Sign In / Register
Make This My Home Page | Feedback |RSS
You are here: IE »   Story

Talking of talks

  • Print
  • Mail This Article
  • Comments
  • Add to favorites
  • Since they are waging a “protracted people’s war through the barrel of the gun”, Maoists will persist in eliminating their enemies. That came from arrested senior CPI (Maoist) leader Narla Rabi Sharma, as reported in this newspaper on Sunday. If that were not alarming enough, there is also the sophisticated organisational structure and resourcefulness of the Maoists — from elaborate vertical hierarchies and concentric divisions of activity to funds to state-of-the-art weapons to their presence in so many districts in so many states of the Indian Union where they not only offer socio-economic “services” but also engage in large-scale indoctrination in the tenets of their violent creed. They move in quietly, begin their propagandist onslaught, entrench themselves, start recruiting, and then embark on mining roads, blowing up bridges, railway stations, schools, raiding police stations for kidnapping or killing police personnel and looting arms. Their funds and arms come from diverse sources, but of particular concern must be the levies or fines that corporate and industrial giants pay the Maoists to carry on with their economic and industrial operations which are nevertheless anathema to the Naxals.

    That such insurgents would dismiss Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram’s crystal-clear, three-word appeal “Halt the violence” does not surprise. To the home minister’s call for an end to Maoist violence and the Union government’s offer of facilitating talks between Maoists and state governments on “all matters” — including land acquisition, industrialisation, development and forest rights — the CPI (Maoist) retorted that laying down arms would be a “betrayal of people’s interests” and that an agreement might be possible if the Centre abandoned its “illogical”, “obstinate” stand that Maoists abjure violence. Of course, technically, the Naxals were not being asked to lay down arms — their doing so is too fantastic to even imagine — but the insurgents leave no doubt through this response that they are nothing but cynical terrorists exploiting those they claim would be betrayed if they stopped killing their “enemies”.

    ... contd.

    Next12
    talking of talkssBy: gurmit Singh | 02-Nov-2009 Reply | Forward For an exuberant and fervent democracy, dissent is the law which must be attended to properly by the concerned authority. Since the Maoists are deeply entrenched comfortably at vantage points, their stance of killing the enemies is high. So engaging them in dialogue is the duty of the Govt. The situation has already gone considerably awry and there is much difference in the thinking of the insurgents and the Govt. which gap need be bridged.Along with the talks, there should be uniform development of the large tracts which have seen a skewed development. No doubt, the State Govt remained apathetic to this vital aspect, but they must be assured of this to win their heart. Since they are in full command of the tribal area of their choice, they are firmly entrenched and may refuse the talks. But perseverance and steadfastness shall enduringly bring results. The resort to the inevitable harsh measures should be thought only if the situation seems slipping out of hands.Hope for best bet
    Fourth estate should not deviate from upholding miseries of the poorBy: CK Raju Thrissur | 02-Nov-2009 Reply | Forward I wonder why ordinary people are still not worried about the presence of armed tribals - there's still not an iota of worry on their faces. These people see armed tribals, in the same vein as they see armed people representing the state. The role of media in raising the adrenalin of such armed congregations who mutually consider other group as their political opponent is alarming. Why are the people in media so much intolerant towards peace ? Why do they want violence to continue ? Has the media come to the conclusion that only violence can salvage its readership and guarantee their proprietors of their investment and interests ? When Indian citizens have the right to move in any part of the country, what sense does media project when it upholds and advises the state to restrict such movement and assert such actions as legitimate - and as the only way by which the state can *reclaim* its territory ? Is a police state a desirable one ? Media ought to uphold travails of miseries of poor.
    Terrorist Fourth Estate should face justice at the gallowsBy: john jacobs | 02-Nov-2009 Reply | Forward This extra constitutional militia with strong leftist overtones was allowed to grow and wreak death and destruction among people by the indifference of those in authority. The mob took advantage of this softness to embark themselves on daring acts of brutality on society, perhaps with the tacit approval of mainstream marxist parties.To rank them or even accept them along side lawful gendarmerie is an act of moral inversion.
    Sensible people should retract from aggresive postures.By: CK Raju Thrissur | 02-Nov-2009 Reply | Forward I don't think such a reading is completely correct. The very fact that tribals resort to arming themselves in order to gain upper hand over administration clearly points to the non-functioning of state administration by being non-responsive and appearing anti-tribal, and lack of education to the tribal folk. A combination of such situations is fertile for such arms-build up. The state's failure to protect resources of tribals, and to add to their misery, enacting legislations like special economic zones make them feel as if arming is the only way out. Leaders, should show the way, leading by example, giving up their own ancestral land for SEZs, if they truly feel the country would progress. Unfortunately not a single elected representative or a functionary of a party in power, is a victim of such legislation backed adventures of corporates on tribal areas or farmlands. India's resources cannot be earmarked for the welfare of the corporates and the representatives alone. The people ought to have more share in such resources. Unless the federal structures recoil their stand on such barbaric and uncivilised legislations - which shamelessly projects primitive greed and selfishness as necessary principles of human life - this violent stand-off promises longevity. Does it take too much of an intelligence to understand the situation ? Usually, it is one form of fundamentalism that gives birth to another, and the latter does not subside unless the former wades away. Such extremisms are a product of excess reliance and over-confidence on utopian capitalistic ways of life - which has so far never succeeded anywhere.
    Post a Comment
    Name:
    Email:
    Title:
    Maximum characters allowed     
    Comment:
    TERMS OF USE:
    The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
    I agree to the terms of use.