-Aranyak Saikia,
St Stephen's College
The time has come for us to have a
thorough analysis into the endless cycle of Red extremism that has engulfed
Central India and is threatening to spread its tentacles across other regions
of the country, particularly the Northeast.
Although numerous attempts have been made to explain why there is a
recurring cycle of violence in the Maoist affected states, there seems to have
been a systematic attempt at polarising the different approaches to explaining
Naxalism into two groups, namely the Pro-government and the Pro-Maoist, rather than
understanding the common strings of thought between the two approaches. This
polarisation then undermines the seriousness of the issue of tackling Red
extremism- that is becoming an obstacle to the long term peace and stability
and effectiveness of our democracy as a whole.
The
recent ambush of the senior leadership of the Chhattisgarh Congress and the
subsequent media outburst appears to have followed the above mentioned trend. On
one hand, we have the government and the people who are a part of the government
machinery branding the Maoists as brutal terrorists and on the other hand, we
have the ‘Maoist sympathizers’ who believe these killings are a genuine
expression of the frustration of the tribal people due to their exploitation at
the hands of the Congress leadership, notably Mahendra Karma who started the
Salwa Judum. However, a thorough analysis clearly shows that the situation
isn’t that black or white. Although a detailed analysis is beyond anyone’s
reach, it is still imperative that we try to assess this situation in a
holistic manner and maybe invoke Gandhian principles at a time when the nation
seems to have taken a large detour from Gandhi’s ideologies.
The
manifestation of red terror in Central India is the result, among others, of
the failure of the Government to provide effective governance in the tribal
regions and thereby deliver the fruits of development to those people. The
tribal regions comprising the forests of Central India are also rich in mineral
deposits which till recently were owned by the state and now this ownership is
being systematically transferred to individuals and large corporations in the
name of liberalisation. A large number of dams and other projects have also
been planned or are under construction in these areas. However, this has led to
the indigenous tribals and forest dwellers being alienated from their own land.
At the same time, the government has failed to provide adequate compensation
and rehabilitation to these people, resulting in their disillusionment with the
democratically elected government. These situations are therefore the fertile
breeding grounds of political and social movements that seek to change or
overthrow the existing form of governance. Maoism is just one of those politically
motivated movements that have been able to hijack attention towards the entire
issue of development of the tribal people through its use of terrorism,
extortion and violence.
Many
people, including the Maoists, argue that the ownership of the resources should
be given to the tribals who are better capable at managing the resources in a
sustainable manner, unlike the big corporations whose sole motive is to exploit
these resources to earn greater profits. It is here that Gandhi’s vision of
‘production by the masses’ instead of mass production comes into focus. Mahatma
Gandhi made clear his hatred for mass production and the development model
followed by the West. Although the Government has taken many of its policies
keeping Gandhiji’s ideologies in mind, the recent attempts at liberalisation
and to achieve the growth model followed by the West have actually highlighted
its serious derailment from his ideologies which has actually aggravated the
tribal-government conflict in the forests of Central India. Now-a-days, even
the West is arguing about the effectiveness and necessity of such a development
model based on large scale exploitation of natural resources and mass
production that has serious environmental repercussions. Even the Stiglitz
Commission set up by French President Nicholas Sarkozy agreed that non-market
activity that actually results in sustainability of resources should be given
greater significance and weightage while measuring the development of nations.
This
is exactly what Gandhi envisioned when he questioned the Western model of
development. And this is exactly what the Indian Government seems not to be doing. It has systematically
tried to exploit India’s resources without estimating the costs of large scale
environmental degradation. In the process, it has developed a form of crony
capitalism that has prevented even the benefits of capitalism from reaching the
nation’s citizens. Many of the mines operated in the tribal dominated forests
of Central India are illegal. The recent Supreme Court rulings banning such
illegal mining activity has been cited as one of the reasons for the negative
growth registered by the mining sector in the last quarter. All this goes to
show that our government’s present policies are not really capable of managing
the mining sector.
This
argument however, does not go on to show that Gandhiji believed in Maoist
ideologies. Gandhi’s ideology of non-violence and democracy are completely at
odds with the Maoists, as recent incidents show. The Maoists have just filled
the void where the Government has left. Thus, although the government cannot
‘deliver development’ in Maoist affected areas, it can actually send the right
message by providing greater rights to the tribals in areas where the threat of
Maoism has been eliminated. It should follow this by greater access to
healthcare and other welfare activities. At the same time, the government must
ensure greater accountability of the officials and bureaucrats who are posted
in those regions to prevent ‘administrative leakage’- an euphemism for
corruption. It is only then can Gandhi’s vision of equal opportunity for all
and peaceful existence through empowerment of the indigenous people can be
realized.
