INDIA TODAY

SUBSCRIBE

PRIVACY


LETTER FROM THE EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

MAIL OF THE WEEK

OFFTRACK


BODYLINE
INDIASCOPE

EXPERT VIEW
YOUR WEEK

EYECATCHERS
UPCOMING EVENTS

INDIA TODAY

CURRENT ISSUE NOVEMBER 08, 2004

NATION: THE LEFT

Hammer And Tongs

As the party of eternal dissent mistakenly plays the role of the earnest Opposition, it is appropriating the Congress' aam aadmi slogan, much to the ruling ally's embarrassment

By Lakshmi Iyer and Kaveree Bamzai

The year is 1973. Indira Gandhi throws a book by radical left-wing educationist Ivan Illich at one of her home-grown trophy leftists D.P. Dhar, then deputy chairman of the Planning Commission, asking him to read it. In a panic, he runs to Raj Thapar, another of Mrs Gandhi's kitchen cabinet leftists, to ask about Illich. It is cultural czarina Pupul Jaykar's idea. Illich is promptly invited, stays in India for a fortnight, and expounds on the deschooling theory.

PICTURE SPEAK

THE POWER BEHIND: Sonia and Manmohan (seated) with Yechury (left) and Surjeet at a UPA meeting

The leftist influence on the UPA Government is a little more direct, and comes from AKG Bhavan, an ugly PWD building down the road from the capital's main post office. And it is almost as confrontationist, especially when embodied in the person of Harkishen Singh Surjeet and his favourite ghost writer (and editor of party paper People's Democracy), Sitaram Yechury.

Over the past fortnight, the griping has become particularly grievous. Surjeet's list of people to be purged has sent a shudder through the bureaucracy, while his uncharitable utterances about the Congress' hunger for power in Maharashtra have not endeared him to his indulgent ally (see interview). It has also given Hindutva devotees fresh ammunition, even getting forgotten RSS chief K. Sudarshan headlines again when he accused the communists of backseat driving and trying to harm Hindu forces.

Power without responsibility is not new to the Left. The United Front government gave it enormous experience at playing a double game. In the past five months, the Left has inched its way into the commanding heights of decision-making, whether directly in Shastri Bhavan, where Arjun Singh's unfinished agenda (1991-1994) is unravelling itself, or indirectly in Left-friendly academics who can be depended upon to create a furore-whether it is through a nitpicking letter written to UNESCO to deny J.S. Rajput the Jan Amos Comenius award or a more justified one chronicling the RSS' penchant for giving jobs to the boys in the NDA government.

THE SPEEDBREAKERS

TELECOMMUNICATION

GOVERNMENT PROPOSED: To hike FDI in telecom from 49 to 74 per cent. Circulates cabinet note ahead of UPA-Left coordination meet in August.

WHAT THE LEFT DID: Peeved, it leaks its position paper to the media. But Chidambaram's rejoinder forces it reconcile to FDI inevitability.

"Telecom or disinvestment, there is no dichotomy
on FDI."
BUDDHADEB BHATTACHARYA, WEST BENGAL CHIEF MINISTER

INSURANCE

GOVERNMENT PROPOSED: To raise foreign equity in insurance firms from 26 to 49 per cent. Leftist trade unions opposed it as there could be job losses.

WHAT THE LEFT DID: Has voiced its opposition but cannot push further if the Government decides to amend laws with help from BJP in the Parliament.

"Our unions will be there so long as there are GIC
and LIC."
SITARAM YECHURY, CPI(M) POLITBURO MEMBER

DETOXIFICATION

GOVERNMENT PROPOSED: To allow most of the political appointees of the NDA government to complete their term. To desist from witch-hunting.

WHAT THE LEFT DID: Went to town about RSS-leaning officials and political appointees who remain in office. Sought their ouster on secular grounds.

"Surjeet's article naming officials got a good response."
PRAKASH KARAT, CPI(M) POLITBURO MEMBER

Those who have longer memories liken the period to S. Nurul Hasan's socialist restructuring of the nation's social steel frame between 1971 and 1977. All the major symbols of leftist intellectual excellence-which housed what the Hindutva brigade now like to call Marxputras, not Macaulayputras-were created in his tenure. The cultural organisations, imperial examples of the First Family's power, came later, the last being the most controversial, the Indira Gandhi National Centre for Arts.

PICTURE SPEAK

THE SPARK IS LIT: RSS chief Sudarshan (centre) with Advani

Ironically, more than the Congress, the Left is eager to reclaim them. While the HRD minister has done the Left proud, I&B and Culture Minister S. Jaipal Reddy is clearly dragging his feet. Ask him about saffron-tinged programmes such as the Rs 70 crore Indo-Saraswati excavation, which seeks to prove beyond doubt that the Indus Valley Civilisation was a proto-Hindu civilisation, and Reddy will only indulge in poli-babble: "Facts are sacred. I don't have a sweeping approach to de-ideologising.''

But there is a lot to boo in the NDA government's activities. HRD officials, handpicked by Arjun Singh to return to duty (they first worked with him in 1992), are up to their rolled shirtsleeves in examples of saffronisation of institutions. The most recent and glaring instance is that of the Preamble to the Constitution which was mysteriously removed from NCERT textbooks in 2000. A handful of the previous government's fellow travellers, such as G.C. Pande, Kireet Joshi and M.V. Kamath, were allowed to hold dual charge of institutions as well as be called upon to be part of almost every search committee for new appointments. The revised National Curriculum Framework was also not formally cleared.

Though Marxists like to believe they do not chase office, the cadres find it difficult to live down the contradiction of opposing the Congress in three states and sharing power with it at the Centre. Surjeet may laugh it away ("This is India. We see no difficulties in it," he says) but not all constituents of the Left are amused. Recently, the CPI(M) cornered four seats in a secret alliance with the Congress in Maharashtra, depriving the CPI of one seat-other Left parties came to know about it only when Congress leader Sushil Kumar Shinde talked.

Having had little success in pushing their economic agenda, the left has focused on purging the government's institutions of saffronistas.

THE DIVIDE WITHIN: The Left is happy with Arjun Singh (left) but thinks Chidambaram's budget could have done better

Yet Surjeet knows better than most the power of appearances, of maintaining a separate identity. Taken aback initially by the Left's protest over the raising of FDI caps, the Government soon took the sting out of the campaign by restricting foreign equity to private carriers. The Left's opposition to FDI in telecom also petered out when Finance Minister P. Chidambaram issued a point-by-point rejoinder to its objections. What remains on the FDI platter for the Left now is the insurance issue. But now that the four Left parties-CPI(M), CPI, RSP and the Forward Bloc-see they do not have enough numbers in Parliament to block the amendments in insurance law, they have decided to vigorously pursue the detoxification of NDA appointees.

An informal coalition of interests has emerged between some Congress ministers and Communist leaders, as was witnessed in the campaign against Planning Commission Deputy Chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia, to get rid of foreign consultants. It has also given some UPA ministers an excuse to hunt down IAS officers close to the previous regime. Labour Minister Sis Ram Ola has been particularly notorious for this. First he sent Central Provident Fund Commissioner Ajai Singh packing for his proximity to predecessor Sahib Singh Verma and divested additional secretary Baleshwar Rai and joint secretary D.S. Poonia of important assignments. In the I&B Ministry, joint secretary Sudhir Sharma was also put on compulsory wait.

BJP circles insist that the Congress will be discredited if it allows itself to be completely persuaded by the Left. Governance will suffer and so will its socialist credentials. But they accept the strategy's benefit for the Left. "It has happened to the Congress before. Emergency was an idea given by S.A. Dange. For long the communists have tried to infiltrate the Congress," says BJP's conspiracy theorist Seshadri Chari.

The Right versus Left divide is now out in the open-with the RSS front organisation Vidya Bharati chief Dinanath Batra launching the Shiksha Bachao Andolan, which is agitating against the "Talibanisation'' of education. The RSS is now trying to raise its favourite xenophobic bogey of communists actually being aliens (well, almost) in disguise. But it is an attack that the communists wear as a badge of honour. As CPI National Secretary D. Raja says, it is an acknowledgement that the Left is a force to be reckoned with.

The Congress knows that best.

INTERVIEW: HARKISHEN SINGH SURJEET

"We Express Our Position. But They Keep Defying Us."

At 88, Harkishen Singh Surjeet may be frail and barely audible, but there is no doubt that he takes his role as unofficial national policy adviser very seriously. His articles in the CPI(M) paper People's Democracy and his utterances on news channels have the power to send policy decisions of the UPA Government into a tailspin. Just back from a trip to London, the CPI(M) general secretary is not letting up on his vitriol, even as his handlers ensure he has his afternoon quota of sleep. Deputy Editor kaveree bamzai and Special Correspondent Lakshmi Iyer met him at the CPI(M) headquarters to see whether Surjeet's famous bark could turn into bite. Excerpts from the interview:

Q. Are you satisfied with the working of the UPA Government?
A. We have given the UPA Government a note on FDI in insurance and telecom. We have tried to impress upon them that they have to remain within the framework of the Common Minimum Programme. It unites us all. We expect them to follow that. But on many occasions, in the name of a financial crunch, they say this is required immediately, that is to be done soon. We don't like it. But they go on doing certain things on their own.

Q. For instance?
A. Take telecom. On financial matters they are lagging behind. The prime minister is aware of that. On the whole we are not satisfied. The main issue is that the burden should not fall on poor people. We have to be careful about it. Those sections whose condition is already bad should not be allowed to suffer further.

Q. So you feel the UPA Government is not doing enough for these sections.
A. Yes.

Q. Could you give specific areas where you feel the Government has not done enough?
A. I'm telling you. Take the budget itself. It doesn't fulfil the aspirations of the people. We have openly criticised it. They have passed the burden to the poorer sections. In these matters, they have to change their thinking. How it should be done or how the budget should be balanced is not our responsibility. It is theirs. They are not attending to this. Yes, there is a change in the budget but not the radical one that people expected.

Q. What radical changes do you want?
A. Such as schemes for employment generation. What is their plan? It is not before us. In many other matters we do not find sufficient successful measures. So naturally, we have to repeatedly remind them. For that a mechanism has been evolved-the Left meets representatives of the UPA Government once a month and tells them that they are deviating from the promises and that they have to change their position. We have had two meetings so far. They agree but the framework is such that they cannot do what we aim to do.

Q. You opposed FDI on civil aviation, yet it is happening. You opposed FDI on telecom, yet it looks likely to happen. Insurance may be opened up further as well. Where does that leave the Left?
A. We resist as much as we can. At the same time, the government machinery is in their hands. More time is lost in expressing our disagreement on issues where we differ.

Q. But you have not been able to oppose anything on the ground.
A. We express our position on all issues. They go on defying. It is not useful for them. The conflict goes on. But we have not lost hope yet. We believe they will realise how to manage by putting more weight on the poorer sections at the cost of working for the upper sections.

Q. But are you likely to lose hope? Will you have to withdraw support?
A. Change is there. Orientation is there. They are lagging behind in practical steps.

Q. Why don't you join the Government?
A. No, no. That is not an alternative. Practical experience shows that when you get committed to implement the policies, you do not adhere to the framework which we would like to have. Then the whole pressure which we want to bring is lost.

Q. What about detoxification? You are not satisfied even with HRD Minister Arjun Singh's attempts at desaffronisation. For instance, you have expressed unhappiness at his allowing J.S. Rajput to continue as NCERT director until he retired.
A. Arjun Singh has taken on Hindutva very boldly. You read my article. I have supported him and written how courageous he is. On that front, there is no difference between the Congress and us.

Q. But do you feel his ministerial colleagues could do a lot more, specifically I&B and Culture Minister S. Jaipal Reddy?
A. I don't want to name individuals at this juncture but people have not done as we expected.

Q. What would you like to see being done? Will there not be tremendous politicisation of the bureaucracy?
A. The bureaucracy has ruled for a long period. It is not easy for us to get rid of them. It will take time.

Q. Would you like to get rid of the bureaucracy completely?
A. I mean the type of people who work for personal benefit, for promotions, for any agenda. If they are removed it is good. They are roadblocks.

Q. But identifying each one of them will be a long process. It will be a witchhunt.
A. It is a question of process. In certain places, you are forced to take measures. In certain places, you go on adjusting.

Q. Would you have preferred to see Sonia Gandhi as prime minister?
A. It is not proper to talk of Sonia Gandhi now. Manmohan Singh was her choice. Sonia Gandhi's emergence as a leader shows the potential she has got. But India is a vast country. It is not easy for a woman who has no past experience to be able to hold the reins of power.

Q. Do you feel she is, in any case, running the Government?
A. I have not noticed it in any measures.

Q. Would you have wanted the Samajwadi Party to join the Government? Are you not close to it?
A. I am close to all politicians. In this combination, there was no possibility of any other party. The Congress did not want Mulayam Singh Yadav. But if more people had come together it would have been good.

Q. The Congress is unhappy with the position CPI(M) has taken on Maharashtra.
A. They are unhappy because we said that it was their business and that they should sort it out. They wanted us to say we were with them.

Q. You also said the Congress is hungry for power.
A. Whenever such an opportunity comes, they would like power for themselves. That is not the way the Left works.