A national challenge
April 12 : The day the Maoists struck mercilessly at a convoy of Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) jawans was a heartrending day for our democracy. Rarely has there been a time more stark or poignant for those of us who follow the news and care about our polity. Numb with shock
and horror, the media and other public discussions that followed the attack were an eye-opener. There were those of us who were appalled and outraged that a banned outfit had embarked upon violence and vowed to overthrow the lawfully-established governments at the state and Centre and had hurt us at the deepest level by attacking the very jawans who had risked their lives to protect their fellow countrymen. How are these people any better than terrorists, or enemies of the state and country? What wrong had those brave and innocent jawans ever done? How are we ever going to repay the sacrifice of those bravehearts? How are we ever going to look their bereft families in the eye?
We have in our midst apologists for these murderous Maoists. We have amongst us those who condemn the “violence” in a ritualistic way, and then talk about tribal rights. Let me straightaway put forth my very strong views that particularly after the Dantewada massacare, tribal rights and Maoists should never be spoken about in the same breath. In fact, the Maoists admittedly terrorise the very tribals whose cause they claim to represent. If they were actually interested in protecting tribals they would be hard put to explain why they target infrastructure that has been painstakingly built up in tribal areas? Why do they target schools where tribal children study and hospitals where tribals receive treatment? And what exactly have Maoists done for tribals till date? What indeed have the apologists done for tribals till date?
There can be no doubt that securing tribal rights is absolutely vital if our democracy is to be truly inclusive. The land belonging to tribals, their security and livelihood all have to be carefully preserved while at the same time ensuring that the forests are not taken over in an irresponsible manner. At the same time everybody agrees that schools, higher education, hospitals and employment all have to be developed in tribal areas and that successive governments have to prioritise the needs of these sections of society. However, all this has absolutely nothing to do with the outrage which is being perpetrated by the Maoists today, and the apologists for the Maoists, who seek to link their depredation and violence with tribal welfare, are doing grave injustice to our country. It is of paramount importance for both policymakers and civil society to understand that tribal rights are no more than a false fig leaf, which the Maoists use to hide their other nefarious and anti-national agenda.
Thus the Maoists are spearheading a violent uprising against our own government for their own ends, which have little to do with tribals or anything remotely legal or justified. This is a fundamental reality that has to be the basic underpinning of any discussion regarding the Maoists. That said, it is a matter of some shock and concern to me when some people refer to the Maoists as “our people”. In the last few days, I have heard several times Maoists being referred to as “our people” in a bid to distinguish — and possibly lay the ground for extenuating circumstance — Maoists being differentiated from “the enemy across the border”. Well, to my mind, the difference is purely a technical one and irrelevant in the face of the fact that it is innocent lives which are being targeted and lost. When the person being massacred is a CRPF jawan it seems to be no more than hairsplitting to identify the perpetrator as being one who is from across the border or one who is a home-grown Maoist. Does it really make a difference? Is not the priority to stop the violence with a firm hand?
In this context, police reforms are absolutely vital. The foremost concern at this point is to ensure that our police forces are well-trained and well-equipped with intelligence gathering, pooling and sharing also being vital cogs in the security machine. The UPA government has always given great importance to police modernisation. It was interesting to see a Comptroller and Auditor General audit of performance of various states in the context of police modernisation. It shows that sometimes the release of funds from the Centre fell short and in many cases the states did not contribute their share. West Bengal, for instance, did not release any funds at all for this purpose during the period under review (2000-2007). Further, even where funds were available states often did not use or utilise the funds for police modernisation. During the reviewed period, 2000-2007, Kerala and Arunachal Pradesh had the highest utilisation at 87 per cent and 83 per cent respectively, while Manipur and West Bengal performed poorly with the lowest utilisation at 28 per cent.
These are merely a couple of issues that are being highlighted in a very complex process. The battle against the Maoist menace is very complicated and has to be fought at several levels. Above all, there has to be resolute political will and total unity of political intent across the board. Thereafter, that intent needs to be translated into concrete action on the ground with the putting in place of a proper strategy ensuring competent training of our security forces supplying them with modern and sophisticated equipment, galvanising of our intelligence network and ensuring synergy and sharing of information between state and Centre. This is not a political or an ideological issue. This is a national challenge upon the success of which lies the security and survival of our democratic polity. And therefore, this is not a challenge that we can afford to lose.
and horror, the media and other public discussions that followed the attack were an eye-opener. There were those of us who were appalled and outraged that a banned outfit had embarked upon violence and vowed to overthrow the lawfully-established governments at the state and Centre and had hurt us at the deepest level by attacking the very jawans who had risked their lives to protect their fellow countrymen. How are these people any better than terrorists, or enemies of the state and country? What wrong had those brave and innocent jawans ever done? How are we ever going to repay the sacrifice of those bravehearts? How are we ever going to look their bereft families in the eye?
We have in our midst apologists for these murderous Maoists. We have amongst us those who condemn the “violence” in a ritualistic way, and then talk about tribal rights. Let me straightaway put forth my very strong views that particularly after the Dantewada massacare, tribal rights and Maoists should never be spoken about in the same breath. In fact, the Maoists admittedly terrorise the very tribals whose cause they claim to represent. If they were actually interested in protecting tribals they would be hard put to explain why they target infrastructure that has been painstakingly built up in tribal areas? Why do they target schools where tribal children study and hospitals where tribals receive treatment? And what exactly have Maoists done for tribals till date? What indeed have the apologists done for tribals till date?
There can be no doubt that securing tribal rights is absolutely vital if our democracy is to be truly inclusive. The land belonging to tribals, their security and livelihood all have to be carefully preserved while at the same time ensuring that the forests are not taken over in an irresponsible manner. At the same time everybody agrees that schools, higher education, hospitals and employment all have to be developed in tribal areas and that successive governments have to prioritise the needs of these sections of society. However, all this has absolutely nothing to do with the outrage which is being perpetrated by the Maoists today, and the apologists for the Maoists, who seek to link their depredation and violence with tribal welfare, are doing grave injustice to our country. It is of paramount importance for both policymakers and civil society to understand that tribal rights are no more than a false fig leaf, which the Maoists use to hide their other nefarious and anti-national agenda.
Thus the Maoists are spearheading a violent uprising against our own government for their own ends, which have little to do with tribals or anything remotely legal or justified. This is a fundamental reality that has to be the basic underpinning of any discussion regarding the Maoists. That said, it is a matter of some shock and concern to me when some people refer to the Maoists as “our people”. In the last few days, I have heard several times Maoists being referred to as “our people” in a bid to distinguish — and possibly lay the ground for extenuating circumstance — Maoists being differentiated from “the enemy across the border”. Well, to my mind, the difference is purely a technical one and irrelevant in the face of the fact that it is innocent lives which are being targeted and lost. When the person being massacred is a CRPF jawan it seems to be no more than hairsplitting to identify the perpetrator as being one who is from across the border or one who is a home-grown Maoist. Does it really make a difference? Is not the priority to stop the violence with a firm hand?
In this context, police reforms are absolutely vital. The foremost concern at this point is to ensure that our police forces are well-trained and well-equipped with intelligence gathering, pooling and sharing also being vital cogs in the security machine. The UPA government has always given great importance to police modernisation. It was interesting to see a Comptroller and Auditor General audit of performance of various states in the context of police modernisation. It shows that sometimes the release of funds from the Centre fell short and in many cases the states did not contribute their share. West Bengal, for instance, did not release any funds at all for this purpose during the period under review (2000-2007). Further, even where funds were available states often did not use or utilise the funds for police modernisation. During the reviewed period, 2000-2007, Kerala and Arunachal Pradesh had the highest utilisation at 87 per cent and 83 per cent respectively, while Manipur and West Bengal performed poorly with the lowest utilisation at 28 per cent.
These are merely a couple of issues that are being highlighted in a very complex process. The battle against the Maoist menace is very complicated and has to be fought at several levels. Above all, there has to be resolute political will and total unity of political intent across the board. Thereafter, that intent needs to be translated into concrete action on the ground with the putting in place of a proper strategy ensuring competent training of our security forces supplying them with modern and sophisticated equipment, galvanising of our intelligence network and ensuring synergy and sharing of information between state and Centre. This is not a political or an ideological issue. This is a national challenge upon the success of which lies the security and survival of our democratic polity. And therefore, this is not a challenge that we can afford to lose.
By Jayanthi Natarajan
Jayanthi Natarajan is a Congress MP in the Rajya Sabha and AICC spokesperson. The views expressed in this column are her own.
