HVK Archives: Red compromises on ideology to keep saffron forces at bay
Red compromises on ideology to keep saffron forces at bay - The Observer
Posted By Ashok V Chowgule (ashokvc@giasbm01.vsnl.net.in)
26 October 1996
Title : Red compromises on ideology to keep saffron
forces at bay
Author :
Publication : The Observer
Date : October 26, 1996
IT is becoming apparent that the Left, especially the CPI
(M), Is increasingly feeling exasperated with the po-
licies and actions of the United Front government. Over
the economic issues, particularly, foreign direct invest-
ment, public sector disinvestment, foreign participation
in the insurance sector there seems to be a marked diver-
gence of views.
Sitaram Yechury, CMI politburo member talked to E Jaya-
kilshnan in New Delhi about the party's views on the UF
government and other political developments.
Is not your party's support to the United Front govern-
ment becoming an embarrassment?
We have made it clear time and again that out support to
the UF government is one the issue of keeping the commu-
nal forces, represented by the BJP and the corruption of
the Congress at bay. That is the man-date, we think, that
the people have delivered. We will support the govern-
ment as long as that objectives remain. It is necessary
for all democratic forces to join hands at this important
juncture. Therefore, we would not like to take any steps
that negates that objective.
What about issues like foreign direct investment, public
sector disinvestment, foreign participation in the in-
surance sector and, on Wednesday, within hours of the
announcement of your support to the postal strike the
communication minister Beni Prasad Verma declared the
postal strike illegal?
It is not our case that on the economic front there are
no differences in perception. There are fundamental
differences between the Left and the government on the
economic policies. That is why, as we did not have the
numerical strength to influence the policies we did not
join the government, we are only supporting it from
outside. We reserve the right to oppose the policies
which we do not agree with, or are contrary to that
agreed upon in the Common Minimum Programme, in the
steering committee.
As regard to the postal strike, the communication min-
ister has gone on record saying that he will take up the
matter in the cabinet meeting and he is not opposed to
the demands of the workers. On most issues we have
written strong letters to the Prime Minister expressing
our strong reservations on some of the policies.
But is the CPM's expression of dissent confined to send-
ing letters of dissent to the Prime Minister? I am not
trying to suggest that our opposition is confined to
that. In fact, over the foreign participation in the
insurance sector we sought a division on the bill in
Parliament, during the last session. The point is that,
thus far, none of the policies, which we have disagree-
ments with the government have been sought to be imple-
mented. They have remained in the realm of policies. As
and when the government decides to implement these po-
licies. Any policy, which goes against the grain of the
Common Minimum Programme, we believe, is against the
interests of the people will be bitterly opposed by us.
We will not hesitate from taking the issue to the
streets.
How do you see the situation of stalemate in Uttar Pra-
desh?
We would like a secular government installed at Lucknow,
but without any preconditions. We have an open mind.
But two things are clear. One, if at all anybody has got
a mandate to rule in UP it is the Samajwadi Party. If
any one leader has been thrown up in the elections it is
Mulayam Singh Yadav. Two, because the situation is so
complex, and the segment BSP represents is important we
are willing to negotiate and bring together a broader
coalition. But, only if the BSP writes to the governor
affirming their commitment not join hands with communal
elements. That commitment is a precondition before we
consider any step involving the BSP.
We believe that the BSP's lack of consistency has been
one of the prime factors that has thwarted the quest for
a secular government in UP. But, we are hopeful.
The three-day CPM central Committee is scheduled to begin
on the 29th. What are the issues that are likely to be
taken up. Are you likely to review your support to the
government?
While a review of our support is not on the agenda of the
Central committee meeting, however, we are going to
discuss the political developments and evaluate our
position.
Our next step will be based on our evaluation. We are
not taking any predetermined steps. Other issues such as
UP and Kashmir are also on the agenda.
What is your position on the issue of the demand for
smaller states. Recently, there were reports that fis-
sures have developed between the CPI and the CPM on the
demand - for statehood for Gorkhaland and Uttarakhand?
Our position is that the division of states into smaller
units will open up a pandora's box.
It will give rise to similar demands from various groups.
The solution is not the formation of new states.
But the accommodation of the feelings of linguistic
groups, regions suffering from economic backwardness or
regions comprising contiguous tribal population.
They should be given administrative and financial autono-
my within the states.
While two of your chief ministers have called for the
repeal of Article 356, recently, during interstate coun-
cil meeting, the government has deemed it fit to use it
twice - in UP and Gujarat?
We are in favour of the abrogation, however, in Gujarat,
the governor seems to have had no choice considering the
violence in the assembly.
While in UP, the decision of the Supreme Court in the
Bommai case that the majority has to be decided on the
floor of the House does not hold because none of the
parties went to the governor claiming majority support.
Therefore, the situation in Uttar Pradesh was one stage
prior to that envisaged by the apex court and the Sarkar-
ia Commission.
The Left seems to have received a setback in the elec-
tions in recently held elections in JNU. Have you ana-
lysed the reasons?
If you see the voting pattern it is quite apparent that
it was the division in the votes of the SFI and the AISF
that led to the defeat.
Because, the aggregate of the combined votes of the SFI
and the AISF was more than the votes polled by the ABVP.
However, I concede that there are other social causes.
Since 1983, when the authorities were able to clamp down
on the student's movement in Jawaharlal Nehru University,
the admission policy has been skewed.
The majority of the admissions went to Delhi-based stud-
ents. Therefore, the politics of Delhi has got reflected
in the politics of the university. But, I do not think
that the ABVP is here to stay. Even earlier, a Congress
candidate won the president's post in 1993. But since
then the Congress had no credible presence in the uni-
versity.
Is the divisions in the Left in JNU symptomatic of the
differences between the CPI(M) and the CPI at the nation-
al level?
There are fundamental differences in our respective
understandings and that is why we are two different
parties. The CPI believes in the concept of joint hege-
mony - between the workers and the bourgeois to lead a
movement. While we believe that it is the working class
alone that will lead the struggle.
That is why they have joined the United Front government
led by Deve Gowda and we have chosen to support it from
outside.
Back
Top
|
