[Reader-list] Alleged Maoist Atrocities

[Pawan Durani]

Why do you have so much doubt in the state ? Or may I say why do you
sow so much doubts ? While as you do not do the gardeners job in case
of separatists, maoists etc..

Pawan


On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 6:21 PM, Shuddhabrata Sengupta
<shuddha at sarai.net> wrote:
> Dear Pawan,
> What motives are you talking about? The only ones that I can see in my
> posting are a clear and categorical criticism and denunciation of the CPI
> (Maoist)'s cult of death and a clear, unambiguous criticism with the way in
> which the state is reacting to the situation. Do you see anything else? I
> don't have to embrace the devil  in order to rescue myself from the deep
> blue sea.
> Having said that, I am not blind to the fact that the Indian state (or rogue
> elements from within the state apparatus) have on occasion resorted to
> elaborate masquerades to create sensational events that bind popular
> consensus in favour of a hard-line course of action. Remember a place called
> Cchattisinghpura? Remember what happened there just around the time when
> Bill Clinton came visiting? ast I knew, It was in the province that you
> claim as your homeland. The questions around Cchatisinghpura still remain,
> and they will not be covered up merely because the state was able to extract
> a 'custodial confession' from an alleged 'detained militant'.
> What happened routinely in Jammu & Kashmir (especially as authored by the
> notorious 'Ikhwanis', the Kashmiri equivalent of the Salwa Judum) can easily
> happen elsewhere. This possibility cannot be ruled out, although it must not
> be seen as the only valid explanation either. We need neither blind faith in
> the goodness of the Indian state, nor elaborate conspiracy theories, that
> indict it in every tragedy.
> What we need are hard facts. And until the facts are crystal clear, or are
> made clear through explicit assumptions of responsibility by the Maoists
> themselves of these massacres,or through their implied assent through
> silence to the fact that they were indeed the perpetrators, it would be
> premature to jump to conclusions in any direction. You might have noticed,
> that despite my aversion towards Hindutva, I have never, ever made capital
> out of the fact that certain Hindutva activists have been implicated in a
> series of terrorist incidents. My attitude to any event of this nature, is,
> we must not judge a person to be guilty until he is comprehensively proven
> not to be innocent.
> If the Maoists remain silent, or own up to their authorship of the last
> round of violence, (as they did, unhesitatingly, in the case of the killing
> of the 76 CRPF jawans last month) then of course the recent massacres can be
> unambiguously attributed to them. And this must be condemned.
> If they don't, if they say that they had no hand in what has happened. Then
> it is a different story altogether. It calls for a different kind of
> response. Not necessarily of endorsing Maoist politics, but of recognizing
> that maybe, they too might be targets of slander.
> Even in that instance, as I have pointed out, with absolute clarity, the
> politics of of the Maoists could still be held responsible for creating the
> climate of violence that enables such incidents to occur. And I have no
> problem in accusing the Maoists of an irresponsible form of politics. it is
> just that I have exactly the same attitude towards the Indian state. I will
> not jump from treetops saying that the state staged a 'false flag'
> operation. I will not jump from tree- tops saying the Maoists are beasts
> either. I would look very carefully into the details of a very messy war. I
> am merely asking that all of us undertake a responsibility to being
> committed to this 'carefulness'.
> If you saw this morning's post on this list by Aman Sethi of a news story on
> allegations that  adivasis were airlifted, abducted and tortured in the name
> of anti-Naxal operations you would no doubt realize that we are not
> operating in a situation where there are good guys and bad guys, what we
> have on the ground are just guys with IEDs and guys with Helicopters.
> I don't hide behind a fig leaf of a justification of the Maoists when I am
> critical of the state, but I see that for many who are ratcheting up the
> tempo of paranoia in the name of hunting down anyone who is critical of
> state action as being automatically a Maoist or at best a Maoist
> sympathizer, there seems to be no problem at all in hiding behind the
> obscenity of a war carried out by the state against its own citizenry. I
> find the double standard of crying yourself hoarse against Maoist
> sympathizers and remaining silent about the state's mandarins who provide
> the gloss and the icing over the state's massacres, troubling, to say the
> least. What compels respectable people to adopt such naked double standards?
> I wonder what their motives might be. I'd be grateful for any answers, if
> they were available.
> best,
> Shuddha
>
> On 18-May-10, at 9:12 AM, Pawan Durani wrote:
>
> Irony ...... The last para tells all the motives........same people
> ....same style.....like the Batla house......
> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 9:50 PM, Shuddhabrata Sengupta
> <shuddha at sarai.net> wrote:
>
> Dear All,
> While I have on several occasions expressed my disgust at the way in
> which the Government of India is conducting it's 'Operation Green
> Hunt', I have to say that the news of the attacks by alleged Maoists
> in Chattisgarh, in which 6 villagers have been killed, and more
> recently a bus, with several civilians (and some special police
> officers)  has been bombed, is deeply disturbing.
> It is a totally different matter from attacking men in uniform, (such
> as the CRPF jawans who were attacked not so long ago, resulting in 76
> casualties). Though I do not support any war, including the Maoist
> initiated 'Peoples War' or for that matter, the Government of India's
> 'Operation Green Hunt',  in any war, armed men in uniform in a combat
> zone are fair targets. The death of the 76 CRPF jawans, though
> regrettable, is not in any way different from the death of any
> guerrila soldiers in the PLGA in any combat operation. I refuse to be
> blackmailed into thinking of such an event as an evidence of Maoist
> 'atrocities'.
> But by no stretch of imagination can the same principles of combat be
> extended in operations that involve unarmed civilians, (such as the
> incidents that have come to light today) no matter who conducts them.
> Regardless of whether the state or the Maoists conduct such
> operations, they must be condemned by all sensible people in the
> harshest terms. The Maoists, and the state must be compelled, through
> relentless civic pressure, to publicly abide by the Geneva
> Conventions in the matter on the treatment of non-combatants in a
> conflict situation. (And yes, there are conventions that shape the
> conduct of non-state actors, or the conduct of the state in relation
> to non-state actors)
> The presence of 15 special police officers in the bus that was bombed
> cannot be offered as a justification for the bombing, because a large
> number of people who were harmed in the attack had nothing to do with
> any arm of the state, they were just ordinary passengers. This is a
> simple and disgusting act of terrorism. It cannot be explained away
> in any sense as part of a campaign of liberation.
> If it is true that these attacks have been carried out by the
> Maoists, then, it is clear that they want to ratchet up the general
> intensity of violence in the regions where they have a presence. They
> want the government to unleash a military style offensive, because
> nothing would serve their purpose better. There can be no other
> explanation for the manner of these attacks. This is a disastrous and
> cynical policy, which will wreck havoc with the lives of the people
> of the area and cannot be justified by any means whatsoever. If the
> government of India responds by increasing the level and intensity of
> the conflict, it will become an accessory of the Maoists design to
> totally militarize the areas of central, southern and eastern India
> where they currently have a presence.
> If nothing else, this shows how the policy of 'Protracted People's
> War' is bound to degenerate (and in fact is already degenerating)
> into an orgy of random violence, exactly as it did in Peru and
> Colombia, where the 'Sendero Luminoso' ('Shining Path') and 'FARC'
> rebels competed with the state and right-wing militias in a sad
> spiralling descent into armed chaos and brigandage that did nothing
> to fulfil any revolutionary goal. If anything it strengthened the
> might of the state and the right wing militias in Peru and Colombia.
> The Maoists actions (attacks on unarmed civilians) cannot bring about
> any other results either. The ultimate and only beneficiary of this
> process will be the state and the corporations who want total control
> over the forests of Central India.
> However, we must not rush to conclusions. If the Maoists disclaim
> responsibility for these attacks, then we will have to see whether or
> not such a disclaimer has any objective basis. Independent
> investigations will have to be carrired out. If, by any means, it is
> possible that these attacks are 'false flag' operations, conducted by
> rogue elements of the state machinery, or even endorsed by the state,
> then the responsibility for the violence will lie squarely on the
> state. It must, however, be understood by the Maoists (even if they
> have not perpetrated these massacres) that the style of their
> politics can and does ennable the state to conduct precisely such
> 'false flag' operations. If there are any amongst the leadership of
> the Maoists who are sensitive to the possibilities of forging an
> alternative radical politics they must begin considering the
> necessity of abandoning the disastrous method of 'protracted peoples
> war' and explore ways to an open, transparent, militant and public
> politics that does not involve the endless cycle of retreats and
> massacres.
> Wherever the truth may life, this is a very sad day indeed,
> best
> Shuddha
>
> Shuddhabrata Sengupta
> The Sarai Programme at CSDS
> Raqs Media Collective
> shuddha at sarai.net
> www.sarai.net
> www.raqsmediacollective.net
>
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with subscribe
> in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>
> Shuddhabrata Sengupta
> The Sarai Programme at CSDS
> Raqs Media Collective
> shuddha at sarai.net
> www.sarai.net
> www.raqsmediacollective.net
>
>