'Creative strategies for the future'

Interview with Harkishan Singh Surjeet.

It was business as usual for Harkishan Singh Surjeet on the morning of October 12, a day after he was elected general secretary of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) for the third consecutive term. After a week of intense activity related to the party congress, a relaxed Surjeet was attending to organisational work when Venkitesh Ramakrishnan met him for an interview at the party's West Bengal State Committee office in Calcutta. Excerpts from the interview:

As the general secretary of the CPI(M), how do you evaluate the 16th congress? The political direction given by the congress marks a significant shift from earlier congresses. For the first time in its history, the party has expressed its readiness to support a Congress(I)-led government even while stressing the need to build a non-Congress(I), non-Bharatiya Janata Party third front.

The task of the 16th party congress was to analyse the national, international and organisational situations during the last three years and to evolve strategies for the future. The unanimous assessment is that the congress took up this task effectively and shaped creative strategies to deal with the future. There were far-reaching changes in the national and international situations in the three years between the 15th congress in Chandigarh and the 16th in Calcutta. At the national level the BJP has emerged as a major force and come to power at the Centre. At the 15th congress, we had foreseen that the Congress(I) would suffer a debacle both electorally and organisationally, given the way its leadership was governing the country and running the party. We had evaluated then that the erosion of the Congress(I)'s secular base, which had been taking place over the last three or four decades, had peaked. There was general discontent with regard to the economic policies it was pursuing.

However, we did not expect that the BJP would be able to make such major gains by exploiting the failures of the Congress(I). This emergence of the BJP, with its communal politics, poses a major threat to secularism and the democratic fabric of our Constitution. Their rule for the last six months has shown what direction they want to take and how they want to tamper with our educational institutions, media and other structures of democracy in order to propagate their communal agenda. All this is bound to have a damaging effect on national unity. The 16th congress felt that protection of national unity was important even for the advancement of the democratic movement. In this context, the congress has identified the fight against the communal BJP and its moves and manoeuvres as the central task of the party. It is in this background and in view of the fact that people do not like repeated general elections that the congress decided to announce that it would give issue-based support to the Congress(I) if and when the BJP-led Government falls because of its internal contradictions.

At the same time, the congress pointed out that the struggle against the policy of liberalisation, which was adopted in the first place by the Congress(I), was also very important. It is this policy that has created the economic crisis in the country. What the congress highlighted was that supporting a Congress(I) government for the purpose of challenging the communal forces does not mean accepting all the policies of the Congress(I). So, even while addressing the challenge of the communal forces as its central task, the party will continue its struggle against retrograde economic policies that are common to both the BJP and Congress(I). This will take the form of mass struggles and it is this that will be the basis of the development of the third alternative that is committed not only to secularism but also to the economic welfare of the poor and downtrodden people.

How is the proposed third front different from the United Front and the National Front that existed earlier? There is a suggestion that the congress has only couched the same idea in a different terminology.

The United Front more or less followed the objectives of the proposed third front in relation to foreign policy, Centre-State relations and the struggle to protect secularism. However, on the question of economic policy, it did not deviate much from the pro-World Bank liberalisation policy of the Congress(I). The mass struggles against this anti-people economic policy will ultimately form the contours of the new third front. It is too early to say, in terms of parties, as to who all would constitute the new front. But its political and ideological contours are clear. That is, commitment to secularism, democracy and the economic welfare of the people as opposed to the liberalisation policy that makes the rich richer and the poor poorer. And unlike the U.F., this will be a pre-election arrangement.

The party congress has analysed the Central Committee's (C.C.) rejection of the U.F.'s offer, after the 1996 elections, of the leadership of the then government to the CPI(M) and asserted that the decision was not a "historic blunder". What was the reason for reopening this debate and what was the most important factor in the debates that led to the reaffirmation of the C.C. decision?

A party congress debates all the major decisions taken by the C.C. since the previous congress. This is normal procedure.

The main factor in the debate was that the C.C. was correct in concluding that we could not join the government without being sure that we could influence the policies of the government. The congress underlined the fact that the party could come to a position of influencing the policies only by overcoming its shortcomings. In this context, changing the co-relation of casteist forces is of utmost importance.

Has this decision completely shut out the possibility of the CPI(M) participating in a government unless it is the major force in terms of numbers? Hypothetically, if the third front develops as you plan and in a future election constitutes as significant an electoral force as the U.F. in the 1996 elections, will the CPI(M) participate in its Government? Or will the decision depend on the question whether you have to take support from the Congress(I)?

As you yourself have said, this is a hypothetical question. But participation or non-participation for us is basically a question of deciding whether we can influence the policies of the government in the manner that we want. And the party leadership will consider the question as and when the situation arises.

The CPI(M)'s larger objective in terms of its party programme is to complete the people's democratic revolution by forging a people's democratic front. How do the offer of "issue-based support to the Congress(I) to form a government" and the emphasis on developing the third front co-relate to this idea?

SUSHANTA PATRONOBISH

As I mentioned earlier, the protection of national unity is important for the democratic movement to function. The BJP is definitely a threat to that. The offer of issue-based support to the Congress(I) is based on this understanding. Similarly, the third front could well be the forerunner of the people's democratic front. The basic difference between the two fronts would be that of leadership. The working class would lead the people's democratic front.

The CPI(M) has put off its plan to update the party programme. Does it reflect any difference of opinion on the issue?

There is no difference of opinion. As a matter of fact, the draft of the updated programme is ready. A special plenum to discuss this will be held next year.

The CPI(M)'s political and organisational report has repeatedly highlighted the failure of the party to achieve a better rate of growth in important areas of the country, especially in the Hindi-speaking States. In 1978, the Salkia plenum had evolved a scheme to bring in cadres from other States to work in this region. Are there any initiatives on this front from the 16th congress?

The practical difficulty that the party faces in advancing in these States is that the impact of bourgeois-landlord ideology is very strong, especially in the rural areas. Because of this, bringing in cadres from other States as suggested by the Salkia plenum has also not succeeded. While cadres from other States can work in urban centres, adapting to the peculiar cultural traits and overcoming the dominance of superstitions are a difficult task. Right now, our emphasis is on mobilising the existing cadres in these States more effectively.

Some media reports spoke of factionalism in the party and suggested that it had even led to the postponement of the election to the Polit Bureau....

All this is bogus reporting. So many reports and resolutions were discussed and passed by the congress and there was voting in the case of only one issue. All the major political and organisational reports were passed unanimously. The election to the C.C. was also unanimous. Where is factionalism in all this? The Polit Bureau election has been postponed on account of the impending Assembly elections and also because we want to select such members who can devote more time to work at the party centre. That is all there is to it.

Is there a proposal to enlarge the size of the Polit Bureau and give greater representation in the party structure to sections such as women?

No proposals for this have come from the congress. However, if the party feels the need for it the C.C. can take the necessary decisions.

Table of Contents

Home | The Hindu | Business Line | Sportstar