The Maoists have left us with no chioce

[Prometheus]

Vir Sanghvi, Hindustan Times

If there is one thing we are all agreed on, it is this: last week’s ambush of a Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) party by the Maoists which left around 76 soldiers dead must be condemned in the strongest possible terms. No matter which side of the political divide you are on — right-wing hardliner or radical jholawallah — the violence is indefensible.
But I wonder if we fully recognise the consequences that will inevitably flow from the ambush. Whatever happens next will not be very pleasant.
In every complicated political situation, there is usually a turning point, a stage when people say ‘enough is enough’. I suspect we have now reached that point. Till now, many educated Indians have been ambivalent about the government’s offensive against the Maoists for a variety of reasons. Many believe that there must be a better way of handling the revolt.
Now, even those who have been reluctant to whole-heartedly endorse the military offensive will concede that there is no alternative.
Of course, it is a tragic and terrible thing for a government to use force against its own people. But there comes a time when a government has to assert itself. Otherwise, its authority simply fades away.
Public pressure can force a State to be more reasonable or flexible. But we cannot expect it to voluntarily abdicate its authority. If the violence reaches an unacceptable level, if the State’s own forces are being massacred with impunity, then the government has no choice: it has to assert its authority with all the might at its command.
Because we depend on the State’s authority for the maintenance of law and order and our own security, we react badly when this authority is flouted. Our insecurity leads to rage and anger.
That accounts for the intolerance we have witnessed over the last few days. This explains why people like Ravi Shankar Prasad (speaking presumably in his capacity as BJP’s chief spokesman) demand action against anyone who sympathises with the Maoist cause. Prasad is not alone. The public anger is now palpable.
Ironically, Maoist sympathisers have lost out because of the actions of the Maoists themselves. Activists frequently make the point that the issue is one of mining rights. In their view, adivasis are being chased away from their homes only so that corporate fat-cats can get at the minerals beneath the soil.
This may or may not be a valid point of view but nobody is listening any longer. By murdering soldiers in cold blood, the Maoists have settled the argument. India is now ranged on the other side and in this battle between us (the State and its citizens) and them (the Maoists) the complexities of the larger problem have been forgotten.
Though terrorism and insurgencies often inflict serious damage on the State and its agencies in the early years of the conflict, history has taught us that in the long-run, the Indian State always wins. No matter whether it is Nagaland, Naxalbari or anywhere else, it is impossible for revolutionaries/ insurgents/terrorists (pick the one you like) to match the immense resources of the State.
Until the battle is resolved, however, the ones who suffer the most are the very people the revolution/insurgency is supposed to benefit. Because the State knows no other way of fighting insurgencies, security forces routinely raid villages, arrest innocent men, kill bystanders and unleash a reign of terror.
Initially, the insurgents argue that all this will work in their favour: “The army is ensuring that the ordinary people turn against it.” But in the long-run — whether in Punjab or in Mizoram — ordinary people tire of being trapped in an endless conflict and public sentiment inevitably turns against the militants.
The State knows this. And it is prepared to wait.
In recent years, Indian policy makers have been strengthened in their resolve to fight violent revolutionaries by the example of Nepal. When the Maoists started mobilising in the Nepali hinterland, the regular police fled and closed down their police stations.
The Indian government tried to persuade the Nepali authorities to use the army to crush the Maoists. The Nepalis were reluctant. So, India helped Nepal raise a paramilitary force called the Armed Police. When this force proved inadequate, India urged Nepal to reconsider using the army before it was too late.
The Nepalis lacked the political will to reach a decision and eventually the Maoists came to virtually dominate that country.
India is not Nepal. But we have learnt the lesson of that experience. Our policy makers will not make the same mistakes. Our Maoists will be crushed no matter how long it takes the Indian State to do this.
But there are deeper questions surrounding the Maoist revolt that need to be answered. It is fashionable now to say that the adivasis have gained nothing since Independence. And to some extent, the figures speak for themselves.
The scheduled tribes number 85 million people in India (though that figure includes those in the North-east, where the situation is entirely different). Some estimates suggest that adivasi lands constitute up to 20 per cent of India’s entire territory. But something like 2/3rds or more of all adivasis are still illiterate.
Hence, say some activists, the poor adivasis have no choice but to turn to the Maoists because the Indian State has failed them.
Actually, it is not that simple. Take the case of the Harijans (Dalits, if you like), who have been at the bottom of the social pyramid for centuries. Post-Independence, we offered Harijans and adivasis the same sorts of things: affirmative action, seats reserved in Parliament, etc. Because they were concentrated in certain areas, adivasis could swing elections in a way that Harijans could hardly ever do. Two new states — Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh — are adivasi-dominated.
So why is it that the Harijans have accessed the political system, have thrown up the likes of Mayawati and have successfully demanded the attention of the Indian State while the adivasis are still seen as helpless victims?
Put it another way: why is the same system that empowers Harijans regarded as so useless by so many activists that they claim that the adivasis have no choice but to support those who commit murder in their names?
It is an important question and I have still to hear a convincing answer.
So, as I said at the beginning, the future is not bright. The State will retaliate and it will do so with the full support of the Indian people. There will be massive collateral damage and blood will be shed. Innocents will die and the conflict will escalate.
Sadly, I do not see an alternative. There may be ways of reaching out to the tribals, bypassing the Naxalites. But all that will have to wait. First, the State must reassert the rule of law. Then, it will finish off the Maoists. And only then, will we tackle the serious issue of social justice. As regrettable as this is, the Maoists have left us with no choice.

 

[KS]

Vir Sanghvi, Hindustan Times

If there is one thing we are all agreed on, it is this: last week’s ambush of a Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) party by the Maoists which left around 76 soldiers dead must be condemned in the strongest possible terms. No matter which side of the political divide you are on — right-wing hardliner or radical jholawallah — the violence is indefensible.
But I wonder if we fully recognise the consequences that will inevitably flow from the ambush. Whatever happens next will not be very pleasant.
In every complicated political situation, there is usually a turning point, a stage when people say ‘enough is enough’. I suspect we have now reached that point. Till now, many educated Indians have been ambivalent about the government’s offensive against the Maoists for a variety of reasons. Many believe that there must be a better way of handling the revolt.
Now, even those who have been reluctant to whole-heartedly endorse the military offensive will concede that there is no alternative.
Of course, it is a tragic and terrible thing for a government to use force against its own people. But there comes a time when a government has to assert itself. Otherwise, its authority simply fades away.
Public pressure can force a State to be more reasonable or flexible. But we cannot expect it to voluntarily abdicate its authority. If the violence reaches an unacceptable level, if the State’s own forces are being massacred with impunity, then the government has no choice: it has to assert its authority with all the might at its command.
Because we depend on the State’s authority for the maintenance of law and order and our own security, we react badly when this authority is flouted. Our insecurity leads to rage and anger.
That accounts for the intolerance we have witnessed over the last few days. This explains why people like Ravi Shankar Prasad (speaking presumably in his capacity as BJP’s chief spokesman) demand action against anyone who sympathises with the Maoist cause. Prasad is not alone. The public anger is now palpable.
Ironically, Maoist sympathisers have lost out because of the actions of the Maoists themselves. Activists frequently make the point that the issue is one of mining rights. In their view, adivasis are being chased away from their homes only so that corporate fat-cats can get at the minerals beneath the soil.
This may or may not be a valid point of view but nobody is listening any longer. By murdering soldiers in cold blood, the Maoists have settled the argument. India is now ranged on the other side and in this battle between us (the State and its citizens) and them (the Maoists) the complexities of the larger problem have been forgotten.
Though terrorism and insurgencies often inflict serious damage on the State and its agencies in the early years of the conflict, history has taught us that in the long-run, the Indian State always wins. No matter whether it is Nagaland, Naxalbari or anywhere else, it is impossible for revolutionaries/ insurgents/terrorists (pick the one you like) to match the immense resources of the State.
Until the battle is resolved, however, the ones who suffer the most are the very people the revolution/insurgency is supposed to benefit. Because the State knows no other way of fighting insurgencies, security forces routinely raid villages, arrest innocent men, kill bystanders and unleash a reign of terror.
Initially, the insurgents argue that all this will work in their favour: “The army is ensuring that the ordinary people turn against it.” But in the long-run — whether in Punjab or in Mizoram — ordinary people tire of being trapped in an endless conflict and public sentiment inevitably turns against the militants.
The State knows this. And it is prepared to wait.
In recent years, Indian policy makers have been strengthened in their resolve to fight violent revolutionaries by the example of Nepal. When the Maoists started mobilising in the Nepali hinterland, the regular police fled and closed down their police stations.
The Indian government tried to persuade the Nepali authorities to use the army to crush the Maoists. The Nepalis were reluctant. So, India helped Nepal raise a paramilitary force called the Armed Police. When this force proved inadequate, India urged Nepal to reconsider using the army before it was too late.
The Nepalis lacked the political will to reach a decision and eventually the Maoists came to virtually dominate that country.
India is not Nepal. But we have learnt the lesson of that experience. Our policy makers will not make the same mistakes. Our Maoists will be crushed no matter how long it takes the Indian State to do this.
But there are deeper questions surrounding the Maoist revolt that need to be answered. It is fashionable now to say that the adivasis have gained nothing since Independence. And to some extent, the figures speak for themselves.
The scheduled tribes number 85 million people in India (though that figure includes those in the North-east, where the situation is entirely different). Some estimates suggest that adivasi lands constitute up to 20 per cent of India’s entire territory. But something like 2/3rds or more of all adivasis are still illiterate.
Hence, say some activists, the poor adivasis have no choice but to turn to the Maoists because the Indian State has failed them.
Actually, it is not that simple. Take the case of the Harijans (Dalits, if you like), who have been at the bottom of the social pyramid for centuries. Post-Independence, we offered Harijans and adivasis the same sorts of things: affirmative action, seats reserved in Parliament, etc. Because they were concentrated in certain areas, adivasis could swing elections in a way that Harijans could hardly ever do. Two new states — Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh — are adivasi-dominated.
So why is it that the Harijans have accessed the political system, have thrown up the likes of Mayawati and have successfully demanded the attention of the Indian State while the adivasis are still seen as helpless victims?
Put it another way: why is the same system that empowers Harijans regarded as so useless by so many activists that they claim that the adivasis have no choice but to support those who commit murder in their names?
It is an important question and I have still to hear a convincing answer.
So, as I said at the beginning, the future is not bright. The State will retaliate and it will do so with the full support of the Indian people. There will be massive collateral damage and blood will be shed. Innocents will die and the conflict will escalate.
Sadly, I do not see an alternative. There may be ways of reaching out to the tribals, bypassing the Naxalites. But all that will have to wait. First, the State must reassert the rule of law. Then, it will finish off the Maoists. And only then, will we tackle the serious issue of social justice. As regrettable as this is, the Maoists have left us with no choice.

atlast one sane voice from the media resonating the hundreds of millions of common ppl in the country who are tired and enraged at the Maoist insurgency.
But now inevitably Mr .Sanghvi will be labelled as a right-wing fanatic nd all hell will break loose.

BTW has anyone seen or heard that B***h Arundati?? has she said anything regarding the Dantewada massacre..?

 

[chachachoudhary]

BTW has anyone seen or heard that B***h Arundati?? has she said anything regarding the Dantewada massacre..?

Yes, just a few days back on a forum called Peoples Tribunal, she had opined that,

The soviet invasion of afghanistan has resulted in proliferation of hindu extremism, which is responsible for naxalism in india.

 

[KS]

Yes, just a few days back on a forum called Peoples Tribunal, she had opined that,

The soviet invasion of afghanistan has resulted in proliferation of hindu extremism, which is responsible for naxalism in india.

WTH !!!.....Soviet Invasion---->Hindu extremism -----> Naxalism.

Mayb after johhny lever retires she should try to take his place in bollywood comedy roles.

i was jus facing a prob in office wen i read it and i suddenly burst out laughing. God ..she made my day!!

 

[Bang Galore]

Her's an article from the BBC saying the same thing.

Support slips away from India's Maoists

By Geeta Pandey
BBC News, Delhi

Earlier this month, Maoist rebels in India carried out their most audacious attack in the central state of Chhattisgarh.

At the crack of dawn they ambushed a large group of paramilitary soldiers returning from a patrol in the dense jungle of Dantewada district.

They killed 74 troops, one policeman and one driver - they also took 75 weapons.

The killings have stunned the authorities and put the spotlight on India's Maoist strategy.

Last October, the government announced a "massive anti-Maoist offensive" in several states, including Chhattisgarh, and more than 50,000 troops have been deployed with the aim to "fight the rebels, restore domination, and develop".

Earlier this week, the home ministry said an additional 6,000 central forces would join the battle.

Law and order issue?

But some - even within the government - have been questioning whether the Maoist problem can be tackled simply as a "law and order" issue?

"He (Mr Chidambaram) is treating it purely as a law and order problem without taking into consideration the issues that affect the tribals," a senior leader from the home minister's Congress party, Digvijay Singh, wrote in the Economic Times newspaper.

"We can't solve this problem by ignoring the hopes and aspirations of the people living in these areas... In a civilised society and a vibrant democracy, ultimately it is the people who matter," he added.

But the government, it seems, is unfazed by the criticism.

Speaking in parliament on Thursday, Home Minister P Chidambaram said "we need a strong head, a stronger heart and enormous staying power" to deal with the Maoist problem - which the Indian prime minister has described as the biggest threat to India's internal security.

The home minister's statement makes it amply clear that the government is determined to go after the Maoists.

And it appears as if the public is behind him.

Touching a chord

The Dantewada killings may actually help the government's campaign - although the incident was a big setback for the authorities, it has been an even bigger public relations disaster for the rebels.

Photographs of wailing family members mourning the dead troops and burning funeral pyres, have touched a chord with many across India

Many of the dead soldiers were young men in their early twenties and many of them came from poor and underprivileged families. Some were reported to be the sole bread-winners for their family.

In a remote village in Chhattisgarh, the sister of a slain policeman appeared before local television cameras to challenge "the Maoist leaders to come and convince me about the cause they are fighting for".

She said she wanted to ask the rebels why they killed her brother, who was a poor Christian tribal - the same group of people the Maoists say they are fighting for.

Anti-Maoist sentiment is very visible in the media and the calls for the government to come down hard on the rebels are getting louder.

'Indefensible'

Some have even suggested that the government use air raids to target the insurgents.

"The ambush... must be condemned in the strongest possible terms. No matter which side of the political divide you are on, the violence is indefensible," senior columnist Vir Sanghvi wrote in the Hindustan Times newspaper.

"In every complicated political situation, there is usually a turning point, a stage when people say 'enough is enough'. I suspect we have now reached that point."

Mr Sanghvi says it is "tragic when a government has to use force against its own people, but there comes a time when a government has to assert itself".

The editor-in-chief of the Indian Express Shekhar Gupta advises the government to "settle down for the long haul" and "do not close your options" in dealing with the situation.

"Insurgencies in India," he writes, "follow a pattern pretty much like a bell-curve. The graph of violence rises in the initial period, producing more and more casualties on both sides.

"But at some stage the rebels come to the realisation that this state and its people are too strong and resolute to be ever defeated, no matter what the score, in a particular day's battle in a long war."

'Mistakes'

Mr Gupta, says the Maoists will come round "once you convince them of the futility of war".

That is unlikely to happen anytime soon. The Maoists derive their support mostly from the tribal populations who have endured poverty and neglect at the hands of the authorities during years of bad governance.

A senior official who has formerly served in the region told the BBC, "Some beginning has to be made. A lot of mistakes made over the years have to be corrected."

Public anger is now being heard everywhere and no one seems to be prepared to hear pro-Maoist voices any more.

Many are agreed, however, that no matter who fires the gun, it is the poor and the ordinary citizen who almost always bears the brunt.

 

[thinkingcap81]

The soviet invasion of afghanistan has resulted in proliferation of hindu extremism, which is responsible for naxalism in india.

What logic did she offer for her opinion?

 

[gogbot]

What logic did she offer for her opinion?

Naxals are Maoist communists , so they are all atheist .

Religion has nothing to do with this.

For once .

 

[ek_indian]

The Hindu : News / National : It’s war against the poorest: Arundhati

It’s war against the poorest: Arundhati

Accusing the Centre of waging war against the “poorest people,” under the pretext of fighting Maoists in the mining belt, with the purpose of creating a “good investment climate,” author and social rights activist Arundhati Roy on Wednesday said creation of an atmosphere conductive to negotiations between the government and left-wing extremists was the only way out of the ongoing violence in the red corridor of India.

Addressing a press conference here, Ms. Roy said: “Let the State governments make public the terms of the hundreds of memorandums of understanding signed with corporate houses, rehabilitate the thousands of people displaced by the violence perpetrated by the security forces and the Salwa Judum [state-backed vigilantes in Chhattisgarh] and also restore a sense of confidence among the tribal population about their positive intentions. That is the only way out.”

“A cynical industry”

Reacting angrily to questions why she did not condemn Maoists for the April 6 massacre of 76 CRPF jawans in Dantewada in Chhattisgarh, she said the “condemnation industry is a hollow and cynical industry where people do not care about the people killed.”

Claiming that most people were living under an “undeclared emergency,” Ms. Roy said: “I feel that every single death, whether that of a police or Maoist or an Adivasi, is a terrible tragedy. The system of violence imposed on us in the structural process is increasingly becoming a war between the rich and the poor. I condemn the system of militarisation of people that sets the poor against the poor.”

Though she admitted that several Maoist crimes could not be justified and deprivation did not validate violence, Ms. Roy said ‘violence of resistance' could not be condemned when hundreds of Central forces cordon off tribal villages — killing and raping people with impunity.

Saying she did not have the skills for mediating between the Centre and the rebels, Ms. Roy added that her message to the Maoists was they should not dominate the cause of the tribal population for motives of their own in the future.

That 99.9 per cent of the Maoists were tribal people was “a coincidence of political aims,” she said.

The practice of both the tribal population and Maoist ideologues using each other had its roots in their loss of faith in institutional democracy.

Asked whether the blowing up of schools by the Maoists, on the pretext that the security forces could use them as camps, could be justified, Ms. Roy said: “Wherever there is a guerrilla warfare going on, schools are used as barracks. Those schools were not functioning anyway as teachers did not attend. The Maoists, however, welcome the teachers.”

Journalist Goutam Navlakha said the ban on the Maoists should be lifted and their organisation given political legitimacy before a dialogue was initiated.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Earlier I was under the impression that AR just has another viewpoint which must be respected, as this is what democracy is. But I feel she has gone insane. One should remember is national interest are always above than anything else. She seems to enjoying (misusing) heer "freedom of expression".

 

[Nemesis]

Earlier I was under the impression that AR just has another viewpoint which must be respected, as this is what democracy is. But I feel she has gone insane. One should remember is national interest are always above than anything else. She seems to enjoying (misusing) heer "freedom of expression".

What the hell does national interest mean? Freedom of expression is national interest. With all the anti-maoist hate, we as a society need an alternative voice.

 

[Skeptic]

The War Nobody Can Ever Win
Far from TV studios, in the deep forests of Gadchiroli, nobody cares about national sovereignty, the State or the Sensex. The only battle is to fool death and avoid getting injected with an odorous liquid that delays the ******* of a corpse.

Two things arrived last month in Pavarvel village in the Naxal-affected area of Gadchiroli, about 220 km from Nagpur. The first arrival was of a baby boy born to an Adivasi woman, Indu Bai. He died within an hour of his birth. The mother followed a day later. In Pavarvel and all other neighbouring villages, pregnancies are handled by elderly women. For everything else, there is Devi puja, since there is not even a primary health centre around. There is no electricity, but the villagers claim that a Gram Panchayat official comes every year to collect electricity tax. Water comes from a ramshackle bore-pump.

The other arrival was that of a police party. It had not come to apprehend Naxalites who villagers say turn up at any hour every now and then, demand food, and slip back into the jungle. Pavarvel itself is in the thick of forest. There is hardly any road, and if you don’t have a local guide, it could take you weeks to figure out your location. In the forests, dense with Mahua and other trees, there are memorials erected by Naxalites in memory of their fallen comrades.

So, yes, the police arrived and went straight to Bajirao Potawe’s house and beat him up. “With their boots and lathis,” he says. “They said bad things to my mother and sister, called me a bastard, and said how dare my family accuse them of rape,” he recounts. Then they made him run errands like fetching water to cook a meal of dal and rice they had brought along. Potawe himself hasn’t been able to eat such meals for a long time. In fact, he has been living with his wife without a marriage ceremony; it would’ve taken a feast for his fellow villagers, and for them to gift the couple some rice. There simply wasn’t enough. Rice is a luxury for Potawe and his neighbours.

The rape which the police party referred to happened with a 13-year-old girl, the sister-in-law of Bajirao Potawe’s brother, Kaju Potawe. The girl, from the neighbouring village of Tudmel, had come to his sister’s house for treatment of an illness through Devi puja, and had stayed back, working as a labourer at a school construction site nearby. It was on the evening of 4 March 2009 that a party of Maharashtra Police’s C-60 Commando group—a special anti-Naxal force of policemen mostly from Adivasi regions—came to Pavarvel, led by their notorious commander Munna Thakur. Reports suggest that the group saw a man running with a tribal water-flask made of dried pumpkin. The police fired at him, but he got away. It was the misfortune of the Potawe family that the man ran off towards the forest behind their house. Within minutes, the police party entered their house and clobbered Kaju Potawe, who had just returned from the jungle with wild berries. “They kept asking about Naxal whereabouts. When I said I didn’t know, they hit me even more,” he says.

It was then that the police party saw Kaju’s sister-in-law, the 13-year-old. “They dragged her by her hair and accused her of being a Naxal,” says Kaju. Later, they asked another villager Dayaram Jangi and his family, and also a school teacher they had put up, to vacate their house. The girl was forced into the house and held captive along with a few men of the village who the police suspected of being Naxals. The next morning, she was taken to a nearby field. Blindfolded, with her hands tied, she was raped several times.

A fact-finding team that visited her after the incident was told by the girl that the police did ‘badmaash kaam’ with her. She told them that the first person who raped her was Munna Thakur. “He said I must have heard of his name as he pushed himself on me,” the girl told the fact-finding team. The girl added that she had fainted several times during her ordeal.

At about 10 am, a helicopter landed in Pavarvel to take the girl and other suspects to Gadchiroli town. In a place where there’s not even a bullock cart to take an ill person to hospital, the state machinery spared a helicopter to ferry a 13-year-old girl accused of being a Naxal. Of course, no charge was proven against her. As a damage-control exercise, Munna Thakur was later transferred.

Just how does the State expect the people of Pavarvel to inform them of Naxal whereabouts? That too, when this is not the only instance of police atrocities in this village? In 2006, 17-year-old Ramsay Jangi was picked up by C-60 commandos and beaten up severely. When his cousin Mathru Jangi went pleading that he was innocent, the police assured him that he will be freed after first-aid. That night, the villagers saw Munna Thakur. They heard him shouting at his men, instructing them to ‘finish off’ the work. A moment later, they heard gunshots, several of them. The police had shot Ramsay Jangi dead. The body was taken to Dhanora taluka.

After ten days, the police came back and asked Ramsay’s father Manik Jhangi to come and collect his son’s body. But nobody went, fearing arrest. The police disposed off the body.

Manik Jhangi has kept the empty cartridges of the bullets that killed his son. “My son’s body must have rotted,” he whispers.

“No, they inject something inside the body to keep it fresh,” interjects a boy with some education. “But he is gone, gone forever,” Manik Jhangi sobs silently, his tears mixing with sweat.

“We fear going into the jungle now because if the police finds us, they will kill us,” says a man.

“Tell me, how are we supposed to survive?”

***

I arrive in Gadchiroli after spending two weeks in Andhra Pradesh, mostly in the erstwhile Naxal bastion of North Telangana. This is the area that top Naxal leaders like Ganapathi and Kishenji come from. It is from this region that a number of bright young men and women—engineers, eye surgeons, PhD students—turned revolutionaries. Almost 30 years before that helicopter landed in Pavarvel, the first squad of Naxals came to Gadchiroli after crossing the Godavari river from Andhra Pradesh’s Adilabad district. It was led by a young Dalit boy Peddi Shankar, who worked in a coal mine before he turned Naxal. Shortly afterwards, he was shot dead in an encounter with the police on the banks of Pranhita, a sub-river of the Godavari. Within 2-3 years of his death, the Naxal movement spread like wildfire in this region. Naxals first targeted contractors involved in the tendu leaf (used in beedi making) and bamboo trade. These contractors would fleece poor Adivasis and pay them a pittance for a hard day’s labour. After the Naxal intervention, these contractors were forced to pay better. Naxals also went after government representatives like forest and police officials who would often harass and exploit Adivasis. The police tried to wrest control from Naxal hands, but it was too late. Gadchiroli was soon made part of Dandakaranya, the Naxal guerilla base. The police just couldn’t act against them, and it ended up alienating the local populace further through a sustained programme of repression. The scenario now is more or less the same. Unable to act against Naxals, the police end up killing boys like Ramsay Jangi. And infuriating villagers in places like Pavarvel.

***

A day after the Dantewada attack, Gadchiroli is tense. In Armori, a town on the Nagpur-Gadchiroli road, I wait at a local activist’s house over a breakfast of puffed rice, jalebi and tea, while he tries to find me a resource person in an east Gadchiroli area. It is after several attempts that the activist gets through on the phone. The conversation lasts 2-3 minutes. “He is worried and says you shouldn’t come here,” the activist says. “Actually, the police is on the prowl. Anyone who goes into a village gets noticed, and after you are gone, they will harrass my friend,” he clarifies. But elsewhere, I need to take chances, he tells me. I take my chances, and that is how I get to Pavarvel. And in touch with a CRPF patrol party.

***

The trees are bare, and the young soldiers of the CRPF long for some shade. In about eight weeks, the trees will be full of foliage. But before it can bring some comfort, it could take these men closer to death. From behind the thick foliage, Naxal guerillas could zero in unnoticed and do a Dantewada on them. The CRPF party has arrived in a deep forest zone of Maharashtra’s Gadchiroli region at about 5 am in the morning, carrying packed lunch and water filled in empty Fanta bottles. The water lasts only a few hours. There is nothing to do, except wait under the oppressive sun and ward off flies adamant on clinging to your skin. The eyelids droop in fatigue, but here that could mean death. It has just been a day since 76 of their colleagues died in Dantewada. “We are all scared,” says one, “Some want a change of job.”

The morale of these men in uniform couldn’t be lower. Ever since the Dantewada incident, the phones haven’t stopped ringing. Anxious family members and relatives are calling every hour to check whether they are safe. The people who died in Dantewada were colleagues, batchmates, and in conflict zones like Kashmir, some of them even became soul mates. “I lost one of my batchmates in Dantewada,” says their officer, wiping sweat from his brow and from the ammunition magazine of his AK-47 assault rifle. “We are fighting a lost battle. We don’t know who our enemy is. Adivasis share nothing with us.”

The officer talks about visiting several villages, tracking Naxals. He says most of them don’t understand a word of the language spoken by Adivasis. Those who do, get no clue from villagers. “We have even tried asking young children, but not a word comes out of their mouth. We have no intelligence at all,” he says.

The group has walked in the morning as part of a road-opening party to ensure that this stretch is safe for their vehicles and men to move on. “Move on where?” he asks. “We are all waiting for evening so that we could retire to the camp,” the officer says. He takes a big gulp from his water bottle and it is over. “You think we are fighting for India?” he asks, and then replies himself. “Jhaat ka baal...!” he lets out a familiar expletive, “We are fighting to save our lives. Do you think this bullet-proof jacket will save us if a 70-kg explosive explodes beneath our feet?”

As an officer, back in camp, he may get a fan, but none of his men would have that luxury. They will sleep in tents with no fans, braving vicious swarms of mosquitoes.

“Saala, yahan ka macchar bhi Naxali hai,” quips a soldier. All of them laugh.

There is the sound of a motorcycle on the nearby road. The laughter vanishes. Fingers go back to the trigger. The other hand feels for the walkie-talkie. Day or night doesn’t matter around here—there is no rest.

The officer says he was on deputation with a special force in Delhi. “Every morning I would run 20 miles to keep myself fit so that I am not asked to leave the force and hence Delhi. But now I am here in these treacherous forests, counting every day the way prisoners do in jail,” he says.

It is still many hours before the party can hope to retire for the night.

“When you write this report, please write that wars are not fought from tents,” says the officer, shaking his sweaty hand to emphasise the point.“We don’t want our bodies to be injected with formalin, as they did with those who died in Dantewada, and then sent back home,” he says as I get back into the car.

I roll down my car windows.

The car engine grunts, but the officer’s voice reaches me above the noise. “Everything ends with formalin,” he says.

Actually this issue like many other can not be viewed in black and white. While killings of CRPF jawans has to be condemned, the flip side of the coin is also has to be considered. This actually is a war nobody can win. Before getting jingoistic, we need to put a hand on our heart and honestly ask - are the tribals truely provided with a level playing field as one a guy from Jaunpur (not even think about comparing to Metros). Some hard questions needs to be answered. It has been decades since Naxal movement started, and it goes on till date. The basic plan they were fighting on was Lack of development and poverty, which still exist. Why have we not done anything substantial till date to address at least the reasonable demands.

 

[KS]

What the hell does national interest mean? Freedom of expression is national interest. With all the anti-maoist hate, we as a society need an alternative voice.

National Interest means for the greater good of the nation above ur petty own interests.

Freedom of expression is essential but in certain cases like these definitely not good nd moreover FOE must have some logic in it not some XYZ doing blah blah blah for his/her self promotion.

nd moreover I dont find it worthwile arguing over that nutcase Arundati

@Nemesis
Sir in the Afghan ---> Hindu ---> Naxalism which is a FOE,please tell me if u find any logic.

 

[KS]

Actually this issue like many other can not be viewed in black and white. While killings of CRPF jawans has to be condemned, the flip side of the coin is also has to be considered. This actually is a war nobody can win. Before getting jingoistic, we need to put a hand on our heart and honestly ask - are the tribals truely provided with a level playing field as one a guy from Jaunpur (not even think about comparing to Metros). Some hard questions needs to be answered. It has been decades since Naxal movement started, and it goes on till date. The basic plan they were fighting on was Lack of development and poverty, which still exist. Why have we not done anything substantial till date to address at least the reasonable demands.

i agree with u completely...u ve asked a good question as wether a guys from Jaunpur or tribal areas gets the same chances a guy from Metro gets..?
the answer is a big NO.
India is a vast country spanning millions of sq.km not some tiny European country.Look where we were 60 years ago nd where we are now.All developmental work takes time in a democracy.
But that doesnt warrant an armed struggle unleasing violence that affects the very ppl they r supposed to protect.
I am also having grievences with the Indian state but for that matter can i take an AK 47 to a public place nd start shooting the ppl..? - No -
Wat if all the ppl having grievences resort to violence..?will India exist then..?
Please tel me wat have the Maoists have achieved for the sake of the poor other than bringing in more jawans nd in turn more violence
Rather that they can take the examples of the Dalit movement..
today definitely the Dalits are in a more respectable position than they were 60 years ago..they didn resort to violence ..rather they took to the power of Ballot and they r in a way more respectable position.
This is a war where no one will win or the State will win..Not the Maoists..Hope the Maoists realise this soon and join the mainstream..

 

[Mirza Jatt]

I know just one thing_ _ _ _ _

these maoists have killed innocents and they need to be shot down before they destroy anymore human life...and to kill these creatures ,we need to stop their well wishers..if AR wants a freedom of speech then she need to be alive to speak her thoughts...but if she keeps supporting these B**tards..it will be injustice to thousands of innocent lives which will be at stake...so kill the Maoists and stop that bit<h from the doing the drama that she has started.....

 

[Skeptic]

i agree with u completely...u ve asked a good question as wether a guys from Jaunpur or tribal areas gets the same chances a guy from Metro gets..?
the answer is a big NO.
India is a vast country spanning millions of sq.km not some tiny European country.Look where we were 60 years ago nd where we are now.All developmental work takes time in a democracy.
But that doesnt warrant an armed struggle unleasing violence that affects the very ppl they r supposed to protect.

I am not comparing Metros Vs Tribals, I am talking about a small town in UP Vs Tribal areas. Metros would be way beyond contention. Read it again. Even a young man from my village has access to road, education and some sort of health facilities even sporadic supply of electricity. None in Tribal areas what so ever. ZIP. They are worse of than dailts - they are way worse off than rural averages. I am not expecting GOI to raise shopping malls and flyovers in these areas. They just require the basic infrastructure and awareness - Some roads, schools (with teachers) and hospitals. A way of life where they can sustain their culture while making sufficient money to get at least 2 square meals a day.

Do you expect them to behave rationally and understand democracy?? When we have not even made them literate - we want them to understand the constitution, which has not even been translated in the language they understand - Nor have we taught them the language we speak.

You can not argue with a starving man - his first loyalty will be towards bread and then only will he think of larger things like nation / democracy and liberty. We have failed to do so. Why would they support democracy if they have not had even 1% of the benefits from it. If their situation remains same after 62 years.

I am also having grievences with the Indian state but for that matter can i take an AK 47 to a public place nd start shooting the ppl..? - No -
Wat if all the ppl having grievences resort to violence..?will India exist then..?
Please tel me wat have the Maoists have achieved for the sake of the poor other than bringing in more jawans nd in turn more violence
Rather that they can take the examples of the Dalit movement..
today definitely the Dalits are in a more respectable position than they were 60 years ago..they didn resort to violence ..rather they took to the power of Ballot and they r in a way more respectable position.
This is a war where no one will win or the State will win..Not the Maoists..Hope the Maoists realise this soon and join the mainstream..

Again, you are mixing up several issues. Nowhere have I supported armed struggle, but emphasized the needs of a cornered community. You have grievances, but you have received so much from the system, you dare not rise up against it. You have so much more than them. you have food, power, connectivity, telecom, jobs, cars and what not. Compared to these tribal, we are obscenely rich.

Again if we talk about Dalits, most of the change has been restricted to urban centres, while rural areas continue to lag behind. We expect Tribals to behave and accept civilized concept of democracy, without taking the plain - what exactly the concept means. One defeat for CRPF, and you are suggesting revoking freedom of speech, and very many members asking for army to step in. Is this the democracy you want them to accept, with air-force bombing their villages and army marching over. That is not how political opposition is suppressed, or else you are stooping to the very same levels - you try to oppose. Suspending freedom of speech and using armed forces against civilians reminds me of another communist state in our neighbourhood, Alas communism is the very ideology adopted by the extremists and we are fighting against.

 

[KS]

I am not comparing Metros Vs Tribals, I am talking about a small town in UP Vs Tribal areas. Metros would be way beyond contention. Read it again. Even a young man from my village has access to road, education and some sort of health facilities even sporadic supply of electricity. None in Tribal areas what so ever. ZIP. They are worse of than dailts - they are way worse off than rural averages. I am not expecting GOI to raise shopping malls and flyovers in these areas. They just require the basic infrastructure and awareness - Some roads, schools (with teachers) and hospitals. A way of life where they can sustain their culture while making sufficient money to get at least 2 square meals a day.

Do you expect them to behave rationally and understand democracy?? When we have not even made them literate - we want them to understand the constitution, which has not even been translated in the language they understand - Nor have we taught them the language we speak.

You can not argue with a starving man - his first loyalty will be towards bread and then only will he think of larger things like nation / democracy and liberty. We have failed to do so. Why would they support democracy if they have not had even 1&#37; of the benefits from it. If their situation remains same after 62 years.




Again, you are mixing up several issues. Nowhere have I supported armed struggle, but emphasized the needs of a cornered community. You have grievances, but you have received so much from the system, you dare not rise up against it. You have so much more than them. you have food, power, connectivity, telecom, jobs, cars and what not. Compared to these tribal, we are obscenely rich.

Again if we talk about Dalits, most of the change has been restricted to urban centres, while rural areas continue to lag behind. We expect Tribals to behave and accept civilized concept of democracy, without taking the plain - what exactly the concept means. One defeat for CRPF, and you are suggesting revoking freedom of speech, and very many members asking for army to step in. Is this the democracy you want them to accept, with air-force bombing their villages and army marching over. That is not how political opposition is suppressed, or else you are stooping to the very same levels - you try to oppose. Suspending freedom of speech and using armed forces against civilians reminds me of another communist state in our neighbourhood, Alas communism is the very ideology adopted by the extremists and we are fighting against.

ok watever u beleive,,

but please answer this question.
wat have the Maoists have achieved for the sake of the poor other than bringing in more jawans nd in turn more violence..?