India: The Poverty of the Intellectual mind and the Enlightened mind of the Adivasi - the last article from Azad

This is a rejoinder that the slain CPI (Maoist) spokesperson had penned in response to B.G. Verghese's article in Outlook.

Reading B.G. Verghese's article Daylight at the Thousand-Star Hotel in Outlook (May 3), one is stunned by the abysmal poverty of thought and colonial mindset of this renowned intellectual. How is it that the illiterate, seemingly uncivilised, backward, half-naked adivasi thinks, analyses and acts a lot better than an established, well-read, highly qualified intellectual like Verghese?

The history of freedom in our country presents innumerable such contrasts: of the highly educated white man, with his vast, in-depth knowledge of the world and the natural and social sciences, glorifying the British raj as a regime with a civilising mission; and the half-naked, illiterate Indian who craved for freedom and independence. To justify the oppression of their subjects in the colonies, the "educated" colonial intellectuals invented phrases such as "white man's burden", "civilising mission" et al. The freedom fighter, however, was not impressed by the 'development' the British colonialists brought to India through their railways, roads, communication networks, plantations, mines etc.

Verghese is a typical example of the self-proclaimed civilisers of modern-day India, akin to the white 'civilisers' of yesteryear, who would have been the pride of a Rudyard Kipling. He reveals this colonial mindset by vehemently arguing in favour of the civilising mission of the corporate sharks and the Indian State to transform the poor, backward adivasis from savages into civilised people through a 'development' that destroys people's economy, social life, culture and all human values. Ironically, ignoramuses like him imagine that adivasis are the casualties of non-development.

The corporate vultures and their police servants have said, through Verghese, what they think of a dialogue with the Maoists. Citing from my interview in The Hindu, Verghese gives his own interpretation to my proposal for talks. He derides my statement that "talks will give some respite to the people who are oppressed and suppressed under the jackboots of the Indian State. . ." and interprets this as "respite for the oppressed (cadres)". Such is the wishful imagination, cynicism, trivialisation and vulgarisation of a life-and-death question confronting millions of hapless people

The War is On by Rahul Pandita

‘Dear Swami Agniveshji…’ Thus began a small step that could have ensured long-lasting peace across India’s Naxal-affected zones, virtually half the country. That letter written by top Maoist leader Azad was addressed to Swami Agnivesh, the social activist chosen by the Centre to hold talks with the CPI (Maoist). Things were moving, and there was the optimism that after an endless cycle of violence, peace could finally be achieved. But before that could happen, Azad was killed by the police in what appears to be a fake encounter. With his death, current hopes of peace have all but vanished. Senior Maoist leader Kishenji reacted immediately to Azad’s killing, calling the ruling Congress party “a big betrayer”.

Open has now learnt from top Maoist sources that much progress had been made towards holding talks with the Government. Azad, as per these sources, was carrying Swami Agnivesh’s letter to the CPI (Maoist)’s guerilla zone in Bastar to discuss it with the Dandakaranya Committee of the party. He had already discussed it with other regional committees, and was moving fast from one place to another to expedite the talks. “This is what the intelligence agencies took advantage of, and managed to zero in on Azad,” says a Maoist leader. Azad was allegedly nabbed from the Nagpur railway station, taken to the forests of Adilabad in Andhra Pradesh (in a helicopter, believe Maoists), and shot dead in cold blood along with another person. “They had been trailing him since March, when they almost got him,” says Gudsa Usendi, spokesperson of CPI (Maoist)’s Dandakaranya Special Zone Committee, where Azad was headed.

It is believed that both Maoists and the Centre had agreed on a mutual ceasefire for a period of three days, after which a formal letter was to be sent by the Home Ministry, inviting the CPI (Maoist) for talks. Maoists had laid down no conditions for the ceasefire; and Maoist sources claim that no terms were set for the talks either. But Swami Agnivesh was told that to turn the atmosphere conducive for talks, the Government could lift the ban on the CPI (Maoist) and free four top Maoist leaders lodged in various jails. These are: Kobad Ghandy, Amitabha Bagchi, Sushil Roy and Narayan Sanyal. “Lifting the ban seemed important to us because that way an overground organisation and not a banned organisation would have held talks with New Delhi,” says a Central Committee member of the CPI (Maoist).

In fact, Azad had made this clear in his letter to Swami Agnivesh, dated 31 May. ‘You are also aware of the difficulties involved for an underground party that is proscribed by the Government for talks. Hence we had proposed the release of political prisoners from the jails. At the outset, the Government can take the initiative to release at least some of our Party leaders, so as to facilitate talks with them,’ he wrote.

In the letter, Azad also writes that the ceasefire period should be much longer than 72 hours.

‘Our party is very serious about bringing about peace, especially at the present juncture when lakhs of Adivasis had fled, and are fleeing their homes; when lakhs of Adivasis are facing chronic conditions of hunger and famine due to their ouster from their lands… one should not be swayed by victories and defeats at this critical juncture in the life of the Adivasi community in our country, but try to create conditions whereby their survival is ensured,’ he opines in the same letter.

On 28 June, Swami Agnivesh responded to Azad’s letter. Though he remains tightlipped about its contents, Maoist sources who have seen that written response say that three slabs (15 July, 20 July and 25 July) were offered to the CPI (Maoist) to begin the 72-hour ceasefire.

With this letter, Maoist leaders say, Azad alighted at the Nagpur railway station on the morning of 1 July, from where he was supposed to go and meet another leader, Sahadev. Azad and his wife Sitakka would have been taken to Bastar by Sahadev. But before the two could meet, Azad was allegedly nabbed by the Andhra police. His wife is still missing. Another person who the police picked up turned out to be a journalist—Hem Chandra Pandey.

In the Maoist hierarchy, Azad whose real name was Cherukuri Rajkumar, held a very special position. A BTech in Chemical Engineering from Warangal’s Regional Engineering College (he had left his MTech course half way), he was the second president of the Radical Students Union, and in 1990, was inducted into the Central Committee (CC) of the then People’s War Group (PWG). This later merged with another Maoist group MCC to form the CPI (Maoist) in 2004. In the CPI (Maoist), he continued as a CC member, working as the party’s central spokesperson for years. He was very close to the chief of the CPI (Maoist), General Secretary Ganapathi, and tipped to be the next Maoist chief. According to reports, he had recently been appointed by the party to run its operations in south India. He was also appointed by his party to oversee talks between Maoists and the Andhra Pradesh government in 2004.

With his death, party cadres are baying for revenge. The north regional bureau of CPI (Maoist) has said its cadres would avenge the ‘cold-blooded murder of Comrade Azad’. Already, a four-day bandh has been announced by Maoists, and there are credible threats of big attacks on security forces—a measure to demonstrate their anger. “On 28 June, you send a letter and two days later you kill the messenger,” says GN Saibaba, a Delhi-based activist. “The Government knew very well that Azad was trying to build a consensus for talks within the CPI (Maoist). In his seven meetings with Home minister Chidambaram, Swami Agnivesh made it clear that Azad was the man he was communicating with. And yet, they killed Azad knowing fully well who he was and what he was up to. Isn’t it clear now that Manmohan Singh and his Home Minister don’t want talks to happen?” asks a top Maoist leader.

Ironically, in the same letter, Azad had expressed doubts about the Home Minister’s intent. ‘Do you really believe that Mr Chidambaram is earnest in proposing talks when there are reports of how the central government is equipping its forces with several more choppers and preparing the Indian Army too for the war on people?’ he asks.

Swami Agnivesh, on his part, has this to say: “His (Azad’s) death has been a big disappointment, but now it has become even more important to hold talks.” (See his exclusive interview with Open).

The sad reality is that talks are unlikely to make any headway now. The CPI (Maoist) is busy trying to consolidate its position, now that a number of senior leaders have been killed or arrested in the recent past. A number of vacancies in the party’s Politburo and Central Committee (the highest decision-making body in the party) need to be filled.

Already, news is trickling in that Azad’s place will be taken by another senior Maoist leader, Mallojula Venugopal alias Sonu, who also happens to be Kishenji’s brother. Once that is achieved, Maoist leaders say, they will be back to ambushes. And this time, it’s going to be a long, bloody war.

(The Open Magazine, 10th July)

Release Debalina Chakrabarty Now !

Debalina Chakrabarty, activist of the Kolkata-based women’s organization Matangini Mahila Samiti, has been charged with UAPA and other sections alleging that she is a Maoist. Debalina is on a fast for the past nine days demanding the withdrawal of the charges.

On 12th July, there will be a march from Metro Channel to College Square (site of the fast) demanding withdrawal of the charges against Debalina, release of the people arrested in Lalgarh and the withdrawal of joint forces from Lalgarh.

The following is the english translation of the pamphlet issued by Matangini Mahila Samiti, protesting against the harassment of Debalina Chakrabarty by the police.
——————————————————————-
“If someone joins the Naxals and fights or symathises with them, is that a crime? First, you say this is an operation conducted against the Naxals. Then you say it’s against their sympathisers, then you say it’s against the sympathisers of the sympathisers. What does all this mean?”

The court posed these questions in response to a petition which was filed after 10 adivasis were killed in Chattisgarh. We, the innumerable activists of people’s movements, are still searching for the answer. Mr. P Chidambaram, darling of the corporates, is prescribing Manmohini recipe for appropriating jal, jungal, jamin (water, forests and land) of India. The drill for Operation Green Hunt, which is nothing but an operation to hunt the adivasis, is in full swing. Alongside, there is the Operation Witch Hunt: looking for witches, identifying, vilifying and arresting them. Here the main targets are the activists of the people’s movements. Critics of the anti-people policy of the government, critics of capitalism, men resisting eviction, those fighting for their rights, vociferous critics of Green Hunt – for the State’s all of them are in the same column – potential ‘Maoists’.

George W Bush, much admired by Manmohan and Chidambaram, had announced ‘war on terror’. He proclaimed that ‘those who are against us are terrorists’. The Indian miniature version of Bush, Chidambaram, is prescribing the same medicine – opposing the aggression of corporate capital tantamounts to Maoism.

What was the crime of Debalina and her friends?

Debalina and Jayita, secretaries of Matangini Mahila Samiti, are part of various organisations and individuals who participated in the people’s movements of Singur, Nandigram and Lalgarh. They repeatedly and unequivocally upheld the message of resistance. They have become the fearless faces of the movement. As a result, they have become target of the State assault – on 7 June, 2008 the Matangini Mess was raided by the police, labeling the residents as Maoists. However, the police had to beat a retreat in the face of strong resistance by the people.

Then on 29th June, 2010 the CID representative informed the press that a letter containing the name ‘Debu’ has been found with the Maoists arrested in Sonarpur. He proclaimed that this person must be Debalina Chakraborty and the police will catch her without delay. It was also told that the arrested Maoists had themselves revealed that ‘Debu’ is Debalina – although according to the rules, confessions made in the police custody do not have any legal validity. Following the police cue, a few media houses started the great democratic campaign of maligning Debalina, of proving that she indeed is a culprit.

Debalina, Jayita have not cowered in the face of the joint orchestra launched by the police and media. Neither have they gone underground to escape arrest. Instead they have raised the political question in a complete democratic manner. The State is not ready to tolerate the minimum degree of opposition. In a warlike situation it is demanding unquestioning loyalty and inane conformity. Those in the opposition to the State policy, who are neither armed nor Maoists, are as dangerous as the Maoists.

This alarming fascist tendency would not leave us even the minimum democratic space. The current ongoing indefinite hunger strike is but an arduous endeavour to protect that little precious space for democracy. Come and stand by our legitimate demands.

Our demands:

1.Stop labelling people’s movement activists as ‘Maoists’.
2.Release of Nisha Biswas, Kanishka Choudhuri and Manik Mandal unconditionally.
3.Scrap UAPA.
4.Withdraw the false FIR on Debalina.
Published and distributed by Jayita Das on behalf of Matangini Mahila Samiti (9830666955), dated 07.07.2010.

Source: Sanhati

Speaking For Mumia Abu-Jamal on 4th July Philadelphia

Arundhati Roy - Democracy's End Game

The Undelivered Missive: Azad’s Death is No Man’s Peace

Social Activist Swami Agnivesh sits in his room at 7 Jantar Mantar, perplexed, battling a strange sense of guilt. For the past few months, he has been mediating a backroom dialogue between the Government of India and the CPI(Maoist). Since May 2010, Agnivesh had facilitated the exchange of two letters between the warring parties. On June 26, he dispatched a third letter to top Maoist leader Cherukuri Rajkumar alias Azad. “The peace process was at a critical juncture. A very positive response was expected,”

Agnivesh told TEHELKA. “I was to receive a date from which talks could begin.” Much to his horror, what he received instead was news that Azad — the receipent of his letter — had been killed in the forests of Andhra Pradesh. “It is possible that Azad let his guard down because of my last letter,” Agnivesh said. “It is a great loss for all of us, including the government. Azad was a key person and most favourably disposed to the peace process. We must ensure that his death does not derail the possibility of peace.”

But the Home Ministry has a different view. “I don’t think this is a setback to the peace process. We had not received any positive response from CPIMaoist,” Home Secretary GK Pillai told TEHELKA.

For every conversation that leaps us forward, there are strings that pull us back. The rhetoric of Maoists killing 27 CRPF men two days before Azad’s death is one such shackle. Reading that attack as an indication that the Maoists were not serious about peace would be misleading. The on-going backroom dialogue was aimed at deciding a date from which a mutual cessation of violence would begin. Until such a date was arrived at, it was understood the violence would continue from both sides. And it did. In the weeks leading up to Azad’s death — five maoists were killed in Lalgarh, several maoist sympathisers were arrested, and adiviasi women continued to be raped by the forces. The Maoists too continued to kill.

The reason why Azad’s death must be seen outside this cycle of violence is because Azad was a key and unlikely salesman of truce, carrying Swami Agnivesh — and by default P Chidam - baram’s message to comrades in Dandakaranya. “Azad was building consensus for a ceasefire within the party. He had our full mandate. Now the government has shown it was never interested in talks,” Usendi, Maoist spokesperson of the Dandakaranya Special Zone Committee, told TEHELKA.

While the first two letters have been made public, the third letter remains confidential. Sources have told TEHELKA of its contents — and it indicates how close both parties were to the possibility of dialogue. That is what makes Azad’s death significant, almost poignant. For the hundreds of adivasis and soldiers trapped in this war, it means a bleaker, bloodier future. Already the Maoists have vowed revenge when they could have been inching toward peace.

“This is a fascist State dreaming that peace will come back by liquidating people,” says G Haragopal, one of the mediators in the 2004 Andhra talks. “Such reactions show an insecure and unconfident State.” Azad’s killing in a gunbattle with the police in the remote forests of Andhra Pradesh, was hailed as one of the biggest catches since the goverment launched a joint-offensive against the Maoists in 2009. Azad was No 3 in the Maoist ranks, a politburo member, Central Committee spokesperson, and a close aide to Maoist chief Ganapathi.

The son of a hotel owner, Azad, 55, belonged to an upper caste family from Krishna district in Andhra Pradesh. An engineering student in Warangal, Azad earned two MTech degrees and helped found the Revolutionary Students Union. Jailed during the Emergency, he went underground shortly after.

ON JULY 2, Adilabad Superintendent of Police P. Promod Kumar claimed the police received intelligence inputs about a group of 25 to 30 Maoists moving around in the Adilabad forest area, near the Maharashtra border. A police team encountered the rebels in the hilly terrain near Sarkepally village. “Our team cautioned them to surrender, but they came under fire, forcing them to retaliate,” he said. According to the police, the encounter began around 11:30 pm on July 1 and lasted till 2 am on July 2. Later they recovered two bodies — Azad and an unidentified man.

Several details have emerged since, that counter the police version of events. Villagers in Sarkepally have said they did not hear gunshots on the night of July 1. The CPI (Maoist) has also released statements alleging the encounter was fake. “Azad was picked up from Nagpur. He had no reason to be in Adilabad. Azad was to meet our man at a cinema hall in the city on July 1. Our man waited but he never showed up,” Usendi said.

A brewing controversy surrounding the second body further strengthens the theory of a fake encounter. After photos of the bodies appreared in Andhra newspapers, a family from Uttarakhand claimed the second man wasn’t a Maoist but a freelance journalist called Hem Chandra Pandey. Hailing from Dewaltal town of Pithoragarh district of Uttarakhand, Pandey had been based in Delhi since 2007. “My husband left Delhi on June 30. He had gone to Nagpur for an assignment and was expected back on July 2,” said his wife Babita Pandey. Pandey’s family claims he wrote for Hindi newspapers like Nai Dunia, Rastriya Sahara, Dainik Jagran. Editors of all these papers have denied this, but TEHELKA has clippings of his work published under the name Hemant Pandey.

Since early 2010, he had been working for an inhouse corporate magazine called Chetna, at Delhi Assam Railways Corporation Limited. Pandey’s colleagues at DARCL describe him as a quiet, helpful man who attended office regularly. Significantly, his colleagues say they saw Pandey last on July 1 — the same day the police claim he was killed in Adilabad. “He attended office for the first half on July 1 and then asked for leave,” office-in charge Abhishek Ranjan said. Another colleague who sits near Pandey said he saw him until lunch. TEHELKA has also learned that Pandey’s supervisor has a text message sent on July 1 saying he would be in for half the day.

However, Pandey’s family continues to believe he left Delhi on June 30 by train. Any proof that Pandey was in office on July 1 is crucial because it could blow holes in the police version. It would be extremely unlikely for someone to be waging guerilla warfare in the Andhra Pradesh jungles by night, if they were in Delhi until 2 pm the same day.

TO UNDERSTAND the significance of what happened on the night of July 1, one has rewind to Agnivesh, to understand why he feels that sense of guilt.

On May 6-8, Agnivesh and several other activists marched through Raipur and Dantewada asking for an end to violence. On May 11, Chidambaram wrote to Agnivesh to clarify the government’s position. The key to talks lay in a specific date from the Maoists. “On the specified date (say, June 1), we would expect that the CPI(Maoist) will stop all violent activities,” Chidambaram wrote. “We would closely observe whether the CPI(Maoist) will maintain the position of “no violence” for 72 hours. It goes without saying that, during the said period of 72 hours, the security forces will not conduct any operations against the CPI(Maoist). It is our hope that talks will begin during [that] period.”

The letter was significant because it was the first time the government had shown its willingness for a mutual halt of violence, meeting a key demand of the Maoists. In a signed response dated May 31, Azad also indicated his party’s willingness for talks. “Our Party desires peace sincerely in the interests of the lakhs of adivasis who are being cruelly crushed,” he said. He mocked Chidambaram’s 72-hour figure as a joke. “If the government is serious it should speak in terms of mutual ceasefire, for a longer period of time, and spell out the government’s stand on fulfilling the minimum requisites like release of leaders and lifting the ban on the CPI (Maoist).” Azad also asked the government to “stop its efforts to escalate the war, including the measure of calling back all the paramilitary forces deployed in war zones.”

Agnivesh relayed the letter to Chidambaram. On the basis of his discussion with the home minister, Agnivesh wrote a third letter to Azad on June 26 clarifying questions raised by the Maoists. The third letter clarified that Chidambaram’s insistence on 72 hours did not mean that ceasefire would only last for three days. Rather, Chidambaram wanted a specific date from which 72 hours of “mutual cessation of hostilities” would begin. During that period, he would invite the Maoists for talks and initiate a mutual ceasefire agreement.

Agnivesh’s third letter asked the Maoists for the most operative part of the process — a date from which the 72 hours of no violence would commence. Had Azad reached his destination, perhaps that date of peace would be on its way to New Delhi.

(Tehelka, 9th July)

Arundhati Roy exposes myth of Indian Democracy

UK Campaign to save the life of Mumia Abu-Jamal - Press Release

A UK campaign is launched to save the life of Mumia Abu-Jamal, an award-winning journalist and author, who has been on death row in Pennsylvania for nearly three decades. 

William Francome star of a documentary film about the case, ‘In Prison my Whole Life’, will be introducing a screening of this movie in Brixton. William Francome and the organisers of Free Mumia Abu-Jamal Defence Campaign UK will be available to answer questions about the film and the campaign.

Photographs may be taken of the event. Stills and publicity material from the film is also available.

Where: is Karibu Education Centre ?

7 Gresham Road
Brixton
London
SW9 7PH

When: ?

20 July 2010
7pm – 9.30pm

Contact: For further information or to arrange interviews please contact:

Keeley Mudd: mailto:keeleymudd@hotmail.co.uk
Grace Kress: mailto:gracekress@hotmail.co.uk

Mumia Abu-Jamal is a global icon for justice and human-rights. He is also the focus for a worldwide campaign against the death penalty.

His life is more in danger than ever. Mumia’s legal team are engaged in pivotal litigation in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Philadelphia. At stake is whether Mumia will be executed or granted a new jury trial on the question of the death penalty. The initial brief will be submitted to the Court of Appeals on 28 July 2010.

William Francome was born on the day Mumia Abu-Jamal was arrested. ‘In Prison my Whole Life’ follows his investigation into the arrest of Mumia in an effort to expose the truth about Justice in America for black activists.

A demonstration will be held outside the US Embassy in London on the 28 July 2010 to coincide with the submission of the initial brief.

Notes for Editors:

Mumia was arrested during the early morning hours of 9 December 1981, in Philadelphia for the alleged murder of a police officer. He was tried in 1982 and sentenced to death the following year.  The trial was a tragic example of everything that can go wrong in a capital case.  The proceedings were marked by racism, inept legal representation, a bigoted and prejudiced judge, a prosecution more intent on winning than seeing that justice was done, and fraud. The defendant was too poor to hire a good lawyer, investigator, or essential forensic experts in such fields as ballistics and pathology.

At the time of his arrest, Mumia was already known as the "Voice of the Voiceless" for speaking on behalf of the dispossessed and against government misconduct and corruption.  He was President of the Philadelphia chapter of the Association of Black Journalists.  Today his weekly writings and radio commentaries from prison reach people in many countries.

There are significant developments on various fronts in the coordinated legal campaign to save and free Mumia Abu-Jamal. The complex court proceedings are moving forward at a fast pace. Mumia’s life is on the line. Two years ago Mumia’s legal team won the right to a new jury trial, with the federal court finding that the original trial judge misled the jury thereby rendering the proceedings constitutionally unfair. Then in January 2010 the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the ruling based upon its decision in another case, and ordered the case be again reviewed by the Court of Appeals. At issue is the death penalty.

Other information:

An online petition for President Barack Obama ‘Mumia Abu-Jamal and the Global Abolition of the Death Penalty’, initially in 10 languages (Swahili and Turkish have since been added) has been signed by over 22,000 people from around the globe. Signatories include Bishop Desmond Tutu, South Africa (Nobel Peace Prize); Günter Grass, Germany (Nobel Prize in Literature); Danielle Mitterrand, Paris (former First Lady of France); Fatima Bhutto, Pakistan (writer); Colin Firth (Academy Award Best-Actor nominee), Noam Chomsky, MIT (philosopher and author); Ed Asner (actor); Elliott Gould (actor); Mike Farrell (actor); and Michael Radford (director of the Oscar winning film Il Postino); Robert Meeropol (son of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, executed in 1953); members of the European Parliament; members of the German Bundestag; European Association of Lawyers for Democracy and World Human Rights; Reporters Without Borders, Paris.

For how to help visit Mumia’s legal defence website:  http://www.mumialegaldefense.org/

Judicial probe demanded into Azad's killing by Swami Agnivesh - Chidambaran refuses the demand

Prominent social activist Swami Agnivesh Friday met Home Minister P Chidambaram and demanded a judicial inquiry into the death of top Maoist leader Azad and his associate, killed in an alleged police encounter a few days back. The demand, however, was turned down by Chidambaram saying such a step could only be taken by the Andhra Pradesh government as the encounter took place in Adilabad, Agnivesh told reporters after the meeting.

Peace talks between the Centre and the CPI(Maoist) will not proceed further if the Union government does not institute a judicial inquiry into the killing of Cherukiri Rajkumar alias Azad on July 2, said Swami Agnivesh, the mediator between the two sides. The judicial probe will have to ascertain whether the encounter in which Azad was killed was fake, said the swami. He will press this demand when he meets Union Home Minister P Chidambaram on Thursday.

Speaking at a convention organised by the National Alliance of People’s Movement in Kolkata, Agnivesh — with Medha Patkar at his side — said, “We will never allow the peace process to be derailed. Azad was at the forefront of initiating the process and if the initiatives become successful, it will be the greatest tribute to Azad. But tomorrow (Thursday), I will meet Chidambaram and ask him to order a judicial probe into Azad’s killing. We all want to know whether he was killed in a fake encounter or a genuine encounter.


Source: Indian Express

Maoists organise 48 hour shutdown in 5 Indian States