Monitoring Indian Communists - 2

[Bharatvarsh]

A small exposure of commie treason:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Slaves of the Middle Kingdom       
Written by P. Chacko Joseph   
Monday, 20 November 2006 

In a broadcast from Delhi on 1 January 1965, the union home minister Gulzarilal Nanda said “There is a reason to believe that the new party CPI (M) was formed under Peking’s inspiration. It was to serve as Peking’s instrument in creating conditions of instability in  the country and to facilitate the promotion of Chinese designs against India in furtherance of her grand strategy of establishing hegemony…. over Asia and her declared aim of world revolution. There is reason to believe that the Left Communist Party has close links with the Chinese from whom it draws ideological inspiration and receives support in other forms.” Sinha, The Red Rebel in India, pp 186-9.

Tibet

Krishna Menon and K.M.Panikkar who shapped India’s Tibet policy, had strong Communist leanings. So much so that K.M.Panikkar married his daughter to a leading Communist labor leader. Panikkar, when called upon by Nehru, went so far as to fib that there was a "lack of confirmation" of the presence of Chinese troops in Tibet and argued that to protest the Chinese invasion of Tibet would be an "interference to India’s efforts on behalf of China in the UN." He wrote, "our primary consideration is maintenance of world peace... Recent developments in Korea have not strengthened China’s position, which will be further weakened by any aggressive action [by India] in Tibet."

Vallabhbhai Patel’s Letter to Jawaharlal Nehru on 7 November 1950 not only deploring Indian Ambassador KM Panikkar’s action “I have carefully gone through the correspondence between the External Affairs Ministry and our Ambassador in Peking and through him the Chinese Government. …... From the latest position, it appears that we shall not be able to rescue the Dalai Lama. Our Ambassador has been at great pains to find an explanation or justification for Chinese policy and actions….”

In 2001 CP I(M) organized a function to observe the "50th anniversary of the peaceful liberation of Tibet" in New Delhi. Sitaram Yechury addressed the gathering then and "pointed out that the Tibetans had improved their standard of living and that the life in Tibet was much easier than it could be otherwise because of the difficult physical conditions there," according to the CPI (M) weekly newspaper People's Democracy of June 10, 2001. In 1999 it came out with a statement criticizing Indian Minister George Fernandes for supporting the Tibetan people.

1962 Chinese aggression and boundary problem

In an article “Whitewashing Jyoti Basu in  The Daily , M V Kamath (30 March 1997) writes in regard to, the Chinese attack on India, again, the CPI (M)'s record is nothing short of despicable. He quoted Surabhi Banerjee the biographer of Jyoti Basu who said "Indian communists became the targets of public outrage: the flames were fanned by Indian jingoists". Jingoists? It is a needless slur on Indian patriots who were incensed by the Communists' sell-out. As during the Quit India movement, once again the comrades were ready to betray their country. Surabhi Banerjee says-that the majority of the Indian Communist Party was in favor of condemning the Chinese aggression, but that "a vocal minority was -not willing to accept that ChinaIndia was motivated by a desire for territory". More significantly this "vocal minority" stuck to the view "that a socialist country could not commit aggression, nor was it prepared to support a Policy under which would receive arms front western powers even if it paid for them".

She unsuccessfully tries defending Jyoti Basu’s record during the times “The party supposedly was divided into two camps. According to her, a third camp was formed to mediate between the two opposing groups called the Communist Unity Centre (CUC) and she adds: "Basu worked with the CUC"! The nation was under attack and Jyoti Basu was trying to mediate between two camps on whether or not the invader should he fought and resisted”!

But the fact lies that in those times  Jyoti Basu, addressing a meeting said: "It's being propagated that the country has been attacked by the Chinese. We don't know what is happening in the snow-clad areas of the Himalayas. The border problem to be solved Peaceably across the table. And if the country has been attacked how is it that this by-election! is being held?" Consider the use of the words like “propagated". Basu was suggesting that the news that the Chinese were attacking India was false. When he should have been fully aware of what was going on, he was pretending to ignorance, as an excuse. True, a by-election was indeed being held in Calcutta, but that; merely showed India's inherent democratic strength - something not to be sneezed at.

It was Lal Bahadur Shastri, then Home Minister, who gave an apt reply to Basu's outpourings. Said Shastri: "How an Indian could make such a statement, I can't even imagine." He threatened CPI  with legal action. The Congress president and general secretary demanded a ban on the party.  “Nehru himself” spoke of the possibility of a ban or curbs on it. 

B.T. Ranadive, long-time top leader of the CPI and, later, of the CPI (Marxist), was on overdrive to contain the public outrage. In an article on “India-China Relations” in New Age (which was the monthly organ of the CPI) of December 1959, after the Longju and Kongka Pass incidents wrote that the CPI “had consistently supported the basic principles of our foreign policy  —  in fact more consistently than the Congress followers themselves”. The article clarified that in a resolution the National Council of the CPI had held “that whatever the origin of the McMahon line may be, the fact cannot be ignored that for several years this has been the frontier of India and the area south of this line has been under Indian administration. It, therefore, held that the area south of the McMahon line was a part of India and should remain in India.” The article stated: “As regards the Western border, the National Council held that the government [of India] was correct in basing itself on the traditional border.” The CPI upheld the demand of the Nehru government that ChinaIndia in their earlier notes.” “should withdraw their personnel 20 kilometres to the east of the international boundary which has been described by the Government of

“The [Indian communist (Read CPI)] party leadership’s action in condemning China for the border fighting and pledging the party’s unqualified support to Nehru can be seen in retrospect as making the final, open split into two parties unavoidable.” Neville Maxwell  (Maxwell, op cit, p.380, fn.).

Many of the The pro-Chinese Left (future CPI (M)) elements were jailed. They supported the Chinese claim on the Aksai Chin region.

THE 34th and 35th volumes of the Complete Works of E. M. S. Namboodiripad contain some important documents of the period 1962-66 which have a bearing on the India-China war. Namboodiripad had refused to condemn the 1962 Chinese aggression. He had taken a pro-Beijing stand, stating that it was a conflict between a socialist (China) and a capitalist (Indian) state. To quote him, “Dogmatic assessment of the class character of the Nehru Government as well as the role a socialist country should play in relation to a non-aligned country made the Chinese Communist Party resort to force rather than peaceful negotiation as the means of settling the border problem,” <!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]--> <!--[endif]-->

Mao Tse-tung was raised to sainthood in Calcutta. To this day there is a Mao Tse-tung Sarani in Calcutta. Mao has been practically disowned in his own country but not by the CPI (M).

In November, 2006, The Chinese Ambassador in India declared Arunachal Pradesh as Chinese territory. The CPI (M) has tried to overtly justify China's position by stating that there were territory disputes." "These are historical issues, there are disputes, this is why these issues are being discussed," CPM leader Sitaram Yechuri told mediapersons

CPM general-secretary Prakash Karat said that Arunachal Pradesh was part of Indian territory and that the dispute was about Tawang.

Naxalbari

Naxalbari is located in the narrow corridor between Nepal and East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) which represents India's only land connection with the state of Assam. Naxalbari had striking similarities to that of the communist-ruled enclaves in China during the 1920's and 1930's from which the Chinese Communist movement made its first advances toward dominating the entire Mainland. The peasant uprising in Naxalbari in 1967 was led by some communists (CPI-M) of the Siliguri area after their release from prison. The alleged uprising was led by pro-Maoist elements. A pronunciation by Mao titled "Spring Thunder over India" gave full moral support for the uprising. The Peking radio called on the Indian people to wage “relentless armed struggle” to “overthrow government” and “forcibly size power.” In the Indian parliament it was alleged that the Chinese embassy officials had gone and met CPI (M) leaders in Calcutta.

According to the Chinese version, "a base of peasants armed struggle led by the revolutionaries of the Indian Communist Party has been set up in the countryside in Darjeeling district". This is, according to the Hsinhua report,  "a strong spark of the fire of the revolutionary armed struggle launched by the Indian people under the guidance of Mao Tse-tung's thought. This represents the general orientation of the Indian revolution at the present time."

The "red district" which was first established in early March, Hsinhua maintained, "has been standing majestically like a mountain for nearly four months in the encirclement of the white regime." It is being led by revolutionaries of the Indian Communist Party "who advocate the seizure of political power through armed struggle." These revolutionaries went to Naxalbari and other villages in early March "to lead and organize the peasants to carry out armed struggle for land, and thus took the road of China's revolution."

This armed struggle, however, - the Chinese contend - is not confined to the Naxalbari region alone: "The peasants' armed struggle in this district has shaken the whole of India and given impetus to the peasants' struggle throughout West Bengal state for the recovery of their land." Moreover, the Naxalbari affair only represents the beginning of even greater events. As the Hsinhua report points out: "It forecasts the approach of a great people's revolution in India with the armed struggle as its major form."

The CPI(M) original founders found the thunder was stolen from them. To salvage their position, they pronounced that the armed struggle was not the way. This forced a split up in and CPI (Marxist Leninist) was born. Ideologically, the CPI (ML) believed that the Chinese model of guerrilla warfare and liberated zones would work in India as well. Their concept of armed struggle was primarily based on a premise that as soon as they organize and start an armed struggle, the people of India would rise up in revolt. This was to be done by the annihilation of the class enemy.

The rebel CPI (ML) members accused the CPI (M) leadership of 'neo-revisionism'. This debate continued for about two years and ultimately a new party was floated on the May Day of 1969. The new party CPI (Marxist-Leninist) started replicating the Naxalbari experience elsewhere.

However, the naxalite movement disintegrated in various splits. China withdrew its political support and turned non-committal towards the various Indian groups (but the support continued), China realized the strength of the Indian democratic system through an articles in its mouthpiece newspaper. At present, there are at least forty Naxalite factions. Among these, the Maoist Communist Centre (MCC) in Bihar and the People’s War Group (PWG) in Andhra Pradesh, formed in 1975 by Kondapalli Seetharamaih, still adhere to the concept of annihilation of class enemies though they have combined armed struggle with mass front activities as well.

CPI (M)’s Failed Indian Path

CPI (M) in public they did not fully embrace the political line of Mao Zedong because of the Naxalbari incident. The CPI (M) was confronted with a situation in which their own masters turned on them. This was for the reason that the CPI (M) was trying to create “the Indian path” of communism in answer to the Russian and Chinese paths. When they failed they toed the Chinese way. Classic example of CPI (M) failure can be seen in the states of West Bengal and Kerala. Both states have been mismanaged and do not contribute much to the national growth.  CPI (M) made all possible attempts to remain in power which included including East Bangladeshi migrants in voters list, terrorizing, falsely implicating leaders of principal opposition leaders of Trinamul Congress etc. The CPI (M) leaders were involved in mass rape in Nadia of women passengers traveling in two buses only recently. 

Shakti Nuclear Explosions

Indian jingoist slur was going to be repeated in 1998 Indian Shakti (Nuclear) test. CPI (M) did not condemn the Chinese nuclear test or the interpretation of Kashmir issue as it did not wanted to contribute to “nationalistic” hostility towards China.

The whole of Indian nation was elated and jubilated in 1998 when India conducted the Shakti Nuclear tests. But CPI (M) in an article in the communist mouth piece “New Approach” titled  “Perils of the BJP bomb,” Jyoti  Basu repeated the CPI (M) accuses “ We have to keep in mind that the BJP's attempts to create a nuclear India has adversely affected our relationship with China. The BJP and the RSS are offering the justification that the bomb is necessary to contain China and its hegemonistic plans. The realities, however, do not suggest that China can be held responsible for India's stepped-up nuclear activity. After the India-China war in 1962, various quarters in India and China have been working steadily towards improving relations between the two countries. They have achieved a degree of success in the past two decades. The Vajpayee Government has been trying to base the justification on charges that China has set up a naval base in Myanmar and a helipad inside India in pursuit of its so-called plan for expansion and that it is overtly helping PakistanIndia emerging as a nuclear power. in its nuclear programme”. CPI (M) organized mass rallies and street corner meetings to launch a tirade against Indian nuclear test.

Economic Subversion

China is desperate to compete with India in service sector.  Yechuri referring to the 18th congress discussions on the Political-Organisational Report on “Certain Policy Matters” said “The Chinese economic model, which is showing a steady 9 per cent growth in GDP for several years and does not allow FDI in the stock market but only in the manufacture sector, merit serious consideration.”  There is serious effort to subvert the services sector in India by CPI (M). The latest being creating trade union for Indian golden goose sector “IT and BPO.” Another issue is, “CITU” a CPI (M) trade union has been systematically subverting all manufacturing in the country. The worst hit is West Bengal. The other CPI (M) dominated state Kerala is an importing state.

Yechury stated “We will soon start a mass movement demanding regulation of industrial capital on the conditions- that it must augment existing productive capacities, enhance the existing technology and lead to employment generation.”

CITU the CPI (M) backed trade union is supposed to be formed for protecting workers right. If a house has to be constructed in Kerala, a Tamilian labour cannot be used who is cheaper to employ compared to his CITU backed militant Kerala labor. But CPI (M) has actively lobbied for visas for Chinese laborers to be brought into IndiaUSA, to protest against Indo-US joint exercises for days together. as they are cheaper to employ. Lack of labor must be the defense of CPI (M). It’s the same CPI (M) which can organize a hundred thousand and more farmers and laborers who have no clue who George Bush is or where is

In West Bengal the Chinese company Dong Fang was favored over BHEL for a power plant in Sagardighi and for adding capacity to a plant in Durgapur. That decision came even though the BHEL union is affiliated to CPI (M)’s trade union wing CITU. But, the Left Front government defended the decision saying the Chinese were the lowest bidders.

Intelligence agencies such as the IB and RAW have expressed reservations in engaging Chinese firms in telecom sector and the construction of ports. Left sources said Chinese companies are interested in building as many as 13 ports across the country at a cost of Rs60,000 crore. Airing deep differences with the Congress-led government, on economic issues, Yechuri said the MNCs could not be allowed to enter our economic sphere “only to make profits and endanger our independent government and the sovereignty of the states.” While Indian/US/ European MNC’s have a reputation of localizing the operations in the country of operations, Chinese companies operate as traders. The western MNC’s are bringing in cutting edge practices in China; Chinese MNC’s have no such practices.

The CPI (M) favors the Chinese model of economy. Briefing the newspersons on the fifth day of the 18thChinaChina.” “Why can’t we learn this thing from China?” CPI (M) is quite on the fact that Hutch is a Chinese company which is a major telecom operator in India. congress, party politburo member Sitaram Yechuri said the CPI (M) had differences with the UPA government on economic issues in the telecom and insurance sectors, reminding the government that opened its economy only in the hardware and manufacture sectors. Yechuri asserted that “no private cellphone company is there in

He said the party was opposed to the use of finance capital for speculative economy and recalled how the economy of the Asian countries was destroyed in the process only recently. This is another sector Chinese would love to subvert in India, while they build up their stock markets.

The CPI (M) backed the Chinese envoy in India Sun Yuxi’s allegation of unequal treatment for Chinese businessmen. The CPM leader echoing the Chinese envoy says, “What are these security considerations? We would like to know why this old mind-set. George Fernandes had called China enemy number one. I am sure the Congress does not think on these lines. Then why are Chinese companies being blacklisted?”

CPI (M) deplores the western MNC’s using Indian natural resources. It actively lobbies for Indian iron ore to be exported to China and for import of finished Chinese goods into India. Talveen Singh a columnist in Indian Express has termed it as “Chinese East India Company.”

Diplomatic Subversion

“The UPA government has so far refused to face to the fact that Israel is an outlaw state which is illegally occupying and oppressing the Palestinian people,” the CPM polit bureau said in a statement here. It said the least the UPA government can do at this juncture was to “sever military and security co-operation ties” with Israel, which has become immune to criticism about the atrocities committed on Palestinians. Keeping up the pressure on the UPA to stop buying arms from Israel, the CPM sees New Delhi’s strategy on Israel to be in line with the government’s ‘getting closer’ to the US. The CPM had alleged there was a hidden US agenda in the attack on Lebanon and said Israeli aggression was threatening peace in West Asia. China has a history of buying arms with China. Israel is the only country in western hemisphere which has covertly sold high end technology to China. China has diplomatic ties with Israel.

On Iran nuclear issue, CPI (M) toes the Chinese line. Iran has been in forefront of Indian NPT woes. Iran took the lead time and again to create UN resolutions against Indian Nuclear programme. 

The top Chinese leaders during meetings with members of a visiting CPI (M) delegation in Beijing were told that India won’t be joining US in containing China. The CPI (M) behaved like uncivilized ruffians during democratic US President Bush visit to India. The CPI (M) was found lobbying in secret for autocratic Chinese President Hu’s address to the Indian parliament.

While Chinese have taken economic and diplomatic advantages from US in order to toe US line at UN, CPI (M) hasn’t learnt this lesson from their masters.

Future

Now that Congress party and its leaders dynastic ambitions rest on the CPI(M), CPI(M) has acquired unprecedented position in Indian capitals corridors of power.  The CPI(M) has been using this leverage to push Chinese interests. In past the British used this opportunity to colonize India. CPI (M) also happens to have tremendous clout in  Delhi University and JNU , which produce a quite a lot of Indian  intellectuals. Prakash Karat is a JNU graduate. It’s a cause of concern. A lot of Indian parties are looking towards forging a Third Front with CPI (M) leadership. This will also help CPI (M) gain foothold in the Hindi belt which is already wrecked with the Red Terror. A red government with a red terror in the economic heartland will be a night mare situation. Chinese can destroy it without firing a single nuclear missile positioned in Chinese occupied Tibet. The first betrayal of India started from Bengal. In Delhi, the British were invited to take over as one Indian king couldn’t see another Indian king prospering. History repeats itself? The brazenness with which China manipulates communist parties in India to pursue its diplomatic objectives, leading to the apprehension that China will fish deeply in Indian domestic politics.

Chinese communist had charisma and had a practical approach. That’s how Chinese provided an alternative to Russian communism. CPI (M) is non-charismatic and idealist. Past five decades have been spent on evolving an Indian alternative to communism which has been a failure. Chinese know it only too well and CPI (M) needs to survive. The Chinese Communists have time and again managed to subvert the CPI(M). A possible explanation of sudden Chinese pragmatism in CPI (M)? Another pitfall is CPI (M) looks at India from its failed “Indian Path” mentality. It refuses to recognize the Indian growing power status. CPI (M) talks about not aligning India with imperialist America and India needs China for saving itself from America. Prakash Karat in 18th Congress of the CPI(M) states that  “China, the biggest socialist country has been steadily developing its economy and making all-round progress. For more than a decade China has registered above 9 per cent growth of GDP. The growing strength of China will have a determining effect on international relations in the coming days and strengthen the trends towards multipolarity”. Then he goes on o state “IndiaUS also strategically sees India as counter-weight to China is a target of imperialism’s attention given the sheer size of its market and the immense possibilities for the forays of international finance capital. The whose growing power, it wishes to contain”.

One can understand this as CPI (M) needs China to save itself. CPI (M) will never see India as equal to China. Today, the word communist has become a slur in India and CPI (M) has earned it.

Copyright: Frontier India Journal, 20 November 2006

Last Updated ( Monday, 20 November 2006 ) 

http://journal.frontierindia.com/index.php...id=61&Itemid=30<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->