Terrorist activities, seperatist/maoists/nexal moments, always take birth due to some serious weaknesses, discrimination, injustice & blind eye on the problems of certain people/ group of people/area of people by the state, Govt & the society. One can see the punjab problem, Sikim, Bihar, Urisa, Bengal ETC, Regards
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Walking with Comrades
- Thread starter bls31
- Start date
Maoists blast CRPF vehicle in Chhattisgarh, 6 killed
Support Naxals, face punishment
RAIPUR: Maoist blasted a Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) vehicle in Bijapur district in Chhattisgarh's Bastar region on Saturday, killing six troopers, a top police officer said.
Support Naxals, face punishment
Naxal Ideologies If Supported Could Lead To Severe PunishmentNew Delhi, May 6: The Centre today issued a public warning to social workers, artists and authors with whom it suspects Maoists are in touch and threatened them with arrest if they helped the banned rebels in their propaganda. {Names bolded in this article are the ones who will feel the heat directly, hence the squealing and frothing at the mouth from these anti-Indian retards.}
Human rights activists immediately saw in the warning a precursor to a large-scale countrywide crackdown on civil liberties outfits, writers, lawyers, academics and journalists.
The move is exceptional in that such a public warning through a media note has probably never been made even against fundamentalist outfits.
The press note, issued by the Union home ministry, described the Communist Party of India (Maoist) and its frontal organisations as terrorists “whose sole aim is armed overthrow of the Indian state and that they have no place in India’s parliamentary democracy”. The note warns the public against assuming that the Maoists are a political outfit and asks them to be treated like terrorists.
The public warning uses the same language that home minister P. Chidambaram used in his speech at Jawaharlal Nehru University on Wednesday night.
The warning was issued because, the note said, “it has come to the notice of the government that some Maoist leaders have been directly contacting certain NGOs/intellectuals to propagate their ideology and persuade them to take steps as would provide support to the CPI (Maoist) ideology”.
Lawyer Prashant Bhushan saw in the warning “a highly unusual step that clearly shows the intention of the government to try and browbeat and terrorise human rights activists and other intellectuals who have been questioning the motives and actions of the government in dealing with tribals and dissidents in the guise of an ant-Maoist drive”.
In the past two months, the Maoist point of view has found currency in mainstream media. Writer Arundhati Roy penned a long reportage/essay after travelling with Maoist guerrillas in which she said they nurtured a dream of a better country. A petitition was moved in Raipur asking for Roy’s arrest under Chhattisgarh’s public safety act, the law under which doctor Binayak Sen was incarcerated for about two years.
CPI (Maoist) spokesperson Azad gave a long interview to a newspaper and another Maoist leader spoke of how the rebels ambushed the CRPF in Dantewada on April 6, killing 76 troopers.
The media note said that the CPI(Maoist) and its frontal outfits are banned under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967. The intellectuals and the general public were being asked “to be extremelyvigilant of the propaganda of CPI(Maoist) and not unwittingly become a victim of such propaganda”.
A suspect could be jailed for up to 10 years under the law, it said.
Activist Gautam Navlakha of the Peoples Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR) said the warning from the government harks back to the years ofthe emergency. “In two months, it is going to be 35 years of the Emergency (imposed by Indira Gandhi from 1975-1977) and UPA-II is defacto recreating the conditions of that period,” he said.
“Instead of exploring more sensible and imaginative policies to deal with the Maoists and the tribals who live in the same zones where huge mining deals have been signed, the government is taking recourse to authoritarian and dictatorial measures,” he said.
The home ministry said “CPI (Maoist) continues to kill innocent civilians, including tribals, in cold blood and destroy crucial infrastructure like roads, culverts, school buildings, gram panchayat buildings, etc so as to prevent development from reaching these under-developed areas”.
The Centre has warned all non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and civil society members that they will be liable to severe punishment if found backing the Naxals in any way.
This warning comes with respect to the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, according to which the state can punish anyone who is found getting together with a forbidden organization and can even face up to 10 years of imprisonment. Under Section 39 of UAPA, the guilty would also be imposed with heavy fine if found helping t he extremists.
It has been quoted by the home ministry, "It has come to the notice of the government that some Maoist leaders have been directly contacting certain NGOs and intellectuals to propagate their ideology and persuade them to take steps, which would provide support to the CPI (Maoist) ideology. This is being issued in public interest so that the general public is aware that the CPI (Maoist) and all its formations and front organizations are terrorist organizations whose sole aim is armed overthrow of the Indian state and that they have no place in India's parliamentary democracy."
Last edited:
Violation of fundamental rights
Violation of fundamental rights by the "democratic" governments in India in not something new. The exploitation of power was largely started by the emergency rule and has been faithfully kept till date by the current government. Be it telephone tapping, suppressing opposition parties (which are fundamental to democracy) by misusing CBI and enacting laws as above.
The most surprising thing is that the governments is ignoring the report of panel appointed by itself –it’s annoying that people still call it as a “democratic government”
FOR THE RECORD E N RAMMOHAN
We cannot overcome Maoists by sheer force alone
Just days ago,E N Rammohan,former director-general of BSF,submitted his report on the Dantewada massacre,which left 76 security personnel dead.The home ministry had asked Rammohan,a 1965-batch IPS officer of the Assam cadre,to conduct an inquiry into the incident.He spoke to Rakhi Chakrabarty about the flaws in the ongoing anti-insurgency operations,which are badly hit by revelations that police and other securitymen have been selling arms to the rebels.Excerpts:
How effective is the Central and state forces joint operation against the Maoists
The whole approach is wrong.Joint operation is not the only answer to this problem.It is a socioeconomic issue for which a military solution is unacceptable.I was amazed when a senior IAS officer recently said that the Air Force should be used to exterminate them.How can you kill your own people An operation should be conducted to set right the wrongs of 1,000 years.A case in point is Andhra Pradesh (AP),which controlled the Maoist problem by effective policing.When they cracked down,the Maoists fled to Chhattisgarh,Orissa and Maharashtra.In reality,AP didnt solve the problem.They only put a lid on it.It is again raising its head in that state.
But the Maoists are on a killing spree.How else to deal with this
The paramilitary force can be deployed only to contain the problem and prevent it from spreading.During insurgency,the security forces reclaim land from the stranglehold of insurgents and then concentrate on area domination.The force must behave well with villagers,help them say,by sending a doctor once a week to treat locals.That will win the confidence of the people,who will,in turn,come out to help the security forces.People joined the Maoists because they were the first ones to come to tribals who have been deprived and exploited for ages and offer them some hope.Why cant the government go to the people and address their grievances
So what should be the strategy to deal with the Maoist problem
The government wants to solve the problem but doesnt want to touch the net of corruption.So,joint operations are resorted to.I am told the spin-offs from sale of tendu leaves in Chhattisgarh and AP reaches right up to Delhi.
Give tribals their due and conduct joint operations to prevent the spread of the problem both should go hand in hand.The thrust should be on eliminating the root cause of the Maoist problem.Enforce land sealing,enact laws that ensure tribals get maximum benefit from forest produce and mining,cut out intermediaries and stamp out corruption.That is the only cure for the problem.If the government can do that,those who joined the Maoists will drop arms and surrender.After all,Maoists are exploiting their grievances and using them to achieve their ultimate goal capture State power.
What then is the root cause of the problem
Its not just bad governance but exploitation by upper castes who are big landowners in most states.Caste is a very important cause that has allowed the Maoists to strike roots and spread.In most places in India,four-fifths of the people work for just one-fifth of the population.In AP,for instance,upper caste landlords have been exploiting the masses for ages.Especially in Telangana and Srikakulam,this is most evident.There is a practice in these areas where a man had to offer his bride to the landlord first.There are numerous ballads that lament,There is no hope for our women.
Complete article at : http://lite.epaper.timesofindia.com...=Delhi&articleid=Ar02000&format=&publabel=TOI
Violation of fundamental rights by the "democratic" governments in India in not something new. The exploitation of power was largely started by the emergency rule and has been faithfully kept till date by the current government. Be it telephone tapping, suppressing opposition parties (which are fundamental to democracy) by misusing CBI and enacting laws as above.
The most surprising thing is that the governments is ignoring the report of panel appointed by itself –it’s annoying that people still call it as a “democratic government”
FOR THE RECORD E N RAMMOHAN
We cannot overcome Maoists by sheer force alone
Just days ago,E N Rammohan,former director-general of BSF,submitted his report on the Dantewada massacre,which left 76 security personnel dead.The home ministry had asked Rammohan,a 1965-batch IPS officer of the Assam cadre,to conduct an inquiry into the incident.He spoke to Rakhi Chakrabarty about the flaws in the ongoing anti-insurgency operations,which are badly hit by revelations that police and other securitymen have been selling arms to the rebels.Excerpts:
How effective is the Central and state forces joint operation against the Maoists
The whole approach is wrong.Joint operation is not the only answer to this problem.It is a socioeconomic issue for which a military solution is unacceptable.I was amazed when a senior IAS officer recently said that the Air Force should be used to exterminate them.How can you kill your own people An operation should be conducted to set right the wrongs of 1,000 years.A case in point is Andhra Pradesh (AP),which controlled the Maoist problem by effective policing.When they cracked down,the Maoists fled to Chhattisgarh,Orissa and Maharashtra.In reality,AP didnt solve the problem.They only put a lid on it.It is again raising its head in that state.
But the Maoists are on a killing spree.How else to deal with this
The paramilitary force can be deployed only to contain the problem and prevent it from spreading.During insurgency,the security forces reclaim land from the stranglehold of insurgents and then concentrate on area domination.The force must behave well with villagers,help them say,by sending a doctor once a week to treat locals.That will win the confidence of the people,who will,in turn,come out to help the security forces.People joined the Maoists because they were the first ones to come to tribals who have been deprived and exploited for ages and offer them some hope.Why cant the government go to the people and address their grievances
So what should be the strategy to deal with the Maoist problem
The government wants to solve the problem but doesnt want to touch the net of corruption.So,joint operations are resorted to.I am told the spin-offs from sale of tendu leaves in Chhattisgarh and AP reaches right up to Delhi.
Give tribals their due and conduct joint operations to prevent the spread of the problem both should go hand in hand.The thrust should be on eliminating the root cause of the Maoist problem.Enforce land sealing,enact laws that ensure tribals get maximum benefit from forest produce and mining,cut out intermediaries and stamp out corruption.That is the only cure for the problem.If the government can do that,those who joined the Maoists will drop arms and surrender.After all,Maoists are exploiting their grievances and using them to achieve their ultimate goal capture State power.
What then is the root cause of the problem
Its not just bad governance but exploitation by upper castes who are big landowners in most states.Caste is a very important cause that has allowed the Maoists to strike roots and spread.In most places in India,four-fifths of the people work for just one-fifth of the population.In AP,for instance,upper caste landlords have been exploiting the masses for ages.Especially in Telangana and Srikakulam,this is most evident.There is a practice in these areas where a man had to offer his bride to the landlord first.There are numerous ballads that lament,There is no hope for our women.
Complete article at : http://lite.epaper.timesofindia.com...=Delhi&articleid=Ar02000&format=&publabel=TOI
Can't believe this, surely you are not saying that fundamental rights of citizens and terrorists (& their sympathizers) are one and the same.Violation of fundamental rights
Rather than indulging in too clever by halfness, it would be helpful if one could tell others, in detail, on how is the government 'ignoring the report of panel appointed by itself?' The clever by half part is, instead of posting the inquiry report (or news related to it), one posts Mr Rammohan's interview, which has no remote connection with the Dantewada Naxal attack inquiry report, and tries to pass it off as summation of the inquiry report. This, grasping at straws, is more pitiable than laughable and shows desperation that has set in.governments is ignoring the report of panel appointed by itself
EN Rammohan submits inquiry report on Dantewada Naxal attack
The one-man inquiry committee, which probed the killing of 76 security personnel by Maoists in Chhattisgarh, is believed to have blamed leadership failure for the worst-ever Naxalite attack on security forces.
Former BSF chief EN Rammohan, who submitted the report to home minister P Chidambaram, is also understood to have blamed lack of coordination among CRPF and state police forces during and after the attack on April 6, sources said.
samarkadian
Active member
Lungiwalla home minister chherred and peed in such a way that his mind now pleading naxalites for peace talks. A weak and indecisive representation in any form of governance is dangerous and Lungiwalla shamelessly keeps on changing his own statements and stand. Naxals do not have air force but more determination unlike our inbreeded home minister.
brahmtewatia
Active member
if a dialogue is started by the govt, what's wrong in it ?
could you please elaborate as to how this is a weak representation by lungiwala ?... also elaborate how this representation is indecisive nd dangerous ?
within the confines of a banana democracy nd our corrupt bureaucracy, imo, he is doing a reasonably well job. or is it very exemplary nd fashionable to scorn every damn politician.
... would appreciate your further elaboration for my enlightenment, you see m very brahmit these dayz. honestly, i've been too much involved on khap issue, nd haven't got a chance to go through the terrain of naxalite dominated areas, off recently nd the news thereof.
could you please elaborate as to how this is a weak representation by lungiwala ?... also elaborate how this representation is indecisive nd dangerous ?
within the confines of a banana democracy nd our corrupt bureaucracy, imo, he is doing a reasonably well job. or is it very exemplary nd fashionable to scorn every damn politician.
... would appreciate your further elaboration for my enlightenment, you see m very brahmit these dayz. honestly, i've been too much involved on khap issue, nd haven't got a chance to go through the terrain of naxalite dominated areas, off recently nd the news thereof.
Samarkadian said:Lungiwalla home minister chherred and peed in such a way that his mind now pleading naxalites for peace talks. A weak and indecisive representation in any form of governance is dangerous and Lungiwalla shamelessly keeps on changing his own statements and stand. Naxals do not have air force but more determination unlike our inbreeded home minister.
samarkadian
Active member
if a dialogue is started by the govt, what's wrong in it ?
could you please elaborate as to how this is a weak representation by lungiwala ?... also elaborate how this representation is indecisive nd dangerous ?
within the confines of a banana democracy nd our corrupt bureaucracy, imo, he is doing a reasonably well job. or is it very exemplary nd fashionable to scorn every damn politician.
... would appreciate your further elaboration for my enlightenment, you see m very brahmit these dayz. honestly, i've been too much involved on khap issue, nd haven't got a chance to go through the terrain of naxalite dominated areas, off recently nd the news thereof.
Okay, good questions.
He is the number 2 administrator of the country after PM and carrying responsiblities of the national security and a subtle loose stand on critical issues is enough to criticise him.
Have a look at his official statements dated 28 Jan 2010, 5th April 2010, 15th April 2010 and 18th May 2010. From Jan to May he went weaker and indecisive gradually in statements and actions from not at all stopping the operation against naxalites to pleading them to talk to which naxalites responded by discarding the offer of truce. He bowed to the naxalites unlike his Januray statement. His stands and ideas has proven dangerous for the lives of soldiers and localites.
He may be doing a great job as per your standards but sometime have a look at the families and dependents of soldiers, people killed. I voted for him and I hold the right to scorn him irrespective of fashionable trend.
Last edited:
brahmtewatia
Active member
you know the bureaucracy nd how it works... keeping that in mind i dont think that a 5 decade problem can be sorted out by one single guy nd within one single shot or by waving a magic band. this frankenstein monster was created by successive govts nd their inability to address the issue.
the massacre of indian soldiers is condemnable in strongest words. my heart-felt sympathies to all those, who suffered.
why suffrerd ?
cos of the laxity of various successive govts nd their failure (or even attempt) to address the issue for whatsoever reasons. if your heart goes for those families, so does mine. but my heart also goes for those families who have suffered deprivation nd humiliation for ages.
for rest, i've already addressed the issue in neutral terms vide my (>>> post no # 22) earlier. hope something positive comes out (seemingly, not an easy task) of lungiwala's recent overtures.
the massacre of indian soldiers is condemnable in strongest words. my heart-felt sympathies to all those, who suffered.
why suffrerd ?
cos of the laxity of various successive govts nd their failure (or even attempt) to address the issue for whatsoever reasons. if your heart goes for those families, so does mine. but my heart also goes for those families who have suffered deprivation nd humiliation for ages.
for rest, i've already addressed the issue in neutral terms vide my (>>> post no # 22) earlier. hope something positive comes out (seemingly, not an easy task) of lungiwala's recent overtures.
Samarkadian said:Okay, good questions.
He is the number 2 administrator of the country after PM and carrying responsiblities of the national security and a subtle loose stand on critical issues is enough to criticise him.
Have a look at his official statements dated 28 Jan 2010, 5th April 2010, 15th April 2010 and 18th May 2010. From Jan to May he went weaker and indecisive gradually in statements and actions from not at all stopping the operation against naxalites to pleading them to talk to which naxalites responded by discarding the offer of truce. He bowed to the naxalites unlike his Januray statement. His stands and ideas has proven dangerous for the lives of soldiers and localites.
He may be doing a great job as per your standards but sometime have a look at the families and dependents of soldiers, people killed. I voted for him and I hold the right to scorn him irrespective of fashionable trend.
Perhaps this can better sum up the stand of our responsible leaders on Naxalism
http://blogs.hindustantimes.com/dabs-and-jabs/tag/blasts/
http://blogs.hindustantimes.com/dabs-and-jabs/tag/blasts/
Lungiwalla home minister chherred and peed in such a way that his mind now pleading naxalites for peace talks. A weak and indecisive representation in any form of governance is dangerous and Lungiwalla shamelessly keeps on changing his own statements and stand. Naxals do not have air force but more determination unlike our inbreeded home minister.
Samar- This is in really bad taste. Is your objection that the home minister wears a lungi? What has his attire got to do with his actions?
On the actions themselves, he is one of the better home ministers India has had. Your objection seems to be that he is changing his strategy from purely military one to military cum dialogue one. Firstly, change of strategy taking into account fresh information/conditions in any field (business, warzone, diplomacy, etc.) is not a sign of weakness. Even armies retreat strategically and it'd be ridiculous to say they have chhered or peed. Secondly, as far as I know, he was always clear that the govt. is open to talk to anyone who is willing to lay down arms. But Maoists can't keep a gun on our heads and then talk. Thirdly, he doesn't take decisions unilaterally. It is not a secret that he wants a tougher approach on Maoists, but has to finally execute the approach decided collectively by the Cabinet Committee of Security that is dilly-dallying due to influence of leftist intelligentsia.
Maoists are not Tribals!!
Going through the thread, I saw quite a lot of chest-beating about TRIBALS and their exploitation by the corrupt state and the big businesses. The same is used as a valid justification for the violence of MAOISTS. The first thing to understand is that Maoists are not tribals. If your heart beats loudly for tribals, it is very good, but please don't make it beat for Maoists who are exploiting the tribals for their own political agenda.
The following article is an excellent write up on this and a must-read.
http://pragmatic.nationalinterest.in/2010/04/27/maoists-are-not-tribals/
Some excerpts:
The debate about Maoists in the public space is shrill and noisy and those opposing Government of India’s security offensive against the Maoists resort to subterfuge in their arguments. They interchangeably use the words Maoists and Tribals in their language. This is how it usually works. A question about the brutality of the Maoists is often retorted with a counter-question about the brutality of the State towards the tribals [and not Maoists, please note]. Or the state is demonised for its failure to do anything substantive for the tribals in the last sixty years, thereby suggesting that the tribals [are they Maoists?] have been eventually forced to take up arms against the State.
The Maoist leadership is completely non-tribal while a fair share of foot-soldiers in the movement are tribals....For the leaders, it is true, protracted war was the strategy all along, it was not a matter of self-defence. But for the bulk of the tribal cadre that joined it, taking up guns was a response to experiences of horrific state violence, and motivated by self-defence and/or revenge. There is a short-term overlap between their aim of fighting against state oppression and the leadership’s aim of overthrowing the state, but the longer-term goals diverge sharply.
Maoists are a politico-terrorist organization with DECLARED aim of overthrowing the Indian state through violent revolution. They get their funding and training from not-so-friendly-to-India powers. We have an example in Nepal of how the "spontaneous people's reaction to state atrocities" turns out to be a planned attack on the state to usurp total control. And it is too late by then.
The same article has excerpts of an interview by an ex-Maoist leader of tribal origin. To all those who are quoting the likes of Arundhati Roy (Very good writer- I loved God of Small Things- with a very screwed up mind. You tell me an issue and I can predict with 100% precision what her stand is going to be, as her stand is pre-determined as anti-establishment, whatever the facts or merits of the case are), this is from someone who has been there and done that:
Q: Do you think Maoists are saviours of tribals in Bengal, Jharkhand?
A: This impression about the Maoists was painted by some city-bred intellectuals like Arundhati Roy. Media-savvy that he is, Kishenji has instantly taken the cue and uses every opportunity to say that he is leading a just war on behalf of “poor and deprived tribals” and that he is the Messiah.
Maoists have summed up their outlook on tribal issues in their document “Strategy and Tactics of CPI (Maoist)”. Para 3 of this document begins with a general statement that tribals are being exploited by various agencies. The impression given is that Maoists would save them from such exploitation. But I want to ask Kishenji a simple question. Why do his men collect a levy of Rs 20 and 3 kg rice from every such poor and deprived tribal household at gun point in that case ? I know thousands of poor tribal families who are not in a position to meet Kishenji’s demands, but have to cough up the money out of sheer fright.
Q: Why did you quit the party again?
A: When the MCC and PWG united to form CPI(Maoist), the party produced an 18-page, 24-point agenda for the upliftment of Adivasis, dealing with the preservation and enhancement of our language, culture and education. There was no mention of class struggle. Since 2003, I started realising that we were moving away from the agenda, and told the party to stick to the original charter. When I kept insisting, the party began avoiding and sidelining me. They said that they would not go back to a communitarian line. In 2005, the party officially disowned its original Adivasi agenda.
Going through the thread, I saw quite a lot of chest-beating about TRIBALS and their exploitation by the corrupt state and the big businesses. The same is used as a valid justification for the violence of MAOISTS. The first thing to understand is that Maoists are not tribals. If your heart beats loudly for tribals, it is very good, but please don't make it beat for Maoists who are exploiting the tribals for their own political agenda.
The following article is an excellent write up on this and a must-read.
http://pragmatic.nationalinterest.in/2010/04/27/maoists-are-not-tribals/
Some excerpts:
The debate about Maoists in the public space is shrill and noisy and those opposing Government of India’s security offensive against the Maoists resort to subterfuge in their arguments. They interchangeably use the words Maoists and Tribals in their language. This is how it usually works. A question about the brutality of the Maoists is often retorted with a counter-question about the brutality of the State towards the tribals [and not Maoists, please note]. Or the state is demonised for its failure to do anything substantive for the tribals in the last sixty years, thereby suggesting that the tribals [are they Maoists?] have been eventually forced to take up arms against the State.
The Maoist leadership is completely non-tribal while a fair share of foot-soldiers in the movement are tribals....For the leaders, it is true, protracted war was the strategy all along, it was not a matter of self-defence. But for the bulk of the tribal cadre that joined it, taking up guns was a response to experiences of horrific state violence, and motivated by self-defence and/or revenge. There is a short-term overlap between their aim of fighting against state oppression and the leadership’s aim of overthrowing the state, but the longer-term goals diverge sharply.
Maoists are a politico-terrorist organization with DECLARED aim of overthrowing the Indian state through violent revolution. They get their funding and training from not-so-friendly-to-India powers. We have an example in Nepal of how the "spontaneous people's reaction to state atrocities" turns out to be a planned attack on the state to usurp total control. And it is too late by then.
The same article has excerpts of an interview by an ex-Maoist leader of tribal origin. To all those who are quoting the likes of Arundhati Roy (Very good writer- I loved God of Small Things- with a very screwed up mind. You tell me an issue and I can predict with 100% precision what her stand is going to be, as her stand is pre-determined as anti-establishment, whatever the facts or merits of the case are), this is from someone who has been there and done that:
Q: Do you think Maoists are saviours of tribals in Bengal, Jharkhand?
A: This impression about the Maoists was painted by some city-bred intellectuals like Arundhati Roy. Media-savvy that he is, Kishenji has instantly taken the cue and uses every opportunity to say that he is leading a just war on behalf of “poor and deprived tribals” and that he is the Messiah.
Maoists have summed up their outlook on tribal issues in their document “Strategy and Tactics of CPI (Maoist)”. Para 3 of this document begins with a general statement that tribals are being exploited by various agencies. The impression given is that Maoists would save them from such exploitation. But I want to ask Kishenji a simple question. Why do his men collect a levy of Rs 20 and 3 kg rice from every such poor and deprived tribal household at gun point in that case ? I know thousands of poor tribal families who are not in a position to meet Kishenji’s demands, but have to cough up the money out of sheer fright.
Q: Why did you quit the party again?
A: When the MCC and PWG united to form CPI(Maoist), the party produced an 18-page, 24-point agenda for the upliftment of Adivasis, dealing with the preservation and enhancement of our language, culture and education. There was no mention of class struggle. Since 2003, I started realising that we were moving away from the agenda, and told the party to stick to the original charter. When I kept insisting, the party began avoiding and sidelining me. They said that they would not go back to a communitarian line. In 2005, the party officially disowned its original Adivasi agenda.
Certainly all Moasist are not tribals. But initially all Naxalis were tribals. There are 3 terms used in India on this issue Tribals, Maosist and Naxalis. Though different origin now Maosist and Naxalis are almost synonym. Or you can say Indian Maosist are called Naxalis. Naxalis were mostly those tribals who were frustrated and believed/believe in violent struggle against state and upper class. Many had tried to take political advantage of this and hence you can see many parties were formed after this. People are still trying to take political gains from it. But the problem is Naxalis are also helping the tribals like giving them food or whatever and in some areas they have wide support of tribals. Thats the problem. Their big support from tribals is the main problem.
Now Govt has to convince tribals and work toward their betterment thats the only way they can overcome this problem. This aspect of the problem was largely ignored and we were only thinking abour countering the voilence.
See below how the govt is divided and they dont have a clear vision.
NEW DELHI: Congress general secretary Digvijay Singh, who triggered a controversy when he attacked home minister P Chidambaram for using force to deal with Naxalites, said the Red extremists could not be called enemies of the country.
"No one can defend their criminal activities. But they are not terrorists. They are those people who have committed acts of crime which have to be dealt with firmly and decisively. But at the same time, you cannot equate them with cross-border terrorists," Singh said in a TV interview.
"Can't say enemies. No," the Congress general secretary said, preferring to call the extremists "misguided ideologues". Singh condemned the violence by Maoists, their theory of armed struggle, and their objective to overthrow India's political system, saying it was "totally unacceptable".
But his remarks pointed to his continued divergence with the government's stand on danger posed by Left-extremism and how to deal with it. On Tuesday, Chidambaram had equated Maoists' threat with insurgency and cross-border terrorism, calling them the three most serious secrurity threats.
Earlier this week, home secretary G K Pillai had warned intellectuals and rights activists collaborating with Naxalites of severe punishment under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. In his interview, Singh regretted calling Chidambaram "rigid" and "intellectually arrogant", but welcomed what he called a re-think in the government on the strategy towards Naxalites. "I am very happy that the prime minister and the home minister have accepted that you can't send the Army, you can't send Air Force and we cannot defeat them militarily."
The Congress general secretary claimed the PM agreed with him that there had to be a multi-pronged strategy, saying there was a perceptible change in thinking now (on tackling Maoists) with most MPs agreeing with the holistic approach.
P.S. Different people have different opinion on this issue. I agree that we need to tackle the voilence but the problem will not disappear just by controlling voilence it will resurface again and again unless the root cause is addressed.
If home minister is willing to talk to them than i think thats a very good step but he keep on changing his stand. The Govt needs to make a clear stand on this and adress it on both fronts. Social and Voilence. Certainly they are not like cross border terrorist but if they do join them or become like them than God knows what will happen but certainly it would be very bad.
Also this is my understading which again could be wrong.
****************************************************************************************
Now Govt has to convince tribals and work toward their betterment thats the only way they can overcome this problem. This aspect of the problem was largely ignored and we were only thinking abour countering the voilence.
See below how the govt is divided and they dont have a clear vision.
NEW DELHI: Congress general secretary Digvijay Singh, who triggered a controversy when he attacked home minister P Chidambaram for using force to deal with Naxalites, said the Red extremists could not be called enemies of the country.
"No one can defend their criminal activities. But they are not terrorists. They are those people who have committed acts of crime which have to be dealt with firmly and decisively. But at the same time, you cannot equate them with cross-border terrorists," Singh said in a TV interview.
"Can't say enemies. No," the Congress general secretary said, preferring to call the extremists "misguided ideologues". Singh condemned the violence by Maoists, their theory of armed struggle, and their objective to overthrow India's political system, saying it was "totally unacceptable".
But his remarks pointed to his continued divergence with the government's stand on danger posed by Left-extremism and how to deal with it. On Tuesday, Chidambaram had equated Maoists' threat with insurgency and cross-border terrorism, calling them the three most serious secrurity threats.
Earlier this week, home secretary G K Pillai had warned intellectuals and rights activists collaborating with Naxalites of severe punishment under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. In his interview, Singh regretted calling Chidambaram "rigid" and "intellectually arrogant", but welcomed what he called a re-think in the government on the strategy towards Naxalites. "I am very happy that the prime minister and the home minister have accepted that you can't send the Army, you can't send Air Force and we cannot defeat them militarily."
The Congress general secretary claimed the PM agreed with him that there had to be a multi-pronged strategy, saying there was a perceptible change in thinking now (on tackling Maoists) with most MPs agreeing with the holistic approach.
P.S. Different people have different opinion on this issue. I agree that we need to tackle the voilence but the problem will not disappear just by controlling voilence it will resurface again and again unless the root cause is addressed.
If home minister is willing to talk to them than i think thats a very good step but he keep on changing his stand. The Govt needs to make a clear stand on this and adress it on both fronts. Social and Voilence. Certainly they are not like cross border terrorist but if they do join them or become like them than God knows what will happen but certainly it would be very bad.
Also this is my understading which again could be wrong.
****************************************************************************************
Certainly all Moasist are not tribals. But initially all Naxalis were tribals. There are 3 terms used in India on this issue Tribals, Maosist and Naxalis. Though different origin now Maosist and Naxalis are almost synonym. Or you can say Indian Maosist are called Naxalis. Naxalis were mostly those tribals who were frustrated and believed/believe in violent struggle against state and upper class. Many had tried to take political advantage of this and hence you can see many parties were formed after this. People are still trying to take political gains from it. But the problem is Naxalis are also helping the tribals like giving them food or whatever and in some areas they have wide support of tribals. Thats the problem. Their big support from tribals is the main problem.
No, all Naxalis were not tribals. Naxal word comes from Naxalbari, which is village close to Darjeeling in Bengal. The village shot into prominence in 1967 because of a violent peasant uprising organized and led by Kanu Sanyal and Charu Majumdar. Who were these guys? They were not native tribals or peasants. They were prominent Communists, who broke away from CPI(Marxist) to form CPI(Marxist-Leninist), inspired by the recent revolution by Mao Zedong in China. These parties and leaders didn't come up after the movement, rather the movement came up because of them. Also, their so called movement attracted hundreds of elites who were attracted by the idea of "total revolution". These non-tribals provided the leadership then as they are providing now. They belong to the same upper class that they declare as the chief enemy in the struggle of proletriat against bourgeoisie. Tribals are mere guinea pigs, who are either swayed by the Maoist propaganda or coerced into following it. If you are a tribal and living in the affected area, it is not really a democratic choice you have to support Maoists or not. It is a plain "You are either with us or against us" ideology. If you don't give them food, then you are dead. This is no different from terrorism where one has no choice but to follow the diktats of terrorists in order to survive. Of course, the abysmal development in tribal areas makes the situation ripe for Maoists' anti-national and anti-social activities. But that doesn't justify those activities! There would obviously be tribals who are attracted by the Maoist agenda and the power that flows from the barrel of a gun, as famously said by none other than Mao himself. Just like there were youth in Kashmir/Punjab who got sucked into militancy because of a combination of their own joblessness and attraction of power.
The connection with China is also not one that can be ignored. It was the radical faction of CPI consisting of likes of Charu Mazumdar and Kanu Sanyal that supported China during Indo-China war. China on the other hand, hailed the Naxalbari movement and supported it full throttle. Just like it supports the Maoists today, though not so overtly. Maoists aim is not to bring development or joy to Tribals' life. Why do they blow up schools, bridges, rails and stall any developmental work? It is because they benefit from the misery of Tribals. Their aim (and it is not a secret, it is declared and espoused with pride) is to overthrow the Indian state through violent armed struggle. Tribals are just a tool to achieve the same.
What Digvijay Singh is saying or doing is a different issue altogether. He must have a political interest in opposing a hardline approach and showing some soft corner towards Maoists. Maybe he could have got a reality check on differences between terrorists and criminals if these guys came knocking on his door. Enjoying the privileges of state sponsored security, he can afford to underplay the security threat and drive political milage out of it.
No, all Naxalis were not tribals.
Hi Mate,
To be precise the below is what I meant by this.
In a remote village called Naxalbari in West Bengal, a tribal youth named Bimal Kissan, having obtained a judicial order, went to plough his land on 2 March 1967. The local landlords attacked him with the help of their goons. Tribal people of the area retaliated and started forcefully recapturing their lands. What followed was a rebellion, which left one police sub inspector and nine tribals dead. Within a short span of about two months, this incident acquired great visibility and tremendous support from cross sections of Communist revolutionaries belonging to the state units of the CPI (M) in West Bengal, Bihar, Orissa, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Uttar Pradesh and Jammu and Kashmir.
Is this correct ?
The connection with China is also not one that can be ignored. It was the radical faction of CPI consisting of likes of Charu Mazumdar and Kanu Sanyal that supported China during Indo-China war. China on the other hand, hailed the Naxalbari movement and supported it full throttle. Just like it supports the Maoists today, though not so overtly. Maoists aim is not to bring development or joy to Tribals' life. Why do they blow up schools, bridges, rails and stall any developmental work? It is because they benefit from the misery of Tribals. Their aim (and it is not a secret, it is declared and espoused with pride) is to overthrow the Indian state through violent armed struggle. Tribals are just a tool to achieve the same.
What Digvijay Singh is saying or doing is a different issue altogether. He must have a political interest in opposing a hardline approach and showing some soft corner towards Maoists. Maybe he could have got a reality check on differences between terrorists and criminals if these guys came knocking on his door. Enjoying the privileges of state sponsored security, he can afford to underplay the security threat and drive political milage out of it.
What u are saying is right but there is another aspect as well. As said below:
Human rights activists are right when they criticize the government of atrocities.The defunct police force have no guts to confront heavily trained and armed Naxal carders head-on but to show their valour they pick up village youths and deal with them brutally. This has been the policing pattern over a decade now and these kind of actions have made Police the villain and Naxals very popular among them.They just do not like Police and state officials.
Half the naxal problem would be over if government put its house in order. For that the corruption has to be removed and that is something beyond the control of any government. Rajiv Gandhi knew about the extent of corruption, Rahul Gandhi knows as well but nothing has been done in that regard so far.
No matter what measures government resort to address the problem, the whole exercise would prove futile unless corruption is weeded out from the system. The ominous sign for the government is that the naxasls have been able to spread their influence beyond the Jungle as well and the situation is bound to worsen further.
What Arvind said at the very start is right according to me' fight need to be started against corruption '.
Couldn’t the Govt find a better way to tackle the problem? I still don’t understand why the Govt couldn’t capture Veerapan for so many years. Was our police and Army so incompetant or was the Govt getting enough money from the smuggler.
FOR THE RECORD E N RAMMOHAN
We cannot overcome Maoists by sheer force alone
Just days ago,E N Rammohan,former director-general of BSF,submitted his report on the Dantewada massacre,which left 76 security personnel dead.The home ministry had asked Rammohan,a 1965-batch IPS officer of the Assam cadre,to conduct an inquiry into the incident.He spoke to Rakhi Chakrabarty about the flaws in the ongoing anti-insurgency operations,which are badly hit by revelations that police and other securitymen have been selling arms to the rebels.Excerpts:
Actually somehow I missed post # 103. This summarise things in a better way. This guy had been there and obviously know more than me.
Last edited:
samarkadian
Active member
Samar- This is in really bad taste. Is your objection that the home minister wears a lungi? What has his attire got to do with his actions?
On the actions themselves, he is one of the better home ministers India has had. Your objection seems to be that he is changing his strategy from purely military one to military cum dialogue one. Firstly, change of strategy taking into account fresh information/conditions in any field (business, warzone, diplomacy, etc.) is not a sign of weakness. Even armies retreat strategically and it'd be ridiculous to say they have chhered or peed. Secondly, as far as I know, he was always clear that the govt. is open to talk to anyone who is willing to lay down arms. But Maoists can't keep a gun on our heads and then talk. Thirdly, he doesn't take decisions unilaterally. It is not a secret that he wants a tougher approach on Maoists, but has to finally execute the approach decided collectively by the Cabinet Committee of Security that is dilly-dallying due to influence of leftist intelligentsia.
Yes Kapil that was purely intentional to insult him as much as possible. Agree on strategy point but when and how would he implement those pious strategies? Opposition is in full support at national security issues but his strategies are continously are getting blown up? That is also evident. Is he intentionaly changing his stands to confuse Maoists? If it is true then he must head UN peace troops.
Isn't it ridiculous that the head of paramilitary troops is incapable in handling the burning issue .? Why wouldn't it stirr a reaction from public?
To talk with terrorists is overlauved strategy.
What is there to talk about? Is there really anything to talk about?
Last edited:
History of Naxalism :
http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/nm2/History-of-Naxalism/225549/Article1-6545.aspx
Charu Majumdar reference archive
http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mazumdar/index.htm
http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/nm2/History-of-Naxalism/225549/Article1-6545.aspx
Charu Majumdar reference archive
http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mazumdar/index.htm
Last edited:
brahmtewatia
Active member
you got no idea what you are talking !... but will walk the talk, just for the heck of it.
dont want eyjafjallajokul volcano to erupt again. so, would rather stay away from this nonsense.
dont want eyjafjallajokul volcano to erupt again. so, would rather stay away from this nonsense.
Samarkadian said:Yes Kapil that was purely intentional to insult him as much as possible. Agree on strategy point but when and how would he implement those pious strategies? Opposition is in full support at national security issues but his strategies are continously are getting blown up? That is also evident. Is he intentionaly changing his stands to confuse Maoists?... ROFLMAO !!! you are right, maoists are morons who will be confused by lungiwala's strategy. If it is true then he must head UN peace troops.
Isn't it ridiculous that the head of paramilitary troops is incapable in handling the burning issue .? Why wouldn't it stirr a reaction from public?
To talk with terrorists is overlauved strategy.... LMAO
What is there to talk about? Is there really anything to talk about?... ROFLMAO !!!
upendersingh
New member
नक्सलवाद के शुरू होने का कारण तो पूंजीपतियों का गरीबों पर जुल्म ही था और अपने हक़ के लिए शुरू की गई नक्सलवादियों की वो लड़ाई
जायज भी थी, लेकिन बीतते समय के साथ-साथ अब नक्सलवादियों की महत्वाकांक्षाएं बहुत ज्यादा बढ़ गई हैं. वे निर्दोषों का खून बहाने में भी कोई गुरेज नहीं कर रहे. वे हथियारों के बल पर पहले तो नक्सल प्रभावित राज्यों में और फिर पूरे भारत में अपनी सत्ता स्थापित करने की सोच रहे हैं. वे तो अब पंजाब के किसानों को भी उगाही देने के लिए धमकी देने लगे हैं. यदि यही हाल रहा तो फिर उत्तर भारत के अन्य संपन्न किसान भी इस तपिश को महसूस कर सकते हैं. कोढ़ में खाज यह कि केंद्र सरकार निठल्लों और नपुंसकों की सरकार है, जो अहिंसावादी है. ऐसे में यदि जीना है तो फिर जाटों को भी आत्मरक्षा के लिए हथियारबंद सेना गठित करने के लिए तैयार रहना चाहिए. नक्सलवादियों के हाथों ना तो सरदार मनमोहन सिंह का, ना सोनिया गाँधी का और ना ही लुंगीवाले पी. चिदंबरम का कोई आरा-प्यारा मारा जा रहा है. उन्हें तो लंबे समय तक अपनी सरकार बनाए रखने की चिंता है बस.
जायज भी थी, लेकिन बीतते समय के साथ-साथ अब नक्सलवादियों की महत्वाकांक्षाएं बहुत ज्यादा बढ़ गई हैं. वे निर्दोषों का खून बहाने में भी कोई गुरेज नहीं कर रहे. वे हथियारों के बल पर पहले तो नक्सल प्रभावित राज्यों में और फिर पूरे भारत में अपनी सत्ता स्थापित करने की सोच रहे हैं. वे तो अब पंजाब के किसानों को भी उगाही देने के लिए धमकी देने लगे हैं. यदि यही हाल रहा तो फिर उत्तर भारत के अन्य संपन्न किसान भी इस तपिश को महसूस कर सकते हैं. कोढ़ में खाज यह कि केंद्र सरकार निठल्लों और नपुंसकों की सरकार है, जो अहिंसावादी है. ऐसे में यदि जीना है तो फिर जाटों को भी आत्मरक्षा के लिए हथियारबंद सेना गठित करने के लिए तैयार रहना चाहिए. नक्सलवादियों के हाथों ना तो सरदार मनमोहन सिंह का, ना सोनिया गाँधी का और ना ही लुंगीवाले पी. चिदंबरम का कोई आरा-प्यारा मारा जा रहा है. उन्हें तो लंबे समय तक अपनी सरकार बनाए रखने की चिंता है बस.