Truth Is Really Bitter !
The statement issued by the CC of MCC entitled ‘Bitter Truth’ (Frontier, Sept. 10-23) in response to an appeal made by seven South Asian Marxist-Leninist Parties affiliated to RIM is a statement of outright lies and false allegations against the CPI(ML) [PW]. It reminds one of the instance of a thief himself shouting "Thief! Thief!" to dupe the public. The said statement mentions that the CC of MCC had given an open declaration on January 7,2000 to its cadres to stop clashes unconditionally and unilaterally due to their realisation of the "due importance of efforts of national and international organisations to strengthen unity among Maoist revolutionaries in the present international context." It charges the PW of not having shown restraint and for continuing the clashes even after the MCC had stopped its attacks.
The statement also distorts the facts regarding the earlier agreements reached between erstwhile PU and MCC regarding the cessation of clashes and the violation of these agreements by MCC. It is delebarately silent on the attempts made by the PW ever since the merger of PU and PW in August 1998 to stop the clashes. It consciously avoids any mention of bilateral talks to resolve the problem and does not state the reasons for its refusal to sit for talks for two long years despite repeated proposals by CC(P), CPI(ML) [PW]. The statement, by cleverly weaving lies and misinterpreting the events tries to confuse and mislead the readers. The CC (P) CPI(ML) [PW] wishes to set the record straight by narrating the actual facts particularly since the merger of PU and PW in August 1998.
Firstly, it was the PW that had first stopped the clashes unilaterally after the merger of PU and PW. It called upon its ranks not to retaliate even if they were attacked by the MCC. In the name of the provisional CC we sent a letter to the CC of MCC informing it that we had instructed our ranks not to retaliate and called upon it to immediately stop its armed attacks. We also appealed to them to come forward for resolving the problem through bilateral talks. Thus it was the CC of PW which first took the decision to unilaterally stop the clashes despite continuous provocations by the armed squads of MCC.
The seriousness of the situation could be gauged from the fact that there were at least a score of incidents including over a dozen murders by MCC's armed squads between October '98 and June'99. The attackers came to the villages in group of over a hundred men armed with sophisticated weapons including even LMGs, as though they were fighting the state's armed forces. Houses of leading cadres and supporters of PW were set on fire, property was looted and anyone suspected of being close to PW was either beaten up severely or murdered outright. This rampage continued for 10 months but the Bihar state committee of CPI (ML) [PW] rigorously implemented the CC line of not undertaking retaliatory actions. Our forces suffered silently even as the MCC stepped up its aggressive acts in our strongholds in Jahanabad. This sacrifice was thought necessary in order to promote the interests of the oppressed people and the Indian revolution. By this unilateral cessation of clashes on the part of the PW, it was expected that the cadres of MCC and the various Marxist-Leninist organisations and wellwishers of Indian revolution would put pressure on the MCC leadership to call off its attacks.
But we were taken aback by the cold response of MCC to our proposal for resolving the problem through bilateral negotiations and its continuing cold-blooded murders of our activists and supporters even as we maintained unilateral restraint. Some of the acts committed by the MCC squads during the period of restraint were most brutal and despicable.
For instance, on September 26, '98 Devlal Pal, an organisor of MKSP, was kidnapped in Ratnag village in Bishrampur block and murdered in the most savage manner: his throat was slit in many places, his stomach was ripped apart, intestines were cut into pieces and his body was thrown on the highway.
On November 16, '98, another organisor of MKSP, Yugeshwar Rana, was abducted from Godgama village, (Palamau), tortured most brutally for two days and murdered. His head was severed from the body and taken away. Then there were the murders of other MKSP organisers such as Jagnandan Yadav in Madhubani village (Patna) on November 3; shooting down of 5 squad members in Ratnag village on Oct, 25 when they were commemorating the martyrdom of Devlal Pal; murder of Ramkapoor Sharma, a supporter of MKSP in Karna, Musouri (Patna), on November 25, and so on. Incidents involving destruction of houses of PW leaders, cadres and sympathisers, looting of property, etc., are too numerous to describe. It was only under such conditions that PW had to undertake at least a limited retaliation for its very survival. Thus the retaliatory actions began from July '99.
While MCC had declared on January 7, 2000 that it had asked its cadres to stop clashes unilaterally and unconditionally its promise lasted for a few months. It unleashed a series of attacks on PW cadres from August, 2000. On August 19, it kidnapped two of our cadres—Raghunath Rajwara and Ganauri Chaudhari and one sympathiser, Naresh Mehta, from Karkatta railway station. Ganauri was brutally murdered in front of the other two after taking them to a hilly place near Kulhi village under Bishrampur PS limits in Palamau. The two other were severely beaten up. In fact, on March 20 itself i.e., two months after the open declaration of the socalled unilateral cessation of clashes by MCC, Ganauri was injured when the armed squad of MCC attacked our squad. Ramasish (secretary, Bishrampur Chattarpur area committee), and Shiv Kumar, a squad member, were killed in Belhara village in Bishrampur Block. At that time Ganauri was let off with the warning that he would be killed if he continued to associate himself with PW. As Ganauri did not heed to their warning, he was murdered on August 19. Interestingly, the MCC released a press statement after this gruesome killing that it was not in accordance with its declaration. While expressing regrets at the incident it claimed that it might have been in retaliation to the murder of one Nandu Paswan of Latheya village PS, Chattarpur, Palamau. The MCC thus actually justified this heinous act, their formal regrets notwithstanding, by saying that it occured due to "the anger and remonstration of the local people and cadres."
The above press statement was intended only to confound the gullible people and is an attempt to cover up their heinous crime. Considering the fact that Chattarpur and Bishrampur are two different blocs, how could the MCC justify the killing of Ganauri by stating that it was due to the anger and remonstration of the local people? Moreover, the killing of Nandu Paswan took place in March, 2000 and for five long months MCC did not even claim that he was its cadre. All of a sudden, to justify their murder of Ganauri, they came out with the story of Nandu Paswan. Such is the dubious nature of their self-criticism.
Four days prior to the killing of Ganauri, the MCC squad murdered one of our sympathisers, Kalim Mian, on August 15, 2000 at Dhawadih village, PS Lesligunj, Palamau. Kalim Mian's brother was killed in 1997. And in the same month of August, 2000, Enamul Ansari, a PW sympathiser, was killed in Ramghar village, Bishrampur, and his house was looted.
On September 10, 2000 the armed squad of MCC again descended into Baria village, PS Nabinagar in Aurangabad
district, in an attempt to kill Satyendra. When they did not find him, the squad displayed its 'heroism' by abusing Satyendra's parents and wife and threatened them that they would kill Satyendra if he continued his activities in PW. Their property was looted and his house was partially destroyed. Terrorstricken, the inhabitants of the village fled to the nearby village of Dhobdhiah. The MCC squad went to Dhobdhiah too in pursuit of Satyendra. When the villagers protested they were thrashed badly.
Again on October 18, 2000, the squad of MCC opened fire on Parikha Yadav when he was travelling in a bus. He however managed to escape. On October 29, When the people of six or seven villagers killed the notorious lumpen Amerika Singh of Jorakhurd village after gheraoing him, the MCC squad surfaced in Bhikhi-Palwa village, Chattarpur kidnapped about fifteen supporters of PW, killed five of them, cut off the hands of two sympathiser and set ablaze seven of their houses.
All these ghastly incidents prove how dubious is their declaration of January 7, to unilaterally and unconditionally call a halt to their attacks. And what is the provocation for the side of PW warranting such brutal attacks on the part of MCC? There was no provocation, whatsoever, on the part of PW to compel MCC to pursue such armed attacks. The PW had actually been showing the utmost restraint despite repeated provocations by MCC particularly during August-October, 2000.
The March 10 statement of PW had, indeed, been proved absolutely correct by the events that followed the open declaration of MCC. The sectarian and fuedal mind-set of the MCC leadership, their "pettybourgeois aggressive mentality"-a term which they hurl most irresponsibly at the PW leadership-has taken a heavy toll of invaluable lives. It is a sad commentary on the MCC line that in the past three years, it is not the Indian state but the MCC that had killed a large number of revolutionaries, almost a hundred, including the leaders at various levels.
Another blatant lie floated by MCC is that "the open declaration issued on January 7 is the continuation of the peace process started in October '99". It put forth a series of lies to prove that it was the PW which had undertaken provocative actions during October '99 to January 2000. It claimed thus in its statement published in Frontier : "MCC actually took the decision to stop all kinds of retaliatory activities after the first week of October '99 or more precisely after October 10 though PW killed some of our supporters and one or two members of our Kranthikari Kisan committee such as Prabhu Jadab (Vill-Kesochalk, PS-Musouri, Dist. Patna) on October 5, '99, Karu Jadab, Sanjay Jadab and Ram Parvesh Jadab (vill. Bhanjore, PS. Bhagabanganj, Dist-Patna) November 24, '99 Naresh Jadab (Vill-Madhokhar, PS-Chainpur, Dist. Palamau) on December 10, '99. We did not take any retaliatory steps."
Why is the MCC now putting forth a new story that it had stopped all retaliatory actions from October 10, '99 itself? Why did it not mention this in their declaration of January, 7,2000? In fact we had readily responded by issuing a press statement on March 10, 2000 in which we correctly stated that "clashes would stop automatically if the MCC sticks to its public declaration."
The CC(P) CPI(ML) [PW] welcomed this change in the stance of the MCC towards the clashes and declared : "In light of the open declaration by the MCC to call off its attacks against our Party we too ensure all the revolutionary organisations in India and abroad that we will not indulge in any attacks against the MCC as long as the latter adheres to its declaration." It called upon its Party cadres "to show restraint and not be the first to undertake at any time, attacks against the MCC." Since that day, there hasn't been a single retaliatory action from our side even though there have been repeated provocation by the MCC. So MCC leadership was caught in a fix. It had to create some lame excuses for continuing its attacks. Hence it masterfully hatched the plan of proving that we had not stopped our attacks between October 10'99 and January 7,2000. It also quoted an incident in February 2000. And this they did after the passage of almost six months during which there hasn't been a single retaliatory act on the part of PW!
To continue their campaign of terror against our cadres and sympathisers, the MCC went to the extent of fabricating incidents. For instance the incident in Bhanjore village which they had mentioned in their statement in which three people were supposed to have been killed by the PW had not occurred at all. Moreover there was no person mentioned in the statement. But a person by name Gachu Yadav alias Ramanand Yadav was annihilated in that village by our squad prior to MCC's open declaration. The people of the village had been fighting against him in the land issue since long. To save himself from people's wrath, Ramanand first joined the 'Liberation' and when the 'Liberation' was isolated in the village by the erstwhile PU, he found a saviour in the MCC. He brought the MCC squad to the village which opened fire on our squad. Our squad, however, retreated without any casuality. After this incident Ramanand was annihilated. As regards Prabhu Jadav (village Kasochalk), he was expelled in 1998 from erstwhile PU due to charges of corruption and indiscipline. Since then he maintained relations with Musouri PS and MCC. He took part in an attack by the MCC squad against our squad. Later he was annihilated.
If MCC was really serious on stopping the clashes and had any sincerity in implementing its open declaration then why is it completely averse to holdig talks with the PW on the issue all along? Why has it not responded positively to almost a dozen letters by the CC(P) CPI (ML) [PW] in the last two years inviting them for talks and particularly to the three proposed dates by PW after MCC's socalled unilateral and unconditional cessation of clashes? All this only shows that MCC is not really serious in ending the clashes. It had issued the open declaration only as a diplomatic ploy and political trick. It is only to satisfy the demand of the various fraternal organisations in India and abroad and to confound the people. Its actual objective of uprooting the PW in Bihar remains intact and is now being implemented with as much a zeal as before.
It is due to the whimsical attitude of MCC leadership and lack of sincerity in their public statements and agreements reached with the erstwhile PU several times in the past that made us look at their January declaration with skepticism.
For instance, in 1995 January, a central level meeting between MCC and PU worked out a code of conduct. In August '95 it was concluded that the situatioin had improved barring afew instances as both sides had adhered to the decision. But within 3 months after the meeting three activists including a squad commander of PU were killed in three separate incidents.
Once again it was decided in August '96 at a state level meeting, and in December '96 at a CC-level meeting to stop the clashes. Guidelines were chalked out in December '96 to : immediately stop the attacks on cadres and sympathisers; one should not interfere in the struggles taken by the other in a given area; one should not encourage those declared by the other as class enemies and reactionaries; one should enquire into the antecedents of those expelled by the other if it wants to take them into the party and, if the charges are still pending, no relation should be maintained with such elements.
But surprisingly it was only after December '96 that MCC increased its attacks on PU. By that time MCC has decided to throw out the PU squads from the areas where they were strong and hence stepped up the attacks, notwithstanding the agreements reached.