[DEBATE] : (Fwd) W.Bengal controversy

[Jai Sen]

Tuesday, November 27, 2007

PS : Apologies for some duplication – Nicola’s posting as below came  
in even as I was preparing mine !  And though I had checked my Inbox  
just ten minutes before that, to avoid duplication, I did not check  
again / see this before sending mine off.

             But I guess my reaching copies of this to the  
signatories of the India letter was still useful – and I still think  
we should act on Peter Waterman’s suggestion.

             Any volunteers ?

             Jai


On 27-Nov-07, at 8:42 AM, Nicola Bullard wrote:

> A communication was sent from Sanhati to Susan George, asking her  
> to check our website (www.sanhati.com) and come to independent  
> conclusions regarding the happenings in Nandigram. She has  
> withdrawn her signature from the statement issued by Noam Chomsky  
> and others. Her response is given below.
>
> ********************************************************************** 
> ********************************************************
>
> Dear Friends, thank you for getting in touch. Please see my  
> response and feel free to distribute if you like,
>
> All good wishes, solidarity,
>
> Susan George
>
> ********************************************************************** 
> *******************************************************
>
> To my friends in India:
>
> Without wishing to place responsibility on anyone but myself, I  
> want to apologise for having signed the common letter concerning  
> Nandigram and hereby withdraw my signature. I signed because the  
> statement seemed reasonable, recognised that the signatories “could  
> not say anything definitive”, seemed compatible with principles  
> like left unity and non-violence which I try to uphold and, above  
> all, had been previously signed by people I greatly admire and  
> respect. Due to a certain urgency, I gave my name without  
> consulting friends in India, particularly the two Indian Fellows of  
> the Transnational Institute, Praful Bidwai and Achin Vanaik, as I  
> ought normally to have done.
>
> Now I have received further information from Indians who have  
> regretted my signature and, while exercising great comradely  
> restraint towards me personally, have pointed to the recent tragic  
> events in Nandigram as unequivocally the responsibility of the CPI 
> [M]. All the communications sent to me blame the government, but  
> having consulted other signatories, I learn that some of them have  
> received thanks and letters of support, also from India.
>
> While my instinct is quite naturally to side with those who have  
> written to me personally, particularly my TNI comrades, I regret  
> above all that I was presumptuous enough to comment, however  
> mildly, on a situation I was not, and am not, in any position to  
> judge. I hope my Indian friends will forgive this presumption and  
> accept my regrets for having signed a letter which has been used  
> politically in India in ways I cannot condone and do not approve.
>
> In solidarity,
>
> Susan George
>
> *********************************************
>
> peter waterman wrote:
>> Having read both the original Open Letter below and the response  
>> of Kunal Chattopadhyay, I wish to identify myself with his challenge.
>> I am shocked by both the content and tone of the original letter,  
>> a mealy-mouthed statement and exercise in apologetics, which can  
>> only give comfort to the Party-State in West Bengal.
>> I would like to suggest that someone write to the co-signators to  
>> get their response to the Chattopadhyay statement. If they signed  
>> the Open Letter, they are co-responsible for the behaviour of a  
>> regime that was of a bureaucratic-authoritarian nature even when I  
>> visited Calcutta, over 25 years ago. I would have liked to believe  
>> that the Western Left - particularly that part identified with the  
>> World Social Forum - was beyond such state-oriented apologetics.  
>> Apparently not.
>> I cannot write to the signators myself since I am travelling  
>> tomorrow and don't know when I will next have access to the web.  
>> But I am quite prepared to co-sign any appeal to them to respond  
>> individually to Chattopadhyay.
>> Peter Waterman
>> (formerly, Institute of Social Studies, The Hague)
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: <pbond at mail.ngo.za>
>> To: <debate at lists.kabissa.org>
>> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 1:41 PM
>> Subject: [DEBATE] : (Fwd) W.Bengal controversy
>>> An Open Letter to Tariq Ali - Nov. 21, 2007
>>> By Kunal Chattopadhyay, Radicalblogger
>>>
>>> Dear Tariq,
>>>
>>> When I was a very young radical, still a Maoist rather than a  
>>> Trotskyist, it was your name, rather than that of Ernest Mandel,  
>>> or of anyone else, that we came across, here in our part of  
>>> India. There are still older comrades in West Bengal, who talk  
>>> about a certain period of Fourth International history, in terms  
>>> of "in those days of Tariq Ali". This is why, a statement, even  
>>> though signed by Chomsky, Zinn and others, along with the man who  
>>> seems to have carried out the coup, a gentleman named Vijay  
>>> Prashad, becomes most painful because you are among the  
>>> signatories. As you once wrote in one of your wonderful books,  
>>> about another comrade of yours, 'there was fire in his belly in  
>>> those days'. Perhaps we have all grown older, but some of us have  
>>> refused to grow "wiser".
>>>
>>> I read, and re-read, with a growing sense of wonder, shame and  
>>> above all anger, "the statement that some of you have signed. If  
>>> you are uninformed, what gave you the authority to issue a  
>>> pompous statement based on that lack of information? I write to  
>>> you, because I consider you a comrade who has committed a mistake  
>>> in signing this statement.
>>>
>>> Right at the beginning, you write:
>>>
>>> News travels to us that events in West Bengal have overtaken the  
>>> optimism that some of us have experienced during trips to the  
>>> state. We are concerned about the rancor that has divided the  
>>> public space, created what appear to be unbridgeable gaps between  
>>> people who share similar values.
>>>
>>>
>>> Who are these people who share similar values? Just what do you  
>>> know about the values shared by those in governmental authority  
>>> in West Bengal? You, and those others amongst you, who made trips  
>>> here, met some of the CPI(M)'s intellectuals, who put on a  
>>> special face for foreign delegations. But as someone who has  
>>> known Marxism for longer than I have, you know well that it is  
>>> never possible to judge people solely by what they say about  
>>> themselves. When someone uses words like democracy, even  
>>> socialism, anti-imperialism, unless you know the context, unless  
>>> you know exactly what their political practice is, you cannot  
>>> assume that they say those words in the same way that you, or  
>>> someone else does.
>>>
>>> So let us begin by looking at values. Just a small example of  
>>> values. When the Singur -Nandigram issues began blowing up, Medha  
>>> Patkar, who happens to be one of India's most respected social  
>>> movement activists, someone who has therefore been vilified by  
>>> parties and governments across India, extended her solidarity for  
>>> the militant people. CPI(M) leaders took umbrage. CPI(M) State  
>>> Secretariat member (and Central Committee member) Benoy Konar, in  
>>> a speech, called on women to show Medha Patkar their buttocks.  
>>> When Medha tried to go to Nandigram, her car was blockaded, and  
>>> some people, supporters of the CPI(M), indeed followed Konar's  
>>> advice and showed Medha their buttocks. I could quote dozens of  
>>> newspaper and television reports, but most clippings I have are  
>>> in Bengali, so I give you the url of Medha's own report.
>>>
>>> I dare you, or any of your co-signatories, with the exception of  
>>> Mr. Vijay Prashad, to come forward and assert that you share  
>>> similar values as these people.
>>>
>>> I am sure, that once this open letter is circulated, it will also  
>>> be trivialized by the murders who are posing as leftists and  
>>> persuading you to sign on behalf of them. So let me say that this  
>>> is not the only issue I am talking about when we say values. I  
>>> will be talking about political outlook and values in other ways.  
>>> But Tariq, in the most extreme days of the IMT line, when talking  
>>> about guerilla warfare, did you ever call on your comrades to do  
>>> unto political opponents, that which Benoy Konar suggested and  
>>> that which his followers obliged by doing?
>>>
>>> If by values you mean left wing values, you would have to define  
>>> more precisely what sort of leftism you are talking about. CPI(M)  
>>> leaders and their government here in West Bengal are deeply  
>>> wedded to a very authoritarian form of bourgeois democracy. I  
>>> will be able to mention only a few cases below. But perhaps the  
>>> clearest evidence is this - despite the fact that in the period  
>>> 1971-1977, the Congress in power used utmost brutality, had  
>>> people illegally arrested, tortured, many actually killed, in  
>>> three decades in power, the CPI(M) led government has failed to  
>>> carry though the prosecution of a single police officer of that era.
>>>
>>> In your statement, you present a euphemistic comment, saying that  
>>> you are concerned about the rancor that has divided the public  
>>> space. The "rancor" that you talk about is the result of a long  
>>> period of violation of civil liberties, of brutal repression of  
>>> political opposition and massive use of party cadres as thugs.  
>>> The most respected civil liberties organization in West Bengal ,  
>>> the Association for the Protection of Democratic Rights, has  
>>> recently been targeted by the chief minister, who claimed that  
>>> the APDR is a Maoist outfit. The crime of the APDR was that it  
>>> has consistently argued that everyone has political and civil  
>>> rights, and these cannot be circumscribed without threatening all  
>>> of us.
>>>
>>> Let me again give some illustration. Attacks on the Maoists,  
>>> especially the organizations CPI(ML) Peoples' War, the Maoist  
>>> Communist Centre, and after they merged, the CPI(Maoist) have  
>>> been massive. Anyone suspected of being a Maoist has been  
>>> arrested, even without real charges. And why is someone  
>>> suspected? In Medinipur district, an activist of the APDR was  
>>> arrested as a suspected Maoist, on the strength of material found  
>>> in his possession. Such material included a copy of George  
>>> Thompson's From Marx to Mao-tse Tung. I still have a copy at  
>>> home, and I am wondering when it will be my turn to be arrested.  
>>> In Kolkata, a man was arrested on suspicion of being a Maoist,  
>>> and he was so traumatized by police action, that he committed  
>>> suicide. (Ananda Bazar patrika, 9.7.2002). Four days after Ananda  
>>> Bazar Patrika wrote about this, the CPI(M) daily newspaper,  
>>> Ganashakti, reported that Benoy Konar told journalists, in reply  
>>> to a question on whether the police had overstepped the  
>>> boundaries of
>>> human rights, that it is difficult to determine the boundaries of  
>>> human rights. In addition, Konar treated the media to the homily  
>>> that the baton of the police is used as a repressive apparatus.  
>>> (Ganashakti, 11.7,02). In 2002, the Chief Minister said that the  
>>> KLO in North Bengal or the Maoists elsewhere were holding up  
>>> development. So the priority for development was used to justify  
>>> violence on them. The Home Minister's budget speech for 2002-2003  
>>> seeking additional funds for the police highlighted the  
>>> commitment of the state to modernisation of the police for  
>>> counter-insurgency; at a time when the government's debt burden  
>>> had risen to 7500 billion rupees. (Amit Bhattacharya, 'Duhsomoy:  
>>> Ganatantra, Manabadhikar O Paschimbanger 'Sangbedanshil' Sarkar',  
>>> in Bartaman Lokayatik, 2002-2003, Nos. 3-4 and 1-2, pp. 238-270 .  
>>> See especially pp. 245-7; and also Ananda Bazar Patrika, 7.8.2002) .
>>>
>>> There has been a long, very long trail of state and party  
>>> sponsored violence. The APDR has regularly listed cases. Two  
>>> comrades, members of the Nari Nirjatan Pratirodh Mancha (Forum  
>>> Against Oppression of Women, Kolkata), Mira Roy and Soma Marik,  
>>> have written a booklet, Women Under the left Front rule:  
>>> Expectations Betrayed, where violence on women have been  
>>> discussed extensively. Not all are cases of political violence.  
>>> In many cases, we have seen how rapists have been defended by  
>>> leaders of the ruling party. For example, in August 1991, a young  
>>> woman had been arrested from a hotel in Kanthi, where she had  
>>> registered with a male friend. She was then raped by the police.  
>>> Virtually defending the police, Acting Chief Minister Benoy  
>>> Chowdhury told the West Bengal Assembly that she had registered  
>>> under an assumed name with a male friend. In other words, since  
>>> she was a presumably unmarried woman "gone bad" it was fair  
>>> enough if the police had a little fun with her. Values I share with
>>> them? No thanks.
>>>
>>> Violence over Singur and Nandigram are not unrelated to the  
>>> foregoing. At one level, they reflect the culture of violence  
>>> supported by the ruling party. At another level, they reflect the  
>>> submission to neo-liberal globalization, even while a huge  
>>> rhetoric is floated abroad for the consumption of international  
>>> left-wing intellectuals. After all, we boast of an intellectual  
>>> chief minister capable of quoting noted poets as part of his  
>>> political spiels. So he needs the endorsement of intellectuals.
>>>
>>> You write, "We continue to trust that the people of Bengal will  
>>> not allow their differences on some issues to tear apart the  
>>> important experiments undertaken in the state (land reforms,  
>>> local self-government)." Since the signature is mostly of  
>>> leftwing persons, and since in particular I am writing to you, a  
>>> well-known Marxist, I trust the signatories, and especially you,  
>>> know that there is no unified and homogeneous people. I am sorry  
>>> if I have to spell out such truisms. But in these days of triumph  
>>> of neo-liberalism, this kind of woolly-woolly, non-class language  
>>> is being resorted to, even by those whom I have always treated as  
>>> charter members of the class struggle camp. West Bengal is part  
>>> of India, and India is a bourgeois state with an economy where  
>>> extremes coexist. From the latest in Information Technology in  
>>> Sector V of Salt Lake, it will take you just about two and a half  
>>> hours by car to get to Nandigram, where you have plenty of poor  
>>> peasants eking out a living much as their
>>> grandparents did. Not that there has been no change, no  
>>> development, but that has been limited development in a backward  
>>> capitalist economy. Since the current conflicts seem minor to  
>>> you, compared to the "important experiments", let us look at  
>>> those experiments briefly. As I am not writing a treatise, I do  
>>> not intend to write for long pages, nor to provide extensive  
>>> footnotes. It is however necessary to question fundamentally the  
>>> false claims of the West Bengal Government, that you seem to have  
>>> swallowed hook, line and sinker.
>>>
>>> Some years back, when the PRC had just started its trek back to  
>>> class collaborationist politics, a comrade in the PRC named  
>>> Franco Grisolia wrote to two of us, asking for a note on the CPI 
>>> (M) led government, as well as CPI(M)'s support to the UPA at the  
>>> center, because this model was being held up by supporters of  
>>> Bertinotti to justify their turn to the right. So Soma Marik and  
>>> I wrote a longish essay, The Left Front and the United  
>>> Progressive Alliance, one version of which was published in  
>>> Italian, and another version, in English, was put up in the  
>>> website of our comrades of Socialist Democracy, Irish supporters  
>>> of the Fourth International.
>>>
>>> Just one paragraph from that essay will reveal an interesting  
>>> story: "The key issue of land distribution, in fact, tells an  
>>> interesting story. In 1967, and again in 1969, two short-lived  
>>> United Front governments had been formed. There had been a mass  
>>> upsurge, and huge land seizures and distribution. OF ALL the  
>>> ceiling-surplus land vested with the state since 1953 (when the  
>>> West Bengal Estate Acquisition Act was passed) and the year 2000,  
>>> as much as 44 per cent of this land (6 lakh acres) was obtained  
>>> in the five-year period between 1967 and 1972, thanks to the  
>>> energetic initiatives of the two United Fronts; another 26% (3.5  
>>> lakh acres) had been acquired earlier. In the last 20 years of  
>>> Left Front rule only 1.53 lakh acres were acquired, which amounts  
>>> to almost a quarter of what was achieved during the very short UF  
>>> regime and almost a half of what was obtained during the 14 years  
>>> (1953-1967) of Congress rule." The two United Front governments  
>>> saw an active left, and one moreover
>>> facing a serious challenge from the emerging Maoist forces who  
>>> eventually became the CPI (ML). Land reform at that time was  
>>> based on popular initiative, not bureaucratic measures. The  
>>> collapse of the governments clearly taught the CPI (M) a lesson -  
>>> to wit, do not rock the boat of the bourgeoisie and their  
>>> partners if you want a long stint.
>>>
>>> As for the important local self government experiments that you  
>>> talk about, what, really, is significant? The three tier  
>>> panchayat system has been in operation in other provinces as  
>>> well. Digvijay Singh, the Congress chief minister of Madhya  
>>> Pradesh, took measures to extend it to the level of the  
>>> individual village. Despite much talk about panchayats being  
>>> organs of self-rule of peasants, rich peasants and teachers  
>>> formed the bulk. And given the fact that the poorer classes  
>>> seldom were able to let their children finish secondary  
>>> education, let alone college, teachers came from rich peasant  
>>> families, or from non-agricultural families. A survey in one of  
>>> the districts, Purulia, further showed that real help was  
>>> received from the government's developmental projects by a  
>>> significant part of the rural rich, using their positions in the  
>>> panchayats. (Prabir Bhattacharyya, ed, Anva Artha 19: Bamfront  
>>> Sarkar-Ekti Mulyayan, Calcutta, May 1985, pp.11-14.)
>>>
>>> You next write:
>>>
>>> "We send our fullest solidarity to the peasants who have been  
>>> forcibly dispossessed. We understand that the government has  
>>> promised not to build a chemical hub in the area around  
>>> Nandigram. We understand that those who had been dispossessed by  
>>> the violence are now being allowed back to their homes, without  
>>> recrimination. We understand that there is now talk of  
>>> reconciliation. This is what we favor."
>>>
>>> This paragraph was drafted by/ is based on arguments by someone  
>>> who is a dab hand at creating confusions that eventually aid  
>>> exploiters, but is at the same time able to pull the wool over  
>>> the eyes of leftists who are a little away from the scene. "We  
>>> send our fullest solidarity to the peasants who have been  
>>> forcibly dispossessed." Exactly which groups are you talking  
>>> about? Evidently not those of Singur, since the next sentence  
>>> clearly talks about Nandigram. In Singur, a colonial era law was  
>>> used to dispossess peasants, to hand over land to one of India's  
>>> major capitalist concerns, the Tatas. Even if we accept, (as I do  
>>> not, as I hope you still do not), the logic of the "free market",  
>>> why should a supposedly progressive government use a colonial law  
>>> to dispossess peasants for the benefit of a capitalist group that  
>>> is so rich that it can bid for and win in a battle to control a  
>>> First World company? Why did the government not tell the Tatas to  
>>> go and negotiate directly with the
>>> peasants so that they could get whatever benefits they were able  
>>> to wrest? Moreover, perhaps your informants forgot to tell you,  
>>> that there were vast numbers of share croppers, agricultural  
>>> labourers, as well as people in various industries and  
>>> transportation sectors in and around Singur, for whom the rich  
>>> agricultural land of singur mattered. Thus, people in the potato  
>>> industry (for Singur grows potato) lost out. People transporting  
>>> potato lost out. Wage labourers lost out. And these, the  
>>> proletarian sections, have received what compensation? The  
>>> answer, dear Tariq, is zilch.
>>>
>>> So let us pass on to Nandigram. There, your statement is  
>>> extraordinarily damaging. If it had come from comparable  
>>> intellectuals in India, I would have used stronger language. I  
>>> suppose that ignorance lets you partially off the hook. What is  
>>> sad is that you think it perfectly legitimate to issue a  
>>> statement even though you are ignorant about the details.
>>>
>>> There have been two charges of being dispossessed. On 6th  
>>> January, 2007, CPI(M) thugs attacked peasants, and the  
>>> retaliatory violence drove out a number of them. A further lot  
>>> left of their own, fearful of the situation. They all stayed in a  
>>> place called Khejuri. The CVPI(M) has claimed high figures -  
>>> sometimes mentioning 1500, sometimes 3000. No independent  
>>> investigation has proved this. Several of us went to Nandigram  
>>> after the CPI(M) attack of 14 March, when 14 persons, at least,  
>>> were murdered, and at least four women were raped. At that time,  
>>> our investigations suggested that the total number of CPI(M)  
>>> supporters forced to leave Nandigram were around 300. The APDR  
>>> twice sent teams to Khejuri, and suggested a figure of around  
>>> 350. Out of these, some 35 had clearly been identified by  
>>> peasants in Nandigram as active elements in the so-called cadre  
>>> force of CPI(M) , i.e., the gun toting criminals who eventually  
>>> carried out the November attacks to "reconquer" Nandigram. Now,  
>>> in the
>>> first days, tens of thousands fled. Over the last few days they  
>>> have trickled back, after having pledged loyalty to the CPI(M).  
>>> So there is no recrimination, provided you have the 100% support  
>>> for the CPI(M).
>>>
>>> You write that you understand that the government has promised  
>>> not to build a chemical hub around Nandigram. This specific  
>>> reference comes as a surprise. Because it is actually once again  
>>> a case of your walking into a trap. First, the chemical hub, and  
>>> a number of similar proposals, are all of the same type - calls  
>>> to build SEZs. If SEZs are built, who will they benefit? They  
>>> will not follow even India's far from excellent labour laws.  
>>> Secondly, the chemical hub, wherever built, is going to be an  
>>> environmental disaster. Finally, and most crucially, the West  
>>> Bengal government never formally promised not to build the  
>>> chemical hub in Nandigram. What they said was that it will not be  
>>> built in Nandigram if the people do not want it. Now, after the  
>>> CPI(M) conquest,( for that is what it was, it was not even the  
>>> state apparatus going in, but armed forces of the major party of  
>>> the Left Front), what if people are compelled to say that yes,  
>>> they do want the chemical hub? Let me remind you, that
>>> the CPI(M) is among the world's largest surviving parties of  
>>> Stalinist origin, and while the Moscow tie is long gone, the  
>>> Moscow style has been retained - but in the service of  
>>> capitalism. Today's (21st November) newspapers already carry a  
>>> news about how peasants have been forced to give written  
>>> apologies to the CPI(M) in order to go and work in their fields.
>>>
>>> You talk of reconciliation. Between whom do you wish for  
>>> reconciliation? Now that the CPI(M) has actually conquered the  
>>> territory by force, would a humble acquiescence, given the  
>>> inability to do anything else, be treated as reconciliation?  
>>> Perhaps a little more detail about who the cadres were and how  
>>> they fought the peasants would come in handy. Cadres - local  
>>> criminals mostly involved in robbery cases - for the operation  
>>> were drawn from Chandrakona and Garbeta zonal committees. Also,  
>>> cadres were sent from Narayangarh and Keshiary areas. Another  
>>> group of around 250 armed CPM supporters and criminals came from  
>>> the villages of Punishol at Onda and Rajpur, Taldangra in Bankura.
>>>
>>> Sources said criminals were given money in advance and given a  
>>> free-hand to bring whatever they could from the empty homes once  
>>> the operation is complete. Sources said one such group that has  
>>> returned to Onda came with motorcycles.
>>>
>>> The Bankura group reached Nandigram after travelling by train and  
>>> then road. The group boarded trains and allegedly got off at  
>>> Balichak, four stations after Kharagpur, and then headed towards  
>>> Nandigram via Khejuri in the guise of daily wage earners. They  
>>> take the same disguise when they go to Bihar and Jharkhand to  
>>> collect arms, sources said.
>>>
>>> Most of these people are suspected to be running arms smuggling  
>>> rackets. The arms used in the recapture operation are believed to  
>>> have been supplied from these suppliers.
>>>
>>> Another cache of arms came from Purulia where party workers had  
>>> received arms to combat Maoists. It is also suspected that the  
>>> arms gone missing after the Purulia arms drop are with CPM  
>>> supporters and were smuggled to Nandigram.
>>>
>>> The coal mafia from Burdwan is also believed to have played a key  
>>> role in the operation. The money from the mafia is believed to  
>>> have supplied funds for the operation, helped in procuring  
>>> ammunition and hire vehicles that carried the armed men to the  
>>> interior areas as the attack progressed.
>>>
>>> In your final paragraph, written in bold type in the version I  
>>> received, you write:
>>>
>>> "The balance of forces in the world is such that it would be  
>>> impetuous to split the left. We are faced with a world power that  
>>> has demolished one state (Iraq) and is now threatening another  
>>> (Iran). This is not the time for division when the basis of  
>>> division no longer appears to exist."
>>>
>>> So here we get the motivation that led you to write the letter.  
>>> You do not wish for a split in the left in the face of resurgent  
>>> US imperialism. Let me go back several years. As you are aware,  
>>> the Fourth International had been great supporters of the  
>>> Nicaraguan Revolution, and we, here in locally, tried our best to  
>>> campaign for Nicaragua. At one stage, when Halima Lopez Sarkar  
>>> was appointed the Nicaraguan ambassador to India, the CPI(M)  
>>> decided to take up the campaign for Nicaragua. Of c ourse, with  
>>> their incomparably bigger force, they could do much more. But  
>>> when I had a talk with a Sandinista comrade who came here, he  
>>> accused us of being sectarian to the CPI(M). I pointed out that  
>>> our problem was simple - the CPI(M) would not even let us do any  
>>> united front work while retaining our independent political  
>>> stance. So even if we accept, as you obviously do, that the CPI 
>>> (M) is a legitimate part of the left, how would we be able to  
>>> avoid a split? In emails where what passes for debates,
>>> CPI(M) supporters are not only abusive towards us, but even to  
>>> RSP or forward Bloc, partners of the CPI(M) in the Left Front who  
>>> have been critical about Nandigram as well as the CPI(M)'s sudden  
>>> volte face over the Nuclear Deal.
>>>
>>> Yet you are confident, that it is we who are impetuously causing  
>>> the split. Tariq, the split is decades old. The CPI(M)'s idea of  
>>> political hegemony is simple - bash everyone on the left till  
>>> they genuflect before you. But according to you and your fellow  
>>> signatories, the basis of divisions no longer appears to exist.  
>>> If by this you mean that Nandigram's resistance has been smashed,  
>>> that armed terrorists of the CPI(M) have silenced the peasants,  
>>> you are of course right. The basis however exists, because we  
>>> have been unable to accept what was done.
>>>
>>> Your argument, that in the face of the US, we must not fight the  
>>> CPI(M), can be extended to every tin pot dictator who takes a  
>>> formal anti-US stand. Meanwhile, the CPI(M) led government  
>>> constantly strives to welcome multinationals, it fights tooth and  
>>> nail in defence of globalization. In lieu of several more pages  
>>> of details, I offer you the URL of Sanhati (Solidarity), an anti- 
>>> globalization website. Here you will find plenty of discussions  
>>> about the Left front government and globalization.
>>>
>>> Nonetheless, you will say, what about the Left and its ability to  
>>> influence the Government of India, or its ability to bring out  
>>> millions in demonstrations? Once more, even accepting your  
>>> premise that when you say CPI(M) you still say Left (would you  
>>> make the same concession for the right wing of the old Italian  
>>> CP?) , why can we not oppose the CPI(M) on other issues? Or are  
>>> you saying, that in the face of the US war threat, all class  
>>> questions inside India disappear? Are you saying that those who  
>>> are in government and are implementing World Bank-IMF dictated  
>>> economic policies are such valiant fighters against imperialism  
>>> that we must accept the loving pats they give us, even through  
>>> their guns? Would demobilizing militant fighters be then the best  
>>> road to militant anti-imperialism? I never learnt that from Marx,  
>>> Engels, Lenin, Trotsky, Luxemburg or Mandel.
>>>
>>> Long years of defeat and retreat have made many of us cautious. I  
>>> agree that the power of US imperialism is greater than it was.  
>>> But I firmly believe that we can best contribute to the anti- 
>>> imperialist struggles by consistent anti-capitalism at the point  
>>> of our existence. When I joined the Trotskyist movement, nearly  
>>> three decades back, this was clear to me. This was clear to me  
>>> even before that, when I understood the meaning of Che's call to  
>>> create two, three, many Vietnams. And yes, on 14th November,  
>>> despite attempts to turn the protest demonstration into an  
>>> "apolitical" show by some high profile figures, there were  
>>> banners and posters, like the one that said, Nandigram is  
>>> Bengal's Vietnam, or the poster where Marx says, "Not in My  
>>> name." Don't, please, call for a cession of the struggles of  
>>> toilers in Marx's name, and don't claim that bourgeois reformism,  
>>> like some land distribution, some registration of sharecroppers,  
>>> or panchayat elections, make West Bengal a planet apart. Stand
>>> by those who have been murdered, and their comrades, and don't  
>>> call for a reconciliation between defenders of the ruling class  
>>> who use sophisticated Marxist sounding jargon, and the crude,  
>>> unsophisticated, but militant fighters who resist them.
>>>
>>> With comradely greetings
>>>
>>> Kunal Chattopadhyay
>>>
>>> Professor of History
>>> Jadavpur University
>>> Fourth Internationalist since 1980
>>>
>>> ******************************************************************** 
>>> **************************************************************
>>>
>>> Text of Statement
>>>
>>> To Our Friends in Bengal.
>>>
>>> News travels to us that events in West Bengal have overtaken the  
>>> optimism that some of us have experienced during trips to the  
>>> state. We are concerned about the rancor that has divided the  
>>> public space, created what appear to be unbridgeable gaps between  
>>> people who share similar values. It is this that distresses us.  
>>> We hear from people on both sides of this chasm, and we are  
>>> trying to make some sense of the events and the dynamics.  
>>> Obviously, our distance prevents us from saying anything  
>>> definitive. We continue to trust that the people of Bengal will  
>>> not allow their differences on some issues to tear apart the  
>>> important experiments undertaken in the state (land reforms,  
>>> local self-government).
>>>
>>> We send our fullest solidarity to the peasants who have been  
>>> forcibly dispossessed. We understand that the government has  
>>> promised not to build a chemical hub in the area around  
>>> Nandigram. We understand that those who had been dispossessed by  
>>> the violence are now being allowed back to their homes, without  
>>> recrimination. We understand that there is now talk of  
>>> reconciliation. This is what we favor.
>>>
>>> The balance of forces in the world is such that it would be  
>>> impetuous to split the left. We are faced with a world power that  
>>> has demolished one state (Iraq) and is now threatening another  
>>> (Iran). This is not the time for division when the basis of  
>>> division no longer appears to exist.
>>>
>>> Noam Chomsky, author, Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the  
>>> Assult on Democracy.
>>>
>>> Tariq Ali, author, Pirates of the Caribbean: Axis of Hope and  
>>> editor, New Left Review.
>>>
>>> Howard Zinn, author, A Power Governments Cannot Suppress.
>>>
>>> Susan George, author, Another World is Possible if, and Fellow,  
>>> Transnational Institute.
>>>
>>> Victoria Brittain, co-author, Enemy Combatant: A British Muslim's  
>>> Journey to Guantanamo and Back, former editor, Guardian.
>>>
>>> Walden Bello, author, Dilemmas of Domination. The Unmaking of the  
>>> American Empire, and Chair, Akbayan, the fastest growing party in  
>>> the Philippines.
>>>
>>> Mahmood Mamdani, author, Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: America, The  
>>> Cold War and the Roots of Terror.
>>>
>>> Akeel Bilgrami, author, Politics and the Moral Psychology of  
>>> Identity.
>>>
>>> Richard Falk, author, The Costs of War: International Law, the UN  
>>> and World Order After Iraq.
>>>
>>> Jean Bricmont, author, Humanitarian Imperialism: Using Human  
>>> Rights to Sell War.
>>>
>>> Michael Albert, author, Parecon: Life After Capitalism, and  
>>> editor, ZNET.
>>>
>>> Stephen Shalom, author, Imperial Alibis: Rationalizing US  
>>> Intervention After the Cold War.
>>>
>>> Charles Derber, author, People Before Profit. The New  
>>> Globalization in an Age of Terror, Big Money and Economic Crisis.
>>>
>>> Vijay Prashad, author, The Darker Nations: A People's History of  
>>> the Third World.
>>>
>>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>> ----------- _______________________________________________
>> DEBATE mailing list
>> DEBATE at lists.kabissa.org
>> http://lists.kabissa.org/mailman/listinfo/debate
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>> ----------- No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.7/1151 - Release Date:  
>> 25-11-2007 16:24
>> _______________________________________________
>> DEBATE mailing list
>> DEBATE at lists.kabissa.org
>> http://lists.kabissa.org/mailman/listinfo/debate
>
> -- 
> Nicola Bullard
> Focus on the Global South
> c/- CUSRI
> Chulalongkorn University
> Bangkok 10330, Thailand
> tel +66 2 218 7363-5
> fax: + 66 2 255 9976
> mobile + 66 81 987 5011/+33 6 70 45 44 04
> email: n.bullard at focusweb.org
> website: http://www.focusweb.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> DEBATE mailing list
> DEBATE at lists.kabissa.org
> http://lists.kabissa.org/mailman/listinfo/debate

______________________________

Jai Sen
jai.sen at cacim.net
CACIM, A-3 Defence Colony, New Delhi 110 024, India
www.cacim.net
Ph : +91-11-4155 1521, 2433 2451

Check out the OpenSpaceForum @ www.openspaceforum.net

Subscribe to WSFDiscuss, an open and unmoderated forum on the World  
Social Forum and on related social and political movements and  
issues. Simply send an empty email to worldsocialforum-discuss- 
subscribe at openspaceforum.net

And, NEW ! : Join CEOS at openspaceforum.net, the CEOS (Critical  
Engagement with Open Space) listserve for exchange and coordination  
on open space theory and practice and to facilitate a critical  
discussion of the idea of ‘open space’.  Just send an empty mail to  
CEOS-subscribe at openspaceforum.net