Volume 3, No. 6, June 2002

The question of talks between the state government in AP and the PW has acquired significance in recent months. It gathered momentum since Nov.2001 after the PW leadership announced publicly that it was prepared to go for talks without conditions. The media in AP has been covering this continually, with Varta, a popular Telugu daily, even inviting a debate in its pages on the talks. Opinions of various organizations and individuals were published in the paper for several days. The state cabinet agreed to go for talks in principle and called for an all-party meet in February and again in March 2002. As all the parties were in favour of holding talks with the PW leadership, the government announced that it was ready for holding talks anywhere and at whatever level.

But even as the atmosphere was building up for the talks, the police in AP attacked a PW camp in Warangal and shot dead 12 comrades. Soon after this event, the secretary of the AP state committee of the Party issued a statement withdrawing their earlier willingness to sit for talks. The statement said that it is only after a conducive atmosphere is created by stopping all atrocities and attacks on the police, it would be ready to sit for talks.

The public debate on the need for holding talks between the government and the naxalites in AP dates back to almost a decade. But it was from the year 1998 that the media and progressive sections of the intelligentsia began to evince a keen interest in the topic, when the chief justice of the AP High Court, while delivering a judgment, advised the state government to initiate proper measures to contain the continuing violence in the State.

It is the Committee of Concerned Citizens (CCC) — a democratic organization of liberal intellectuals — that had been taking the utmost interest in the matter. It had been appealing repeatedly, since 1997-98, to both the TDP government in the state, as well as the naxalites to stop the violence.

The leadership of the PW responded positively to their desire for peace while making it clear to the CCC that the Party was forced to resort to counter-violence as there was no other alternative due to the brutal state violence unleashed by the government of Chandrababu Naidu on all democratic people’s movements. The Party also criticized the CCC for trying to act neutral by equating state violence with the counter-violence of the Party.

In 1999 the CCC addressed letters to the Chief Minister and the PW leadership appealing to both sides to sit together for talks to find a solution to the spiraling violence. It also made some proposals for the distribution of land to the landless in Telangana. While the PW leadership was always open-minded to hold talks on people’s demands, the state government, headed by the World Bank stooge, Naidu, always insisted that it would go for talks only if the PW gave up the gun and joined the "mainstream" — a euphemism for parliamentary politics.

The wily jackal, Chandrababu Naidu, declared on Apr.3 2000 that his government was ready for talks with leaders of the RWA and the APCLC on the issue of bringing peace to the state. This proposal to hold talks with such organizations showed that Naidu was not really serious about it and that he was only making a public statement to appease the CCC and other sections of the intelligentsia. The real intention of naming the two organizations for participating in the talks was to show that they are moving too closely with the banned PW and to threaten them that they would have to face dire consequences if they continued to participate actively in movements against the state. The unceasing attacks on the activists of these two organizations, the cold-blooded killing of the civil liberties leaders Purshottam and Azam Ali, within a few months after the Apr.3, 2000 statement of the Chief Minister, revealed the true meaning of his proposal for talks.

In fact, the hypocrisy of this wily jackal became public the very next day after he made this proposal for talks — on Apr.4 2000 — when, at a meeting of the Chief Ministers of 5 states, who met under the stewardship of Union Home Minister, L.K.Advani, he spoke of more brutal and fascist measures to suppress the PW. He demanded an all-India ban on the PW and huge funds from the Centre, argued for more effective coordination from the other states for joint operations against the naxalites, modernization of the police forces in all affected states, and lectured to his partners in these states to undertake covert operations by infiltrating the Naxalites with agents in line with what his government was successfully doing in AP. A decision was taken in that meeting to form the Joint Operational Command (JOC). Naidu thus achieved his objective of drawing the attention and help of the Centre and the other states, and obtained huge funds from the Centre to step up his brutal onslaught on the PW and other people’s movements. The curtain fell over the talks proposal for another year.

It was once again brought into focus in April 2001 in the context of elections to the local bodies in AP. On April 17, 2001, the CCC appealed to both the state government and the PW to agree on sitting for talks without any prior conditions. This was followed by appeals from senior journalists from all over the State on Apr.23 and from professors of Osmania University on April 30. All these intellectuals expressed their desire for creating a peaceful democratic atmosphere in the state. While the PW leadership responded to their appeals through a public statement, the government showed the least interest, at the beginning.

But as the elections for the local bodies were spread over three months, between Apr. to June 2001, the proposal for talks was again mooted by Devendra Goud, the state Home Minister, with an eye on the elections. Within days, however, the Chief Minister denied that his government had any such thinking. Later, the BJP leader and the Deputy Minister for Home in the Union Cabinet, Vidyasagar Rao, stated during his election campaign that the state government should take the initiative to hold talks with the PW leadership. Naidu shrugged it off with the sarcastic remark that the BJP minister should also have suggested where and with whom the government should sit for talks. Soon after, Devendra Goud, reiterated that he was in favour of talks with the naxalites and even stated that the government was thinking of distributing fallow land to landless. But there was no official statement from the government. Naidu continuously maintained his stand that the government would sit for talks only if the naxalites gave up arms and joined the mainstream. The curtain once again fell over any talk of talks by June, with the completion of elections.

All the above history is being given to show that the proposal for talks between the state government in AP and the PW had never been taken seriously by the government, and its public statements, now and then, in favour of talks was only an eye-wash and a ploy to pacify those who had been advocating talks. On the contrary, the government has been continuously stepping up its fascist onslaught on the PW and the people’s movements on democratic demands.

The debate on talks has been hotting up since the past few months once again. The latest developments began with the Home Minister, Devendra Goud, giving a statement in the second week of August 2001, following the attack by the PW on the Eturnagaram Police Station, that the government was ready for unconditional talks. It was reiterated by the DGP, H.J.Dora. But within a week, the Chief Minister, as usual, called on the Naxalites to first lay down arms and join the "mainstream", and only then would the government be willing for talks.

Meanwhile, two leaders of the Party expressed the Party’s willingness to sit for talks when reporters asked what they thought of the proposal made by the CCC. After this there was renewed pressure by the CCC and other intellectuals on the government to rethink its adamant stand and come forward for talks. From December last there has been wide coverage on the topic. A Press statement was issued by Ramakrishna and Prakash, on behalf of the state committee of AP and the CC respectively, that appeared in the papers on Jan.19th 2002. This was in response to repeated appeals by Shri S.R.Shankaran, a senior retired officer, who heads the CCC.

The statement pointed out that the Party leadership was willing to sit for talks if the government created a conducive atmosphere, by stopping its brutal onslaught on the people and the Party activists. It appreciated the efforts made by the CCC and pointed out that the state government had been unleashing a reign of terror that far surpassed that in Latin American countries. It said arrests and the cold-blooded murders had taken place in the past few weeks in Warangal, Adilabad, Mahboobnagar, and Kurnool districts.

It said that although the Party was not insisting on the fulfillment of any conditions for talks, the minimum measures the government should take in order to create a conducive atmosphere for talks are:

1) Putting an end to all state attacks, arrests and encounters.

2) Stopping combing operations in villages and forests, stop harassing people and activists of mass organizations.

If the government stopped its attacks as mentioned above for three months, thereby creating a favourable condition for talks, then the leadership would be willing to meet the government representatives in NT, AOB or anywhere in AP and that the Agenda for talks could then be worked out. If that were not possible, the Party would place a Charter of Demands and name some persons to present it. It would send its suggestions from time to time basing on the government’s response to its demands. It however reiterated that it would prefer direct talks with the Party leadership.

Even as the debate on ‘talks’ was heating up, the police continued their attacks on the activists of the PW. Towards the end of January, three activists of the Party were picked up and one of them was shot dead. When repeated appeals to release them fell on deaf ears, there were a series of armed actions on the night of Feb.10th in Kurnool district. A cinema theatre of the TDP MP was destroyed along with a railway station and a goods engine that was specially sent by Clinton. When the Party threatened to step up the offensive, if the arrested persons were not released, the police produced them in court the very next day.

Again, in the month of March, a PW camp was attacked and 12 persons were killed. Immediately after the incident, the PW leadership issued a statement calling off its earlier willingness for ‘talks’.

Talks between revolutionaries and the enemy are not something unusual. History of the world revolution is replete with several such instances. In neighbouring Nepal, the CPN(M) leadership had used this tactic skillfully in favour of the revolutionary cause. If talks are helpful for revolution, then it must be pursued. If not, then they should be rejected.

It is true that in AP the government did not evince much interest in ‘talks’ with the PW for a long time. It has been giving statements that are mutually contradictory (like those of the Home Minister and the Chief Minister) and inconsistent — at times declaring as if ready for ‘talks’, but soon after denying it and asking the naxalites to give up arms and join the "mainstream". But the consistent stand of the PW leadership had exposed the hypocrisy of the government and pushed it into a corner.

It is true that the state government is not really in need of ‘talks’, as the PW is not in a position that presents a real threat to the government. Yet there are situations when the govt. has to moot the idea of ‘talks’ at least to divert the attention of the people, and gain time, as during elections. There is also the growing pressure from sections of the intelligentsia, including senior journalists, whom Naidu does not want to antagonize. Hence he is compelled to declare, now and then, that he is not averse to their proposals.

In such a situation what should be the stand of a revolutionary Party? It should take the initiative to politically isolate the govt. and expose its real intentions. It should focus on the democratic demands for which it is waging armed struggle. It should expose the fascist nature of the government — its anti-people policies and its suppression of democratic movements. Once the question of ‘talks’ comes on to the agenda, it is necessary for the revolutionary Party to take it up seriously, while not having any illusions of the intentions of the government. Whether the talks take place or not, the demands for which it has been waging armed struggle would be brought into focus, since the entire attention of the media and the people would be centred on the question. If the government yields to public pressure and a conducive atmosphere is created by a temporary cease-fire, the situation could be utilized for launching a broad-based democratic movement, while consolidating the gains already made in the battlefield. The new democratic programme should be widely propagated among the people during the period of ‘talks’. The people’s demands should be placed as the focus during the ‘talks’. This would expose the government thoroughly as it would not be willing to yield to such demands as land distribution, end to privatization, lifting of the ban on the Party, punishing guilty officials, etc. thus the situation could be turned in favour of the revolutionaries. And when ‘talks’ break off, there would be a lot of gains made.

<Top>