The Hindu : Conflicting political signals

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Thursday, Jul 11, 2002

Opinion

Opinion - Editorials

Conflicting political signals

THE DECISION BY the two emissaries of the People's War Group (PWG) of naxalites to pull out of the ongoing dialogue with the Andhra Pradesh Government is somewhat of an anti-climax in the negotiating process considering that the representatives of the outfit slated to take part in the talks were promised safe passage just a few weeks back. Yet, the decision is merely indicative of an unfortunate, though by no means unforeseen, resurfacing of mutual suspicions and a pervasive mistrust between militant outfits and the political establishment in the State. This is the reason why neither the Government nor the militant groups were prepared to lower their guard during the prelude to the negotiations. The latest turn of events may not therefore adversely impact on the commencement of the dialogue later this month or on its long term outcome. But the withdrawal from mediation by the balladeer, Gaddar, and the revolutionary writer, Varavara Rao, has certainly heightened the level of mutual apprehensions, apart from setting the clock back at least temporarily.

The most glaring evidence of the persisting unease amidst a seemingly growing climate of hope was encapsulated in the widely known perception among the PWG naxalites that the Government's recent offer of safe passage to their top leaders slated to participate in the dialogue was nothing but a conspiracy to eliminate them. Such a reading may or may not have any real basis. But there has been concrete evidence that encounter killings have continued with alarming regularity right through the past few months despite a PWG declared unilateral ceasefire last May. Thus, the gunning down of four leaders of the extremist outfits in Karimnagar district last week and two more in Khammam a few days earlier by the police in the name of encounters raises questions regarding the Government's sincerity in bringing the decades long tangle with extremism to an end, let alone, its desire to acquiesce in the framework proposed by the PWG for negotiations. The currently vitiated atmosphere thus appears far removed from the enthusiastic advocacy by the Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister, N. Chandrababu Naidu, of a dialogue with extremist groups outlawed under the Prevention of Terrorism Act.

In what is by no account a politically astute calculation, the PWG's announcement of a ceasefire first in February this year and then in May during the prelude to the current dialogue was not matched by any toning down of its hardline or political rhetoric. For instance, the justified concern about the persistence of encounters should have led to isolating the police administration for its unrelenting use of strong-arm methods. Instead, the PWG chose to concentrate on the other issue of questioning the motives of the political leadership with whom it is engaged in a dialogue. In doing so, its interlocutors may have contributed to vitiating the atmosphere. It is crucial that the important distinction between restoration of political space for furthering the democratic movement on the one hand and the recourse to armed insurgency on the other hand is recognised. Significantly, the purported objectives of extremist groups fall in the domain of the former, notwithstanding the highly dubious means they have deployed to achieve their ends. The challenge before the administrative machinery lies in ensuring that it does not blur the division between means and ends.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

Stories in this Section

Goodwill at any cost?

Conflicting political signals

Discrimination at work

The border confrontation

Time for a reality check

Sukh Ram judgment

Nation's last hope

Cartelisation

Birds of same feather