‘ideological and political campaigns’ against imperialism, while keeping the anti-feudal armed struggle as its central focus. The two need not be counterposed, as the RF is attempting to do. Let us look at some examples of PW’s anti-imperialist programmes.

To build the anti-imperialist consciousness, PW, every year, in all its areas, actively conducts August 15th and January 26th as ‘black days’…. and has held April 14th as Anti-Dunkel Day. Besides, it has conducted countrywide campaigns against the government’s liberalisation policies, the Dunkel IGATI’ offensive, the Gulf War, the Bhopal Union Carbide holocaust, etc. The mass organisations have held seminars against the imperialist/comprador inspired coal policy, education policy, destruction of the environment etc. On the cultural front, the mass organisations have been actively fighting imperialist culture, as in the joint activity against the Miss World contest and the campaign against cable TV in the guerilla zone area even successfully stopping Cable TV in

certain villages. North Telangana guerilla zone areas youth organisations have conducted wide campaigns against the MNC’s introduction of mini-cigarettes, and have even successfully banished it in some villages. Besides, at the local level numerous specific campaigns have been conducted, such as the Karnataka student’s campaign against Ford Foundation, the coal mine workers’ campaign against the new coal policy, etc.

So, for RF to make a fetish of anti-imperialist propaganda and to pit it against the anti-feudal armed struggles is merely a method to cover up its own passivity in furthering the class struggle. The reality is that the RF has no clear-cut strategy for the seizure of power and must therefore rest content with making banalities such as “learning from them ( i.e. other revolutions) and learning from the masses of people in our country, we have to make ourselves capable of seizing the political power and creating a New Democratic India.” For all the RF’s self-professed claims to theoretical purity, its fuzziness on basic questions of strategy and tactics are noteworthy.

(2) On Theory and Practice


The problem with the RF is that it confuses ‘Left’ rhetoric for ‘theory’ and then complains that the VG critique negates theory for pragmatism. Quite the contrary, the VG critique merely emphasises the importance of theory to be taken as a guide to action…. not for the sake of ‘Left’ sloganeering to dupe genuine cadre. For example RF’s claim to be inheritors of the CPI (ML) and Naxalbari, its praise for CM, its support to the Peru and Philippines revolutionary movements, etc. is in no way linked to either its present policies and practice, nor to its newly founded alliances with revisionists and counter-revolutionaries.

What is worse, it is manipulating ‘theory’ to provide a smoke screen for its own drift to the right, by attempting to club the genuine revolutionaries with the Lin Piaoists and spreading false rumours that PW is following the ‘foco theory’ in its armed struggle. Not once has it been shown in any article or practice wherein PW is basing itself on the ‘foco’ concept, yet RF persists in this slander.

Is the RF unaware of PW’s repeated emphasis on the mass line and the need to arouse the masses for armed struggle ? Are they unaware of the extensive mass mobilisation by the PW inspite of heavy repression ? Do the concepts of the PW to build the guerilla zone by establishing the organs of people’s power, establishing development committees, educational committees, justice committees and the village militias, fit in with the Cuban style ‘foco’ theory ? Does the existence of mass organisations of the peasants, workers, youth, women, students and the sweeping cultural movements, fit the ‘foco’ concept. Is the RF just ignorant of these facts or is it playing with ‘theory’?

(3) On United Front


RS makes contradictory statements (RS page 21) when it first accuses PW of being sectarian for not being part of their ‘slogan based joint movement’ with various revisionist formations, and in the very next breath accuses PW for incorrectly allying with rich peasant forces.

First let it be clear, that rich peasants form part of the New Democratic United Front, while revisionists do not. As Lenin said, revisionists are nothing but bourgeois agents within the working class movement – they are the enemies of revolution and the last refuge of reaction. For RF to ally with revisionists like CPI (ML) Liberation, CPI (ML) New Democracy, COI (ML) and MCPI in a so-called ‘slogan-based joint movement’ – which is defacto an anti-imperialist unity – only acts to diffuse any real anti-imperialist struggles. Revisionists of all hues, no matter what demagogic statements they may make, cannot play any significant anti-imperialist role. The MCPI, particularly, is notorious for its anti-people activities in Narsombet area in Warangel district. Its leader, Omkar, a No.1 class enemy in the area, had thrice survived the annihilation attempts by the guerillas of CPI(ML)f People’s War]. A front with such elements only acts as an effective safety valve for the dissipation of the anti-imperialist sentiments amongst the rank-and-file and masses under their influence.

It is one thing to have joint actions against imperialist targets – like say, Cargill; KFC, etc. – with all who are willing to participate, it is quite another matter to build a joint movement’ with revisionists. Issue based activities can and should be as broad as possible involving all who are willing to participate. But while building up United Front work, the aim should be to build the four class alliance, with the worker peasant alliance as its basis, specifically isolating all the enemies of revolution — particularly those that seek entry wearing a ‘Left’ mask. And, in the final analysis, the RF calls for a joint movement’ with Liberation-type outfits; the CPI (ML) Liberation calls for ‘Left-unity’ with the CPI(M) type ruling class parties; and the CPI (M) calls for ‘secular unity’ with the Congress (I) a cosy chain of unities, tying all to the status quo !

(4) On Revolution and Counter-revolution


The real problem with the RF in all its ‘Unity’ moves and joint movements’ is that it is not able to draw a clear line of demarcation between the revolutionary forces and the revisionists. This vision has got particularly blurred ever since it has changed it stand towards the CPI (ML) Liberation – first treating it as a revisionist organisation, now viewing it as part of the revolutionary camp, with merely a drift to the right.

As Mao said, it is imperative that the party of the proletariat be able to distinguish between Sian and Yenan….. i.e. between revolution and counter-revolution. Once this is done, the attitude towards each will differ. Towards the revolutionary (even with mistakes) it will be positive, and criticisms will be with a view to help and correct, while towards the revisionists the attitude will be quite different…..criticisms will here be with a view to expose and condemn. Such a difference in approach is not visible in RF’s present-day criticisms of PW and Liberation.

What is even worse, inspite of the CPI (ML) Liberation falling into the parliamentary path, supporting the erstwhile USSR, defending Deng’s China, etc., the RF claims that in essence the PW line and the Liberation line are the same…. just because Liberation also continues to nominally maintain that the contradiction between feudalism and the masses is principal. Does such polemics have any seriousness, when it is quite clear that the two parties are, in essence, poles apart? It is nothing but resorting to formal logic to distort reality …. like saying, a horse has four legs; a donkey has four legs, so a horse is equal to a donkey!

(5) On Principal Contradiction


Here, RS has resorted to a mechanical application of Mao’s philosophical concepts and also to distortion of the classics, in order to undermine the anti-feudal task in the Indian democratic revolution.

First, it states that PW is eclectic in its understanding by “its deletion of principal contradiction at the international level, while faithfully sticking to it at national level in its party programme. “And it further adds that the RF is more consistent by removing this concept at both international and national levels. Sounds very logical…. but pure logic has its limitations, specifically when it seeks to cover up the truth. For RS to compare the entity of the World Socialist Revolution with that of the Indian Revolution, is to confuse the issue. The World Socialist Revolution is an ensemble of separate revolutions in different countries, for which there may or may not be a ‘principal contradiction’; while the Indian revolution (or the revolution in any one country) is not an ensemble of separate anti-imperialist revolutions and anti-feudal revolutions, but a composite whole, wherein at different times one particular contradiction will be principal.

Next, for RS to state that, “the documents of the 1CM and the communist parties including the CPC till 1968, show that till that time the concept of principal contradiction was never put forward in any of them is downright dishonest. On the question of World Socialist Revolution, the CPC had never put forward the concept of a principal contradiction, but, at most, referred to the storm centres of world revolution. On the other hand, as regards the Chinese revolution, the CPC has always put forward the concept of a principal contradiction – generally being between feudalism and the masses of the Chinese people, which changed to that between Japanese imperialism and the Chinese nation, at the time of Japanese aggression.

The RF is resorting to bourgeois semantics to justify its removal of the clause that in the Indian revolution the principal contradiction is between feudalism and the masses of the people. If RF seeks to alter this basic content of the CPI (ML) programme, and the strategy and tactics based on it, it should openly say so, rather than resort to such subterfuge.

(6) On Neo-colonialism


The RF’s so-called ‘neo-colonial phase’ runs into two problems. First, is it a new stage of imperialism? Second, what then are the class relations within India ? Let us see what RS says.

On the first point they state (RS, Sept.’98, page 15), “The problem with PW like organisations is that they see changes as only arithmetic progressions. They refuse to see the qualitative changes that have taken place in the neo-colonial phase.” As quantitative (or arithmetical) change does not lead to the change in the nature of the entity itself and qualitative change does, the RF must explain what are the qualitative changes in imperialism that have taken place in this so-called ‘neo-colonial phase’. The PW definitely does not believe that the present developments have led to any qualitative changes in imperialism, but that the present neo-colonial policies have only accentuated all the aspects of imperialism as defined by Lenin. This is more clearly brought out in an article on ‘Finance Capital today’, which appears in this issue of the magazine.

On the second point, in RF’s neo-colonial thesis, it is not clear what the predominant mode of production is, within the country. Neo-colony, semi-colony, colony, etc 4efines the relationship between a backward country and the imperialists, it does not state what the class relations within the country are – whether they are feudal, semi-feudal or capitalist. On this point RF is consistently ambiguous. Firstly, it denies (RS page 13) that “semi-feudal relations are predominant “; it also denies that it is “predominantly capitalist”. So in the RF schema the predominant mode of production at present remains undefined, but predicts that it is fast changing “towards a distorted or neocolonial capitalist development”. In other words, for the present, the RF is unable to define the predominant mode of production in the country, and for the future it says, that is will soon be capitalist…. though that capitalism may be “distorted or neo-colonial” in character. This understanding has no relation whatsoever with that of the CPI (ML) 1970 programme and is closer to that of the dependency theories of Andre Gunder Frank, Samir Amin, etc.

Based on an analysis of the changing agrarian relations within India, and utilising Mao’s concepts and Lenin’s ‘Development of capitalism in Agriculture’ as a guideline, PW clearly sees the predominant mode of production in India as semi-feudal.

(7) On Political Line and Armed Struggle


There is a tendency for the RF to pit political line against armed struggle… and also mass line against armed struggle…. thereby negating the importance of armed struggle in India. And to give validity to this argument, the failure of numerous armed struggles are cited.

First, let it be clear that armed struggle per se is not the only basis to prove the communist credentials of any movement. In fact in most backward countries, due to the inhuman oppression and fascist brutalities, the oppressed are forced to take to violence to defend even their minimum democratic, civil and human rights. So, often armed struggles are launched not only by communists but also by the oppressed nationalities and various other democratic forces.

In India too, not only is the oppression and exploitation reaching unbearable limits, the brutalities of the state and fascist gangs, are forcing not only the revolutionaries to violence, but also the oppressed nationalities, the dalits, the minorities, the workers and the peasants. Today, for example even minimum trade union rights are being denied

– liberal TU leaders like Niyogi and Samant are openly murdered; the one-lakh strong coal miners union, SIKASA, is banned; and strikes in public sector units have ESMA clamped against them and their leaders arrested. In such a situation, where all peaceful forms of activity become increasingly meaningless, does not the undermining of armed struggle play into the hands of the ruling classes and fascist forces? It is an irony that ‘revolutionaries’ like RF tremble at the word ‘armed struggle’, while the fascist forces like the Shiv Sena, RSS, Bairang Dal are openly building up their quasi-military forces. The RF keeps talking of fighting the fascist forces – yet it refuses to prepare itself for the task. It is not even able to learn from past history of the anti-fascist movement during World War II; where communists militantly fought the fascists in the streets as well as through partisan warfare.

One wonders how the RF can face the growing fascist menace with its entire Party apparatus, including the entire leadership, remaining overground and without any preparations for waging armed struggle.

Like the revisionist parties of the Second International, is not the RF leadership commiting the criminal folly of making the party totally defenceless? Even to carry out its self acclaimed anti-imperialist campaign, can it rely on its existing legal setup? Does not the passive, reformist line it has been pursuing lead to a complete decimation of the perty in the face of fascist attacks (provided, of course, the ruling classes think you are a real threat)? We request the RF leadership to seriously ponder over these question.

Though armed struggle cannot per se be equated to communism, in a country like India can any serious communist undermine it ? Here, where armed struggle is on the agenda from the very beginning of the revolutionary movement, any serious communist party must either be leading it, or preparing for it. For the RF to delink the question of political line from that of armed struggle, or to pit one against the other, is bound to lead to all forms of revisionism and reformism. The political line determines the friends and enemies of revolution at a given time, the line of conduct of the proletarian party at that moment, the tactics to be followed, etc…. all within the general strategic plan of revolution. Armed struggle is very much a part of this, and is, infact, central to the implementation of the very political line itself.

In a country such as India, only those communist revolutionaries that are serious about armed struggle are of any significance for making revolution. Political differences may exist even amongst those parties and groups on questions of analysis of the national and international situation, or questions of organisation and tactics, etc…. but these can be resolved through discussion and debate in the course of advancement of the class struggle. But for those who are not serious about armed struggle, who are unable to take the class struggle forward, even discussions lack sincerity.

Finally, the RF must remember, that it was by Opposing revolutionary violence and armed struggle that the Khruschevite modern revisionists built their theories of three ‘peacefuls’. The question of revolutionary violence and armed struggle was then very much apolitical question. And so is it today.

(8) On Building an All-India Bolshevik Party


In order to prove PW’s ‘sectarianism’ RF cites the example of lack of unification between the three organisations leading armed struggles and states, “and even the last minute efforts for PW and PU unity also collapsed. “This is probably only wishful thinking on the part of the RF leadership who fear unification between the real revolutionary forces. On the contrary, the RF is itself facing severe splits within its own ranks, with a sizable section coming out of the party and forming another CPI (ML) faction and that too, after severe political and organisational criticisms on the RF leadership.

Of course, it is quite true, that amongst the M-L forces in India there has been much dogmatism and sectarianism, which has been a hurdle for rectification of errors and for unification. This should, no doubt, be corrected wherever it persists. But what has been a source of even greater danger, specifically during the last two decades, has been the proliferation of rightist groups…. all seeking validity in the name of attacking the dogmatism and sectarianism of the past. It is these that have caused greater harm in building a unified revolutionary CPI (ML).

Unite we must, into one all-India Bolshevik style party; but, as Lenin maintained, before we unite and in order to unite, clear lines of demarcation must be drawn between Marxism and revisionism. There must be unity not only on the question of programme, but also on questions of tactics and organisation. There must be unity not only on questions of theory, but also a common practice. The’-e must be a true spirit of democratic centralism in the uniting bodies, which supersedes all forms of bureaucracy, petti-bourgeois individualism and ego, or a mountain-stronghold mentality. Only then can the unity be lasting and advantageous for furthering the class struggle. PW, having learnt this from bitter experience, has taken all the above factors into account, rather than going in for any hasty unity moves…. and it is for this reason that the unification between the erstwhile PW and PU took a little time. It was for the same reasons, for want of commonalty on all the above issues, that unity with MCC has been temporarily stalled. No doubt, as both parties continue on the revolutionary path, unity will be achieved at some future date. Meanwhile, PW has a positive approach towards MCC and its movement, while struggling with it at the ideological and political plane.

But as far as the rightist M-L groups/parties are concerned, many of which have indefinitely postponed the question of armed struggle or even removed it from the agenda itself, unification is only possible after a thorough going rectification … which involves adopting not only correct strategy and tactics but also developing a correct practice and building a Boishevised party with professional revolutionaries as its core. If such organisations do not critically review their past, the genuine revolutionaries within them are bound to realise the futility of such bodies and rally behind the genuine revolutionary Party.

To take RF’s latest split. Not only has the breakaway faction accused the RF leadership of diverting the movement from the revolutionary path…. on a number of basic questions… but has also accused them of incorrect organisational methods. In a statement dated May 20, 1998, a CRC member (RF’s leadership body) has said: “When the party wants to change the cardinal aspects of the line it should come out with a document, circulate it among the rank and file and should finalise it after due discussion. There was no document on any of the cardinal questions raised in the beginning of this note ( i.e. Area-wise seizure of power, principal contradiction, armed struggle and peoples’ army, boycott of elections, concept of secret party organisation and nationality question) we got the understanding through the articles in Red Star and side talks during CRC meetings. Can a serious revolutionary party adopt such surreptitious methods?” It is obvious that, the infirm patient, while throwing wild accusations against PW and demanding that “the doctor treat himself first”, is itself gasping for oxygen in a bid to survive.

In a vast country like India, divided by numerous nationalities, languages, castes, religions etc.; building a homogenous all-India proletarian party is no easy task. This problem has been further compounded by decades of revisionism prior to Naxalbari and a quarter century of fragmentation in the post-Naxalbari period. It is only by further deepening the class struggle, successfully combating state repression, raising the ideological and political level of the entire party organisation, deepening our understanding of the concrete situation within India and of MLM Thought, and by strictly following democratic centralist principles of party organisation, with a modest and self-critical approach…. can a truly Bolshevised all-India party be built. The PW has merely taken a first step forward in this gigantic task.

Conclusion


In this reply we have taken some of the main points raised in the RS article. We have not repeated the points already mentioned in the May-June ’98 issue of Vanguard. Regarding some of the wild accusations hurled against us by the RS article we have not thought it fit to counter them, here, practice alone will prove who is correct and who is not. Regarding some of the errors within PW; the party has already done a detailed self-critical review and sought to rectify its shortcomings in both political and organisational matters.

The PW has never claimed to have solved all the complex questions of Indian revolution… this is an ongoing process of study and analysis…. but what it has done is to work out a basic international standpoint, a basic analysis of Indian society, a detailed strategy and tactics, a stand on the nationality question and a policy paper on caste and women. Besides, it has two detailed self-critical reviews -one, for the 1967-80 period, the other for the 1980-95 period. The PW has always been ready and eager to learn from others’ experiences, specifically those that have been able to successfully lead the class struggle forward, whether in India or abroad.

The PW has never claimed to have achieved a great strength, given the enormity 6f the Indian state; but what it has achieved, in some pockets of India, is one step beyond the earlier Telangana armed struggle (1948-51) in its ability to withstand the state and with a more developed military line and systematic growth of the organs of power. Of course, it still has a very long way to go…. after all, the Indian revolution is a protracted people’s war.

Criticisms from the RF, or any other source, are welcome if they help in furthering the armed struggle and rectifying genuine flaws ….as that will only help achieve the NDR quicker, and thereby alleviate the unbearable suffering of the vast masses in India. If the RF is at least serious in its anti-imperialist tasks, if not agrarian revolution, we hope that they will intensify the struggle against the pro-imperialist policies of the governments and the MNC onslaught.

— Tushar

Posted in CPI ML Redflag | Leave a Comment »