BRP BHASKAR
Gulf Today
THE die is cast. The Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) has finally taken a major step to rid its Kerala unit of the canker of sectarianism which has spread through its vitals. Given the unilateral character of the action, it is unlikely to yield the desired results.
All of Kerala waited with bated breath during the weekend as the 85-member party central committee, called at short notice, deliberated on the course of action proposed by the 15-member politburo, which could not come to an agreed conclusion the previous weekend.
People sat glued before television sets as the news channels organised live discussions on the issue on Saturday and on Sunday on the basis of unsubstantiated reports that emerged from time to time about the course of the deliberations at the party headquarters in New Delhi.
Fax messages supporting one leader or the other flowed into the party office from all over Kerala and from the Gulf states while the meeting was in progress.
The party has been afflicted by sectarianism since long. Matters came to a head at the 2005 conference at Malappuram, where the factions led by state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan and Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan (who was leader of the opposition at the time) clashed, ignoring General Secretary Prakash Karat's plea to accept an agreed list of candidates for the state committee.
The hesitant steps the national leadership took during the past five years failed to check sectarianism. The party's disastrous performance in the Lok Sabha elections forced it to acknowledge that the malaise that originated at the top had spread to the lower limbs.
The official assessment was that Achuthanandan's public voicing of opinions different from those of the party on issues like the Lavalin case, in which Pinarayi Vijayan figures as an accused, and the electoral pact with Abdul Naser Mahdani's People's Democratic Party, had contributed to the poll debacle.
It was this perception that prompted the leadership to recommend to the central committee to remove Achuthanandan from the politburo.
Although some members wanted action to be taken against Vijayan also, the committee eventually accepted the recommendation without any change.
The central committee's decision, undoubtedly, is a victory for Vijayan, since the state committee, which is under his control, was seeking action against Achuthanandan for breach of discipline.
But the Vijayan faction's sense of triumph is tinged by disappointment over the national leadership's refusal to concede its demand for Achuthanandan's removal from the post of chief minister. The state committee reportedly made the demand in two resolutions sent to the Politburo.
Demotion from politburo to central committee is a setback that Achuthanandan, who has invited disciplinary action in the past too, can take in his stride. For him, the greater blow is the national leadership's rejection of his contention that there was corruption in the Lavalin deal. It rejected his demand that Pinarayi Vijayan, as an accused in a corruption case, must be told to step down from the post of state secretary.
The politburo gave Pinarayi Vijayan a clean chit. It reiterated the earlier decision that the Lavalin case was politically motivated and that Vijayan was not guilty of corruption.
On earlier occasions the national leadership had taken care to convey the impression that it was holding the scales even between the two faction leaders. This approach was particularly evident when both Achuthanandan and Vijayan were suspended from the politburo for several months for indulging in a public spat.
On a superficial view, the national leadership may appear to maintain parity even now inasmuch as Achuthanandan and Vijayan have been allowed to remain chief minister and party secretary respectively.
However, considering the bureaucratic character of the communist machinery, demotion within the party further limits Achuthanandan's functional autonomy as chief minister, which was already severely circumscribed by the state party.
Since Achuthanandan values his image as a crusader against corruption, built up over the years, and Pinarayi Vijayan is unlikely to lessen the control he exercises over the government through his acolytes in the cabinet, the national leadership's fond hope that the two factions will work together is unlikely to materialise.
The spontaneous demonstrations at a few places and the opinions voiced by people in straw polls conducted by television channels are indicative of a surge in support for Achuthanandan in the wake of the disciplinary action against him.
This does not augur well for the CPI-M which has to face panchayats elections next year and Assembly elections the year after.
Showing posts with label Sectarianism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sectarianism. Show all posts
Monday, July 13, 2009
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
CPI-M is damned if it does, damned if it doesn't
B.R.P. BHASKAR
Comment
IANS
The Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) politburo meets July 5-6 to grapple with the worrying problem of sectarianism in its Kerala unit. Few political observers believe it is in a position to act decisively.
Ranged on either side of the divide are two politburo members - party state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan, 65, who has the organizational machinery in his grip, and Chief Minister V.S. Achuthanandan, 85, the only living party man from the state who was among the 32 members who walked out of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of India in 1964 to found the breakaway party.
Achuthanandan, who was state secretary from 1980 to 1992, played a big role in Vijayan's elevation to that post in 1998. But they quickly parted ways.
Early on, it looked as though Vijayan was trying to modernize the party to bring it in tune with the times and Achuthanandan was trying to hold it back in the Stalinist path. Soon, however, their public images changed.
When the Congress-led United Democratic Front was in power, Achuthanandan, as Leader of the Opposition, travelled to the remotest corners of the state and identified himself with popular causes, earning in the process the image of a man of the masses. Vijayan, who tightened his hold on the party and mobilized resources for the party's media and entertainment enterprises by tapping rich men of dubious background, came to be identified with the wrong kind of change.
The party's national leadership has been seized of the sectarian problem since 2005 when the two sides went in for a showdown, rejecting General Secretary Prakash Karat's plea to approve an agreed list of state committee members. The measures it has taken to put down sectarianism have not yielded results, mainly because it has been treating the symptoms, not the malady.
The state party leadership did not want Achuthanandan to contest the assembly elections but the politburo, responding to public demonstrations of support to him, allowed him to contest and become chief minister. The state party then effectively reined him in by packing the cabinet with Vijayan loyalists. With the politburo's help, it ensured that the chief minister did not keep the sensitive portfolios of home affairs and vigilance.
The national leadership has been at pains to give the impression that it holds the scales even between the feuding leaders. As they indulged in a public spat, it suspended both from the powerful politburo but allowed them to stay in their respective posts. The suspensions were withdrawn after a few months.
As the situation deteriorated, the national leadership adopted a policy of procrastination. There was no action on Achuthanandan's repeated requests for a politburo meeting to discuss state party affairs. Complaints from the two factions levelling charges against each other piled up at the party's headquarters.
After the party's disastrous performance in the Lok Sabha elections the national leadership could no longer look the other way. However, its election review was marked by self-righteousness rather than self-criticism. The Central Committee refused to acknowledge the damage caused by the party's brazen attempt of shield Vijayan from prosecution in the Lavalin case and by the alliance with Abdul Naser Mahdani's People's Democratic Party, which is widely seen as a communal outfit. It attributed the electoral debacle simplistically to the confusion caused in the public mind on these issues by the opposition, hostile media and a section within the party.
The politburo has before it two demands - one from the Vijayan faction seeking Achuthanandan's ouster from the chief minister's post and the other from the Achuthanandan faction for Vijayan's removal from the state secretary's post pending his clearance by the judiciary in the corruption case. Theoretically, it can accept either or both of these demands.
The national leadership is in the unenviable position of being damned if it does and damned if it doesn't. In taking a decision, it has to consider how its action will affect the Kerala party, which is its largest unit. If Achuthanandan is ousted, it will not be able to find a chief minister with comparable popular appeal. If Pinarayi is removed, it will be hard put to find an equally competent successor.
Party documents have revealed that about 10 percent of the full members and close to 25 percent of the candidate members in the state have been dropping out each year. Large-scale desertions, even when the party is in power, suggests deep disillusionment among the rank and file.
Despite a high dropout rate, the party continued to grow until 2006 thanks to the onrush of new entrants. However, in 2007, the last year for which figures are available, there was a net drop in membership. It fell from 341,006 in the previous year to 336,644.
Comment
IANS
The Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) politburo meets July 5-6 to grapple with the worrying problem of sectarianism in its Kerala unit. Few political observers believe it is in a position to act decisively.
Ranged on either side of the divide are two politburo members - party state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan, 65, who has the organizational machinery in his grip, and Chief Minister V.S. Achuthanandan, 85, the only living party man from the state who was among the 32 members who walked out of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of India in 1964 to found the breakaway party.
Achuthanandan, who was state secretary from 1980 to 1992, played a big role in Vijayan's elevation to that post in 1998. But they quickly parted ways.
Early on, it looked as though Vijayan was trying to modernize the party to bring it in tune with the times and Achuthanandan was trying to hold it back in the Stalinist path. Soon, however, their public images changed.
When the Congress-led United Democratic Front was in power, Achuthanandan, as Leader of the Opposition, travelled to the remotest corners of the state and identified himself with popular causes, earning in the process the image of a man of the masses. Vijayan, who tightened his hold on the party and mobilized resources for the party's media and entertainment enterprises by tapping rich men of dubious background, came to be identified with the wrong kind of change.
The party's national leadership has been seized of the sectarian problem since 2005 when the two sides went in for a showdown, rejecting General Secretary Prakash Karat's plea to approve an agreed list of state committee members. The measures it has taken to put down sectarianism have not yielded results, mainly because it has been treating the symptoms, not the malady.
The state party leadership did not want Achuthanandan to contest the assembly elections but the politburo, responding to public demonstrations of support to him, allowed him to contest and become chief minister. The state party then effectively reined him in by packing the cabinet with Vijayan loyalists. With the politburo's help, it ensured that the chief minister did not keep the sensitive portfolios of home affairs and vigilance.
The national leadership has been at pains to give the impression that it holds the scales even between the feuding leaders. As they indulged in a public spat, it suspended both from the powerful politburo but allowed them to stay in their respective posts. The suspensions were withdrawn after a few months.
As the situation deteriorated, the national leadership adopted a policy of procrastination. There was no action on Achuthanandan's repeated requests for a politburo meeting to discuss state party affairs. Complaints from the two factions levelling charges against each other piled up at the party's headquarters.
After the party's disastrous performance in the Lok Sabha elections the national leadership could no longer look the other way. However, its election review was marked by self-righteousness rather than self-criticism. The Central Committee refused to acknowledge the damage caused by the party's brazen attempt of shield Vijayan from prosecution in the Lavalin case and by the alliance with Abdul Naser Mahdani's People's Democratic Party, which is widely seen as a communal outfit. It attributed the electoral debacle simplistically to the confusion caused in the public mind on these issues by the opposition, hostile media and a section within the party.
The politburo has before it two demands - one from the Vijayan faction seeking Achuthanandan's ouster from the chief minister's post and the other from the Achuthanandan faction for Vijayan's removal from the state secretary's post pending his clearance by the judiciary in the corruption case. Theoretically, it can accept either or both of these demands.
The national leadership is in the unenviable position of being damned if it does and damned if it doesn't. In taking a decision, it has to consider how its action will affect the Kerala party, which is its largest unit. If Achuthanandan is ousted, it will not be able to find a chief minister with comparable popular appeal. If Pinarayi is removed, it will be hard put to find an equally competent successor.
Party documents have revealed that about 10 percent of the full members and close to 25 percent of the candidate members in the state have been dropping out each year. Large-scale desertions, even when the party is in power, suggests deep disillusionment among the rank and file.
Despite a high dropout rate, the party continued to grow until 2006 thanks to the onrush of new entrants. However, in 2007, the last year for which figures are available, there was a net drop in membership. It fell from 341,006 in the previous year to 336,644.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Sectarianism dampens mood on the eve of LDF anniversary
BRP BHASKAR
Gulf Today
As the third anniversary of Kerala's Left Democratic Front (LDF) government approaches, sectarianism in the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) is in full swing again and the knives are out.
Neither Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan nor his party appears to be in a mood to celebrate the anniversary, which falls on next Monday.
Much will, of course, depend on the results of the Lok Sabha elections, which are expected on Saturday (March 16), the date set for counting of votes.
Both Achuthanandan and state party secretary Pinarayi Vijayan had said before the elections that the results would be a verdict on the state administration too.
Early in the campaign, LDF spokesmen asserted the alliance would do better than last time, even though there was little room for improvement since it had made an almost clean sweep in the Lok Sabha elections of 2004.
Even after polling they continued to exude optimism in public, but the CPI-M's post-poll exercises are a giveaway.
Party committees at various levels have been busy assessing vote losses and fixing responsibility for them.Evidently an effort is on to find scapegoats for likely reverses.
Several party committees have reportedly concluded that Achuthanandan's supporters worked against the party nominees in several constituencies.
With Pinarayi Vijayan's supporters asking for Achuthanandan's scalp, the sectarian feud in the party, which re-surfaced recently, has entered a new stage.
According to media reports, at a meeting of the party's state secretariat on Friday, almost all members demanded Achuthanandan's resignation.
The demand came after Pinarayi Vijayan, in a report, said that Achuthanandan had voiced his personal views on the Lavalin issue at the Cabinet meeting. The members said Achuthanandan had flouted party discipline in giving expression to view different from those of the party.
Ahead of last week's cabinet meeting to consider the Advocate General's advice to turn down the Central Bureau of Investigation's (CBI) request for permission to prosecute Pinarayi Vijayan in the Lavalin case, the CPI-M state committee, at a meeting held in the presence of general secretary Prakash Karat, had asked the government to accept it.
At the cabinet meeting, Achuthanandan reportedly threatened to convey to the Governor his personal view that the CBI's request must be granted.
However, he dropped the idea after NK Premachandran, minister belonging to the Revolutionary Socialist Party, pointed out that such a step would lead to the fall of the government as it meant loss of collective responsibility.
Media reports about the demand for Achuthanandan's resignation in the state committee caused a flurry of activity in New Delhi.
After telephonic contacts with the state leadership, the national office said Achuthanandan's exit was not discussed.
At the instance of the national office, the state party formally denied reports about demands for the chief minister's resignation.
However, it did not contradict reports that the state leadership would complain to the national leadership about Achuthanandan's conduct and demand his ouster from the politburo.
According to published accounts, Labour Minister PK Gurudasan was among those who asked the chief minister to step down if he was not ready to abide by party decisions. MC Josephine was the only Achuthanandan loyalist who did not join the chorus for his resignation.
By cracking the whip the state leadership has been able to isolate Achuthanandan almost totally. But he appears to be ready to fight alone if necessary.
The recrudescence of sectarianism in the state party poses a severe challenge to the national leadership. In earlier interventions in the inner-party feud, it made it clear that it wants Pinarayi Vijayan and Achuthanandan to continue in their respective posts. It is this formula that the state leadership is challenging.
The infighting is likely to intensify further after the election results are announced. If the LDF fares badly, the state leadership is sure to lay the blame at Achuthanandan's door and renew the call for his resignation.
Achuthanandan, on his part, can be expected to argue that the party lost because of the poor image resulting from the state secretary's implication in a corruption case and the electoral understanding with a communal party like the People's Democratic Party of Abdul Naser Ma'dani.
While the LDF constituents cannot question the CPI-M's right to choose its leader, the party cannot effect a change of chief minister without considering their views also.
The CPI, the second largest constituent of the alliance, has made it clear that it does not favour Achuthanandan's exit.
Gulf Today
As the third anniversary of Kerala's Left Democratic Front (LDF) government approaches, sectarianism in the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) is in full swing again and the knives are out.
Neither Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan nor his party appears to be in a mood to celebrate the anniversary, which falls on next Monday.
Much will, of course, depend on the results of the Lok Sabha elections, which are expected on Saturday (March 16), the date set for counting of votes.
Both Achuthanandan and state party secretary Pinarayi Vijayan had said before the elections that the results would be a verdict on the state administration too.
Early in the campaign, LDF spokesmen asserted the alliance would do better than last time, even though there was little room for improvement since it had made an almost clean sweep in the Lok Sabha elections of 2004.
Even after polling they continued to exude optimism in public, but the CPI-M's post-poll exercises are a giveaway.
Party committees at various levels have been busy assessing vote losses and fixing responsibility for them.Evidently an effort is on to find scapegoats for likely reverses.
Several party committees have reportedly concluded that Achuthanandan's supporters worked against the party nominees in several constituencies.
With Pinarayi Vijayan's supporters asking for Achuthanandan's scalp, the sectarian feud in the party, which re-surfaced recently, has entered a new stage.
According to media reports, at a meeting of the party's state secretariat on Friday, almost all members demanded Achuthanandan's resignation.
The demand came after Pinarayi Vijayan, in a report, said that Achuthanandan had voiced his personal views on the Lavalin issue at the Cabinet meeting. The members said Achuthanandan had flouted party discipline in giving expression to view different from those of the party.
Ahead of last week's cabinet meeting to consider the Advocate General's advice to turn down the Central Bureau of Investigation's (CBI) request for permission to prosecute Pinarayi Vijayan in the Lavalin case, the CPI-M state committee, at a meeting held in the presence of general secretary Prakash Karat, had asked the government to accept it.
At the cabinet meeting, Achuthanandan reportedly threatened to convey to the Governor his personal view that the CBI's request must be granted.
However, he dropped the idea after NK Premachandran, minister belonging to the Revolutionary Socialist Party, pointed out that such a step would lead to the fall of the government as it meant loss of collective responsibility.
Media reports about the demand for Achuthanandan's resignation in the state committee caused a flurry of activity in New Delhi.
After telephonic contacts with the state leadership, the national office said Achuthanandan's exit was not discussed.
At the instance of the national office, the state party formally denied reports about demands for the chief minister's resignation.
However, it did not contradict reports that the state leadership would complain to the national leadership about Achuthanandan's conduct and demand his ouster from the politburo.
According to published accounts, Labour Minister PK Gurudasan was among those who asked the chief minister to step down if he was not ready to abide by party decisions. MC Josephine was the only Achuthanandan loyalist who did not join the chorus for his resignation.
By cracking the whip the state leadership has been able to isolate Achuthanandan almost totally. But he appears to be ready to fight alone if necessary.
The recrudescence of sectarianism in the state party poses a severe challenge to the national leadership. In earlier interventions in the inner-party feud, it made it clear that it wants Pinarayi Vijayan and Achuthanandan to continue in their respective posts. It is this formula that the state leadership is challenging.
The infighting is likely to intensify further after the election results are announced. If the LDF fares badly, the state leadership is sure to lay the blame at Achuthanandan's door and renew the call for his resignation.
Achuthanandan, on his part, can be expected to argue that the party lost because of the poor image resulting from the state secretary's implication in a corruption case and the electoral understanding with a communal party like the People's Democratic Party of Abdul Naser Ma'dani.
While the LDF constituents cannot question the CPI-M's right to choose its leader, the party cannot effect a change of chief minister without considering their views also.
The CPI, the second largest constituent of the alliance, has made it clear that it does not favour Achuthanandan's exit.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Kerala CPI-M factions appear set for fight to finish
BRP BHASKAR
SECTARIANISM in the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M), which subsided after secretary Pinarayi Vijayan tightened his grip over its state unit this year, is in full cry again.
This time, the leadership appears to be ready for a fight to the finish.
The state party has been faction-ridden for years.
At one stage, in a bid to check sectarianism, the central leadership suspended both Vijayan and VS Achuthanandan from the Politburo.
The suspension was withdrawn before the Assembly elections.
The sectarian strife is essentially a power struggle.
Before the poll there was a build-up in Vijayan's favour. He led a march from Kasergode to Thiruvananthapuram, and all along the route, party units organised breakfast meetings for him to interact with social and business leaders.
Some interest groups presented to him memoranda outlining what they expected the CPI-M-led government to do for them.
Simultaneously there was a move to keep Achuthanandan away from the election scene.
Pinarayi loyalists branded him as "anti-development" and argued that the party would lose if he led the election campaign.
The Politburo's decision that both Achuthanandan and Vijayan should stay out of contests dashed the former's chief ministerial hopes and left the door open for Vijayan or his nominee to head the government after the elections.
Achuthanandan's supporters revolted, forcing the Politburo to allow him to contest.
After the Left Democratic Front's sweeping victory, the party could not deny Achuthanandan the chief minister's post.
The state party leadership, therefore, tried to clip his wings.
It expelled KM Shahjehan, who, as additional private secretary to the leader of the opposition, was believed to have helped him to build a populist image.
It denied Achuthanandan elbow room by packing the cabinet with Pinarayi followers.
However, strife continued. Each side resorted to covert methods to defeat the other's moves. Thus, when the chief minister stood in the way of a loan agreement with the Asian Development Bank, in which the party leadership was interested, the Local Self-government minister sent an official to New Delhi without his knowledge to sign the deal.
The chief minister and the party secretary found themselves on opposite sides when the state government began eviction of encroachers in the hill resort of Munnar.
The infighting was so intense that many believed Achuthanandan would be forced out after the state party conference.
Although Pinarayi Vijayan emerged stronger from the party conference, the central leadership made it clear that it wanted Achuthanandan to continue as chief minister.
For a while, it looked as though factionalism had ended.
Last week's developments suggest that the two sides have begun an open clash which can only end with the loser's unceremonious ouster in typical Communist fashion.
The opening shots were fired by the chief minister's private secretary, S. Rajendran, and political secretary, KN Balagopal, who reportedly told the state committee that Achuthanandan was acting on the advice of a clique of outsiders.
They identified K. Suresh Kumar, an IAS officer, whom the chief minister had handpicked to head the Munnar operations, as a member of the clique.
Suresh Kumar, who was attached to the chief minister's office at one time, hit back with an accusation that Rajendran and Balagopal had blocked action on some important files, including that relating to the Kiliroor sex scandal in which Achuthanandan had taken keen interest as opposition leader.
The party immediately demanded action against Suresh Kumar for violating conduct rules of government officials.
At the chief minister's instance, the chief secretary called for an explanation from him.
Later the cabinet decided to suspend him without waiting for his explanation. There is more in the renewed outbreak of sectarianism than meets the eye.
There was a veneer of ideological differences in the exchanges between the two sides on issues like the ADB loan.
Personal elements vitiate the latest exchanges.
There have been insinuations that the sons of two ministers belonging to the Pinarayi faction are involved in the Kiliroor case, to which Suresh Kumar alluded CPI-M legislature party secretary P. Jayarajan accused Suresh Kumar of visiting New Delhi to contact officers investigating the Lavalin case.
One issue involved in the case, which the High Court has entrusted to the Central Bureau of Investigation, is Pinarayi Vijayan's role in the award of a contract to the Canadian firm SNC Lavalin when he was electricity minister.--Gulf Today, Sharjah, December 15, 2008
SECTARIANISM in the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M), which subsided after secretary Pinarayi Vijayan tightened his grip over its state unit this year, is in full cry again.
This time, the leadership appears to be ready for a fight to the finish.
The state party has been faction-ridden for years.
At one stage, in a bid to check sectarianism, the central leadership suspended both Vijayan and VS Achuthanandan from the Politburo.
The suspension was withdrawn before the Assembly elections.
The sectarian strife is essentially a power struggle.
Before the poll there was a build-up in Vijayan's favour. He led a march from Kasergode to Thiruvananthapuram, and all along the route, party units organised breakfast meetings for him to interact with social and business leaders.
Some interest groups presented to him memoranda outlining what they expected the CPI-M-led government to do for them.
Simultaneously there was a move to keep Achuthanandan away from the election scene.
Pinarayi loyalists branded him as "anti-development" and argued that the party would lose if he led the election campaign.
The Politburo's decision that both Achuthanandan and Vijayan should stay out of contests dashed the former's chief ministerial hopes and left the door open for Vijayan or his nominee to head the government after the elections.
Achuthanandan's supporters revolted, forcing the Politburo to allow him to contest.
After the Left Democratic Front's sweeping victory, the party could not deny Achuthanandan the chief minister's post.
The state party leadership, therefore, tried to clip his wings.
It expelled KM Shahjehan, who, as additional private secretary to the leader of the opposition, was believed to have helped him to build a populist image.
It denied Achuthanandan elbow room by packing the cabinet with Pinarayi followers.
However, strife continued. Each side resorted to covert methods to defeat the other's moves. Thus, when the chief minister stood in the way of a loan agreement with the Asian Development Bank, in which the party leadership was interested, the Local Self-government minister sent an official to New Delhi without his knowledge to sign the deal.
The chief minister and the party secretary found themselves on opposite sides when the state government began eviction of encroachers in the hill resort of Munnar.
The infighting was so intense that many believed Achuthanandan would be forced out after the state party conference.
Although Pinarayi Vijayan emerged stronger from the party conference, the central leadership made it clear that it wanted Achuthanandan to continue as chief minister.
For a while, it looked as though factionalism had ended.
Last week's developments suggest that the two sides have begun an open clash which can only end with the loser's unceremonious ouster in typical Communist fashion.
The opening shots were fired by the chief minister's private secretary, S. Rajendran, and political secretary, KN Balagopal, who reportedly told the state committee that Achuthanandan was acting on the advice of a clique of outsiders.
They identified K. Suresh Kumar, an IAS officer, whom the chief minister had handpicked to head the Munnar operations, as a member of the clique.
Suresh Kumar, who was attached to the chief minister's office at one time, hit back with an accusation that Rajendran and Balagopal had blocked action on some important files, including that relating to the Kiliroor sex scandal in which Achuthanandan had taken keen interest as opposition leader.
The party immediately demanded action against Suresh Kumar for violating conduct rules of government officials.
At the chief minister's instance, the chief secretary called for an explanation from him.
Later the cabinet decided to suspend him without waiting for his explanation. There is more in the renewed outbreak of sectarianism than meets the eye.
There was a veneer of ideological differences in the exchanges between the two sides on issues like the ADB loan.
Personal elements vitiate the latest exchanges.
There have been insinuations that the sons of two ministers belonging to the Pinarayi faction are involved in the Kiliroor case, to which Suresh Kumar alluded CPI-M legislature party secretary P. Jayarajan accused Suresh Kumar of visiting New Delhi to contact officers investigating the Lavalin case.
One issue involved in the case, which the High Court has entrusted to the Central Bureau of Investigation, is Pinarayi Vijayan's role in the award of a contract to the Canadian firm SNC Lavalin when he was electricity minister.--Gulf Today, Sharjah, December 15, 2008
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Literary academy chief in the garb of party commissar
BRP BHASKAR
As the sensation created by Kerala Sahitya Akademi Chairman M. Mukundan’s denigration of Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan subsides, the sectarianism in the Communist Party of India (Marxist), which was believed to have been laid to rest at the State party conference early this year, is raging furiously once again.
Mukundan’s dim view of Achuthanandan’s leadership had first found expression in a short story, which contained an allegoric reference to him as a dinosaur. It was written when the Chief Minister was pushing hard for removal of land encroachments in Munnar, facing opposition from his own party as well as the CPI.
This time he went one step further. In a magazine interview, he described Achuthanandan as “old-fashioned” and “an outdated saint”. He not sonly ridiculed Achuthanandan as an anachronism but also hailed State party secretary Pinarayi Vijayan as the one who can lead Kerala to glory.
Mukundan is undoubtedly a major writer of his generation, but few will give him a high rating as a political thinker. Though not a CPI (M) member, Minister for Culture MA Baby picked him to head the official literary academy. Baby, a leading light of the Pinarayi camp, has been instrumental in drawing several writers and artistes, who were not even fellow-travellers, towards the party with a view to widening its base among men of arts and letters.
Some have uncharitably characterised Mukundan’s criticism of Achuthanandan and praise for Pinarayi Vijayan as a return favour. Since the Akademi post does not in any way curtail his personal freedoms, he is certainly entitled to express his opinion. However, he was being impetuous when he donned the garb of a commissar and pronounced on who should lead the party.
Mukundan merely echoed the views of KEN Kunhahammad, who has been the party’s de facto literary commissar since the late MN Vijayan was deposed after he criticised the party leadership’s line of seeking accommodation with the forces of globalization. In a widely discussed magazine article, he had accused Achuthanandan of being a political godman.
Achuthanandan’s initial response to Mukundan’s interview was one of good-humoured dismissal. People would have different views and they had the right to express them, he told media persons.
A few days later, in a written statement, he addressed the writer’s criticism directly. He acknowledged that as an 85-year-old he could be described as “old-fashioned”. Besides, the ideology that he upheld dated back to 1848. He added, “I am proud of it. I consider it is the ideology of the future too.”
He pointed out that even in the time of Karl Marx, the demons of capitalism had ridiculed Communists as old-fashioned. When Gorbachevism gained ground in the Soviet Union, there was widespread propaganda that history had ended and Communism had become outdated. With a touch of sarcasm, he added, “Even now some post-modernists are taking it up.”
Achuthanandan concluded with another ideological dig. He said it was capitalism’s chorus as well as hope that time would invalidate all values.
The carefully worded response made it clear that Achuthanandan considered Mukundan’s remarks not as personal views expressed casually in an interview but as a calculated attempt to boost the prospects of the party’s official leadership in the renewed sectarian warfare.
The thrust of Achuthanandan’s arguments were directed not against the writer but against Pinarayi Vijayan and his supporters, who, like the Chinese Communist leadership, favour the capitalist path of development.
The link between Mukundan's interview and the sectarianism in the CPI (M) became evident when Achuthanandan's supporters burnt the writer's effigy at a few places. The party leadership has reportedly ordered inquiry into these incidents. Evidently, it views a demonstration against Mukundan as an anti-party activity.
The controversy coincides with acts of revolt by party men at some places. The party recently dissolved a few local committees dominated by Achuthanandan supporters and set up ad hoc committees in their places. Some who have attracted disciplinary action have responded by setting up parallel committees. Such forms of protest have few parallels in the party’s history.
CPI (M) General Secretary Prakash Karat had made decisive interventions before the last party congress to check sectarianism in the State unit. At one point, he had even got the Politburo to suspend both Achuthanandan and Vijayan from that high-powered body. The disciplinary measure was withdrawn when the Assembly elections approached.
Karat has so far maintained discreet silence on the renewed faction fight. With the Lok Sabha elections fast approaching, he does not have much room for manoeuvre. -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, November 17, 2008.
As the sensation created by Kerala Sahitya Akademi Chairman M. Mukundan’s denigration of Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan subsides, the sectarianism in the Communist Party of India (Marxist), which was believed to have been laid to rest at the State party conference early this year, is raging furiously once again.
Mukundan’s dim view of Achuthanandan’s leadership had first found expression in a short story, which contained an allegoric reference to him as a dinosaur. It was written when the Chief Minister was pushing hard for removal of land encroachments in Munnar, facing opposition from his own party as well as the CPI.
This time he went one step further. In a magazine interview, he described Achuthanandan as “old-fashioned” and “an outdated saint”. He not sonly ridiculed Achuthanandan as an anachronism but also hailed State party secretary Pinarayi Vijayan as the one who can lead Kerala to glory.
Mukundan is undoubtedly a major writer of his generation, but few will give him a high rating as a political thinker. Though not a CPI (M) member, Minister for Culture MA Baby picked him to head the official literary academy. Baby, a leading light of the Pinarayi camp, has been instrumental in drawing several writers and artistes, who were not even fellow-travellers, towards the party with a view to widening its base among men of arts and letters.
Some have uncharitably characterised Mukundan’s criticism of Achuthanandan and praise for Pinarayi Vijayan as a return favour. Since the Akademi post does not in any way curtail his personal freedoms, he is certainly entitled to express his opinion. However, he was being impetuous when he donned the garb of a commissar and pronounced on who should lead the party.
Mukundan merely echoed the views of KEN Kunhahammad, who has been the party’s de facto literary commissar since the late MN Vijayan was deposed after he criticised the party leadership’s line of seeking accommodation with the forces of globalization. In a widely discussed magazine article, he had accused Achuthanandan of being a political godman.
Achuthanandan’s initial response to Mukundan’s interview was one of good-humoured dismissal. People would have different views and they had the right to express them, he told media persons.
A few days later, in a written statement, he addressed the writer’s criticism directly. He acknowledged that as an 85-year-old he could be described as “old-fashioned”. Besides, the ideology that he upheld dated back to 1848. He added, “I am proud of it. I consider it is the ideology of the future too.”
He pointed out that even in the time of Karl Marx, the demons of capitalism had ridiculed Communists as old-fashioned. When Gorbachevism gained ground in the Soviet Union, there was widespread propaganda that history had ended and Communism had become outdated. With a touch of sarcasm, he added, “Even now some post-modernists are taking it up.”
Achuthanandan concluded with another ideological dig. He said it was capitalism’s chorus as well as hope that time would invalidate all values.
The carefully worded response made it clear that Achuthanandan considered Mukundan’s remarks not as personal views expressed casually in an interview but as a calculated attempt to boost the prospects of the party’s official leadership in the renewed sectarian warfare.
The thrust of Achuthanandan’s arguments were directed not against the writer but against Pinarayi Vijayan and his supporters, who, like the Chinese Communist leadership, favour the capitalist path of development.
The link between Mukundan's interview and the sectarianism in the CPI (M) became evident when Achuthanandan's supporters burnt the writer's effigy at a few places. The party leadership has reportedly ordered inquiry into these incidents. Evidently, it views a demonstration against Mukundan as an anti-party activity.
The controversy coincides with acts of revolt by party men at some places. The party recently dissolved a few local committees dominated by Achuthanandan supporters and set up ad hoc committees in their places. Some who have attracted disciplinary action have responded by setting up parallel committees. Such forms of protest have few parallels in the party’s history.
CPI (M) General Secretary Prakash Karat had made decisive interventions before the last party congress to check sectarianism in the State unit. At one point, he had even got the Politburo to suspend both Achuthanandan and Vijayan from that high-powered body. The disciplinary measure was withdrawn when the Assembly elections approached.
Karat has so far maintained discreet silence on the renewed faction fight. With the Lok Sabha elections fast approaching, he does not have much room for manoeuvre. -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, November 17, 2008.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Party Secretary emerges stronger but Chief Minister stays
The trial of strength in the Communist Party of India-Marxist, which heads the ruling Left Democratic Front (LDF), has ended in a decisive victory for state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan, but he still has to live with his vanquished rival, VS Achuthanandan, as the Chief Minister.
The new State Committee, elected unanimously at the conference held at Kottayam last week, is more heavily weighted in Pinarayi Vijayan's favour than the outgoing one.
Of the 11 newly inducted members, only one belongs to the Achuthanandan faction, making it even more of a minority than before.
Immediately after his re-election as state secretary for the fourth time, Pinarayi Vijayan said it was the beginning of a new era. He added that the sectarianism that had gripped the party for several years was over. It was, in effect, a proclamation of victory.
The principle of "democratic centralism," which the CPI-M follows, enjoins upon the minority to surrender to the wishes of the majority. To drive home the point, Vijayan warned that no breach of discipline would be tolerated.
Achuthanandan listened silently as Vijayan's supporters attacked him in the delegates' session. At the public meeting that followed, he promised, as was expected of a party loyalist, that he would take into account the members' criticism. General Secretary Prakash Karat, who headed the national leaders present at the conference, endorsed Vijayan's observations about the end of sectarianism and maintenance of party discipline.
Karat also said the State party would forge ahead with Vijayan as secretary and Achuthanandan as Chief Minister.
These words signalled a message to the victorious faction that the central leadership did not favour a change of leadership at the governmental level.
Media reports interpreted Achuthanandan's reported silence at a Cabinet meeting when the controversial HMT land deal came up for consideration as evidence of his 'surrender' to the official faction.
Industries Minister Elamaram Kareem, a Pinarayi supporter, had played an active role in facilitating the sale of land by HMT to a Mumbai real estate firm.
Talking to reporters after the Cabinet meeting, Achuthanandan said that although sectarianism had ended ideological differences could surface from time to time. Pinarayi Vijayan dismissed his observation as a mere verbal exercise.
The remarks of the two leaders indicate that the media can continue to expect a bonanza of innuendoes and even public spat from them.
Karat announced at the conference that the party would draw up a set of guidelines with a view to improving co-ordination between the organisational and governmental wings.
Earlier the central leadership had constituted a five-member co-ordination committee, with equal representation for the two factions, for the same purpose. It failed as the state leadership did not give it a fair trial.
Apparently the central leadership has come up with the new formula, encouraged by its assessment that the guidelines it had provided for the conduct of the State conference had succeeded in checking sectarianism.
Whether or not sectarianism is over, the two factions will find it necessary to put aside their differences and pull together since bugle sounds for an election battle are already in the air.
Congress President Sonia Gandhi, who was in Kerala on Friday, accused the CPI-M-led LDF of misrule and said, "That we are together at the Centre does not mean they can do anything here." She drew pointed attention to attacks by the CPI-M on the judiciary and to its interventions in the education sphere.
On earlier visits to the State, Sonia Gandhi had avoided direct attack on the CPI-M, which is supporting the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance government at the Centre from outside.
The departure from this practice can be seen as part of the preparations for the inevitable confrontation between the two parties in the Lok Sabha elections, which are due next year but can come earlier.
Both Achuthanandan and Vijayan immediately joined issue with her. The Chief Minister termed her remarks "immature." The party secretary accused her of levelling false charges against his party with political motives.
It remains to be seen whether the proclaimed end of sectarianism and the truce dictated by electoral considerations will result in an improvement in the performance of the State government, which had been badly hit as the Chief Minister and ministers belonging to the opposite faction were working at cross purposes in several matters. --Gulf Today, Sharjah, February 18, 2008.
The new State Committee, elected unanimously at the conference held at Kottayam last week, is more heavily weighted in Pinarayi Vijayan's favour than the outgoing one.
Of the 11 newly inducted members, only one belongs to the Achuthanandan faction, making it even more of a minority than before.
Immediately after his re-election as state secretary for the fourth time, Pinarayi Vijayan said it was the beginning of a new era. He added that the sectarianism that had gripped the party for several years was over. It was, in effect, a proclamation of victory.
The principle of "democratic centralism," which the CPI-M follows, enjoins upon the minority to surrender to the wishes of the majority. To drive home the point, Vijayan warned that no breach of discipline would be tolerated.
Achuthanandan listened silently as Vijayan's supporters attacked him in the delegates' session. At the public meeting that followed, he promised, as was expected of a party loyalist, that he would take into account the members' criticism. General Secretary Prakash Karat, who headed the national leaders present at the conference, endorsed Vijayan's observations about the end of sectarianism and maintenance of party discipline.
Karat also said the State party would forge ahead with Vijayan as secretary and Achuthanandan as Chief Minister.
These words signalled a message to the victorious faction that the central leadership did not favour a change of leadership at the governmental level.
Media reports interpreted Achuthanandan's reported silence at a Cabinet meeting when the controversial HMT land deal came up for consideration as evidence of his 'surrender' to the official faction.
Industries Minister Elamaram Kareem, a Pinarayi supporter, had played an active role in facilitating the sale of land by HMT to a Mumbai real estate firm.
Talking to reporters after the Cabinet meeting, Achuthanandan said that although sectarianism had ended ideological differences could surface from time to time. Pinarayi Vijayan dismissed his observation as a mere verbal exercise.
The remarks of the two leaders indicate that the media can continue to expect a bonanza of innuendoes and even public spat from them.
Karat announced at the conference that the party would draw up a set of guidelines with a view to improving co-ordination between the organisational and governmental wings.
Earlier the central leadership had constituted a five-member co-ordination committee, with equal representation for the two factions, for the same purpose. It failed as the state leadership did not give it a fair trial.
Apparently the central leadership has come up with the new formula, encouraged by its assessment that the guidelines it had provided for the conduct of the State conference had succeeded in checking sectarianism.
Whether or not sectarianism is over, the two factions will find it necessary to put aside their differences and pull together since bugle sounds for an election battle are already in the air.
Congress President Sonia Gandhi, who was in Kerala on Friday, accused the CPI-M-led LDF of misrule and said, "That we are together at the Centre does not mean they can do anything here." She drew pointed attention to attacks by the CPI-M on the judiciary and to its interventions in the education sphere.
On earlier visits to the State, Sonia Gandhi had avoided direct attack on the CPI-M, which is supporting the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance government at the Centre from outside.
The departure from this practice can be seen as part of the preparations for the inevitable confrontation between the two parties in the Lok Sabha elections, which are due next year but can come earlier.
Both Achuthanandan and Vijayan immediately joined issue with her. The Chief Minister termed her remarks "immature." The party secretary accused her of levelling false charges against his party with political motives.
It remains to be seen whether the proclaimed end of sectarianism and the truce dictated by electoral considerations will result in an improvement in the performance of the State government, which had been badly hit as the Chief Minister and ministers belonging to the opposite faction were working at cross purposes in several matters. --Gulf Today, Sharjah, February 18, 2008.
Monday, December 3, 2007
CPI-M poll process makes progress despite sectarianism
AS the election process in the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) moves to the final phase, it is clear that the central leadership's effort to contain sectarianism in the Kerala unit has not succeeded fully. However, the faction feud caused disruption only at a few places.
The Kerala party, which had 341,006 members last year, is the CPI-M's largest unit. The West Bengal party, which has been in power continuously from 1977, had only 290,164 members at the time. Bengal's population is two and a half times that of Kerala.
The conferences held at various levels in advance of the triennial party congress provide CPI-M members the opportunity to express their views on the organisation's working and elect new office-bearers.
As the party's 26,000 units decorated their localities with red banners and festoons for the meetings, Kerala had a festive air. Last week district-level conferences began, raising the noise level. The State conference will be held at Kottayam in February.
The party has been in the grip of sectarianism for several years. Last May, the Politburo suspended both State party Secretary Pinarayi Vijayan and Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan, who lead the rival factions, for feuding in public. Before going into conference mode, the Politburo revoked their suspension. It also issued a set of election guidelines to contain sectarianism. They provided for immediate intervention to deal with any manifestation of factionalism. CPI-M General Secretary Prakash Karat said the Politburo would intervene if the guidelines were not followed.
The media took keen interest in the electoral process. By all accounts, the leadership of the organisational and governmental wings came up for severe criticism from supporters of the rival faction at the lower level conferences.
Thanks to the party's tradition of democratic centralism, delegates usually accept officially circulated lists of office-bearers. However, contested elections are not unknown. This time there were contests at many places. There have been reports that the factions either captured or retained control of committees at different levels. However, there is nothing to indicate whether there has been a change in their relative strength.
The district level conferences are spread over a long period. When all 14 district meets are over, the stage will be set for the State conference. The final line-up will be available only then.
Pinarayi Vijayan said last week that the guidelines had helped contain factionalism. But the spate of complaints that flowed to the central leadership shows that members divided on factional lines even at the lowest levels. Charges levelled by each side against the other include abduction of delegates, use of money power and resort to blackmail tactics.
The reasons why the guidelines have not been very effective are not difficult to fathom. When the higher body, which is required to supervise the proceedings, is affected by factionalism, it cannot be expected to act decisively against sectarianism at the lower level.
There are definite limits to the Politburo's ability to intervene promptly at the lower levels. Now that the process has reached the district level, the State committee is directly in the picture as the sole supervisory body. Also, it is possible for the Politburo to keep a close watch on developments and step in if the guidelines are not followed scrupulously.
Aware of this, the leaders of the two factions, which fought bitterly at the lower levels, are reportedly demonstrating willingness to avoid direct conflicts, and accommodate each other instead. Pinarayi Vijayan, who was present at the Kottayam district conference, strove hard to promote unanimous election. Some observers, however, thought he did so to prevent the rival faction taking advantage of the differences between two of his local supporters.
The two factions had gone to the last State conference, held at Malappuram, determined to fight it out. Prakash Karat appealed to them to elect the State committee without a contest, but they ignored his plea. In the contest that followed, the Pinarayi Vijayan faction emerged victorious.
This time, too, the electoral process began amid indications that the two factions are determined to fight it out. However, the way Karat has handled the sectarian issue in recent times suggests that, unlike last time, he may now be willing to assert the authority of the central leadership and prevent a fight to the finish. --Gulf Today, Sharjah, December 3, 2007.
The Kerala party, which had 341,006 members last year, is the CPI-M's largest unit. The West Bengal party, which has been in power continuously from 1977, had only 290,164 members at the time. Bengal's population is two and a half times that of Kerala.
The conferences held at various levels in advance of the triennial party congress provide CPI-M members the opportunity to express their views on the organisation's working and elect new office-bearers.
As the party's 26,000 units decorated their localities with red banners and festoons for the meetings, Kerala had a festive air. Last week district-level conferences began, raising the noise level. The State conference will be held at Kottayam in February.
The party has been in the grip of sectarianism for several years. Last May, the Politburo suspended both State party Secretary Pinarayi Vijayan and Chief Minister VS Achuthanandan, who lead the rival factions, for feuding in public. Before going into conference mode, the Politburo revoked their suspension. It also issued a set of election guidelines to contain sectarianism. They provided for immediate intervention to deal with any manifestation of factionalism. CPI-M General Secretary Prakash Karat said the Politburo would intervene if the guidelines were not followed.
The media took keen interest in the electoral process. By all accounts, the leadership of the organisational and governmental wings came up for severe criticism from supporters of the rival faction at the lower level conferences.
Thanks to the party's tradition of democratic centralism, delegates usually accept officially circulated lists of office-bearers. However, contested elections are not unknown. This time there were contests at many places. There have been reports that the factions either captured or retained control of committees at different levels. However, there is nothing to indicate whether there has been a change in their relative strength.
The district level conferences are spread over a long period. When all 14 district meets are over, the stage will be set for the State conference. The final line-up will be available only then.
Pinarayi Vijayan said last week that the guidelines had helped contain factionalism. But the spate of complaints that flowed to the central leadership shows that members divided on factional lines even at the lowest levels. Charges levelled by each side against the other include abduction of delegates, use of money power and resort to blackmail tactics.
The reasons why the guidelines have not been very effective are not difficult to fathom. When the higher body, which is required to supervise the proceedings, is affected by factionalism, it cannot be expected to act decisively against sectarianism at the lower level.
There are definite limits to the Politburo's ability to intervene promptly at the lower levels. Now that the process has reached the district level, the State committee is directly in the picture as the sole supervisory body. Also, it is possible for the Politburo to keep a close watch on developments and step in if the guidelines are not followed scrupulously.
Aware of this, the leaders of the two factions, which fought bitterly at the lower levels, are reportedly demonstrating willingness to avoid direct conflicts, and accommodate each other instead. Pinarayi Vijayan, who was present at the Kottayam district conference, strove hard to promote unanimous election. Some observers, however, thought he did so to prevent the rival faction taking advantage of the differences between two of his local supporters.
The two factions had gone to the last State conference, held at Malappuram, determined to fight it out. Prakash Karat appealed to them to elect the State committee without a contest, but they ignored his plea. In the contest that followed, the Pinarayi Vijayan faction emerged victorious.
This time, too, the electoral process began amid indications that the two factions are determined to fight it out. However, the way Karat has handled the sectarian issue in recent times suggests that, unlike last time, he may now be willing to assert the authority of the central leadership and prevent a fight to the finish. --Gulf Today, Sharjah, December 3, 2007.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)