Sacrificing the commons

By Kuldeep Ratnoo
01 Jul 2010

Despite knowing well that violence will never help the poor tribals, many civil society activists continue to defend Maoist brutalities. Can they remain indifferent to the cries of those who lose their loved ones in a futile battle? At the same time, the government and the industry can not be allowed to marginalise and exploit the poor tribals.

Indians love to talk, extol, criticise and give extreme opinions on all and sundry issues. Their opinions could vary from astute to obtuse, and solemn to hilarious, depending less on their intellectual abilities and more on the relevance of the issue with their beliefs and self-interests. But very rarely one encounters the frivolity and gibberish that have clouded the debate and discourse on the marginalisation and exploitation of poor tribals in some states of India and the violent actions of Maoists on the pretext of avenging the alleged oppression by the industry and the government.

On one end of the spectrum are leftists of varied hues and views, whereas the market worshippers occupy the other end in this verbal warfare. Though miniscule in number, these fringe elements on both sides have access to powerful platforms to distract the public and shout down the reasonable queries. The voiceless citizen suffers silently the verbal junk dispensed liberally by these communist and capitalist extremists. Sadly, in their madness to defend their exploitative ideologies, they have no qualms in overtly espousing violence as a means of ensuring justice. Whether they call their actions 'green hunt' or 'red revolution', the casualty is always a commoner, either an innocent tribal or a poor jawan of police forces. The real perpetrators remain ensconced firmly in their safe heavens giving orders to the security forces or sponsoring lengthy essays to portray Maoist brutalities as noble actions.

As the battle in the heart of India gets bloodier, some pertinent questions deserve answers. As people's power is frequently being hijacked by money power, we need to know the role of a government in a democracy. Ignoring the advice of Mahatma Gandhi to keep the poorest of the poor in mind while making policies, our recent governments have begun to shower all resources at disposal on the richest and the mightiest. Revenues are important but should a government be worried about esnuring profits of corporates just because they pay large amount of taxes (or pay huge bribes to people who run and influence the government)? It is critical to ask who owns the natural resources of a country: people or government? Can we allow few politicians and officials to transfer ownership of the vast natural resources of the country to companies without consulting the people whose livelihoods are destroyed and lives get threatened by such myopic decisions? Development is needed but can we do a long term cost and benefit analysis of development projects in view of their effects on environment and people? Are revenues and investments more essential than health, safety and welfare of people? These and many other questions continue to be brushed aside by the beneficiaries of exploitative system, and therein lies the problem.
This is not the first time that citizens have to bear the cost of development programmes initiated by the rulers. However, miseries of people have multiplied in recent times because shedding all inhibitions the democratically elected governments have refused to acknowledge people’s concerns. If the affected people do not get justice from the government despite pleading and crying for years, what options they are left with? Do our democratic structures provide any hope to increasing number of displaced and deprived? From Dantewada to Delhi, the poorest of the poor bear the brunt of growth obsessed policy makers. But neither judiciary, nor press comes to their rescue except paying occasional lip service.

For Maoists and their sympathizers, continued exploitation of poor, mainly tribals, become good excuse to sanctify their violent struggle to capture political power. Instead of enquiring deeper, most left leaning intellectuals either rationalise or half-heartedly condemn Maoist violence. The reason for their hesitation is obvious. Almost all of them believe or try to make others believe that Maoists are deprived, marginalised and exploited tribals fighting against the greedy capitalists. The general impression is that land grab, displacement and spurt in mining activities have given rise to Maoism. There can not be anything far from the facts.
Many leftist revolutionaries who wanted India to accept communism as its policy of governance, began to criticise democracy and mobilise peasants in some areas of Andhra Pradesh within years of India gaining freedom from the British rule. Highly educated, globally connected upper caste Maoists have been preparing for armed revolution since 1950s. Even during Pandit Nehru's time, these radicals tried several times to instigate landless farmers against exploitative landlords in some parts of the country. After attack by China in 1962, Maoism began to take roots in few areas of West Bengal, not far from China. Though the violent Naxal movement was crushed ruthlessly by the then West Bengal government, the ideology and methods of Maoist militants fascinated few educated people and some splinter naxalite groups came into existence with covert financial, intellectual and logistic support from anti-India forces. These militant groups were committed to Maoism and had organised eight national Congresses by 1970.

The Maoists' violent struggle to overthrow democratic government and 'liberate the people from the clutches of imperialism, feudalism and the big comprador bourgeoisie' continued for decades, mainly in Andhra Pradesh and Bihar. These Maoists entered into forests of Chhattisgarh only when they were on the verge of elimination by Special Forces of Andhra Pradesh. No wonder, none of the top Maoist leaders is a tribal. All of them are high caste militants from Andhra Pradesh. They needed dense forests and poorly developed regions to regroup. Obviously, the Maoists, who have pushed thousands of poor tribals into death trap, deeply love their own lives. The forests of Dandkaranya provided them safety and shelter and the exploitative contractors working there shared their 'profits'. On one hand, the Maoists instigated the poor tribals, ignored and exploited for decades, against the corrupt officials and contractors; on the other they made deals with the same 'exploiters' to ensure their safety, security and smooth working. Soon, they began to collect 'security money' from the big corporates having business interests in forest areas and expanded their influence over a much larger region.

Though the Maoists claim to have established a system of governance beneficial to tribals in areas under their control, the facts speak otherwise. In the last few years of Maoist rule in the Bastar region, the condition of tribals has only worsened on almost all socio-economic indicators including education, health, income, safety etc. Obviously, Maoists are least interested in welfare, progress or empowerment of tribals. Poor adivasis are nothing but sacrificial lambs for their larger objective to grab power at Delhi. Unfortunately, the government and the greedy capitalists make their task easier by implementing policies that further marginalise the poor and downtrodden and make his life miserable.

First pushing people to the brink by implementing exploitative policies and then projecting certain individuals and groups as their only saviours is a silly strategy detrimental to the society and nation. Whether Kashmir, North East, Punjab or Chhattisgarh, playing with fire has only resulted in the country paying a heavy price but myopic, corrupt and self-obsessed politicians refuse to learn any lessons. Making political capital out of poverty, fear and insecurity remains their core strategy.
Human lives, whether of poor tribals or of obedient policemen, can not be allowed to be sacrificed by either ruthless Maoists or insensitive governments. The nation can not remain mute spectator to sacrifice of fellow citizens for evil intentions of vested interests. Enough blood has already been wasted in fruitless revolutions around the world and the Maoists know well theirs would not succeed either. Sooner or later, security forces of mighty India will crush their struggle. The only losers will be poor tribals and jawans forced to fight each other. The tragedy is that many civil society activists fail to see the futility of Maoist violence. Do they feel helpless or like politicians they too have begun to make capital out of poverty and violence?