We were able to protect peoples interests

Prakash Karat was re-elected general secretary of the CPI(M).-Prakash Karat was re-elected general secretary of the CPI(M).

Interview with Prakash Karat, general secretary of the Communist Party of India (Marxist).

After his re-election as general secretary of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) on April 3, Prakash Karat spoke to Frontline about the various issues that came up for discussion at the 19th party congress in Coimbatore and outlined the future course of the largest mainstream Left party in the country. Excerpts from the interview:

In keeping with the CPI(M)s sustained political line, the 19th congress of the party has reiterated that the struggles against communalism, neoliberalism and imperialism would continue with renewed vigour. But what is the partys evaluation of the qualitative progress of this three-point political action plan in the period between the previous congress in Delhi and the current one?

Our party congress has said that we have had some success in checking some of the most outrageous neoliberal prescriptions that the Union government wanted to implement. They have been compelled to slow down the pace of the neoliberal economic reforms. And on some crucial issues we have been able to protect the interests of the people as well as economic sovereignty. But this struggle, obviously, has to go on.

The congress has also noted that there has been success in the sphere of foreign policy and in terms of security matters. Our struggle against the implementation of the civilian nuclear cooperation deal with the United States has also progressed. We have not allowed the government to go ahead with this agreement and we hope we will now be able to step up the struggle to reverse the strategic partnership that the U.S. and India are entering into. This is the second area where we are planning to make our efforts more vigorous.

As you are aware, in recent times the BJP [Bharatiya Janata Party] and the RSS [Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh] have started particularly targeting our party. I think that the BJP-RSS combine realises that our party is the most committed and clear-sighted as far as checking their drive to re-establish themselves in the government at the Centre and carry forward their game plan for the establishment of a Hindu rashtra is concerned. The party congress has resolved to intensify the struggle against communalism. Of course, this is not a job for us alone. We want all democratic and secular forces to join us in fighting the fascist-communal forces.

There seems to be some difference of opinion within the Left Front on the Indo-U.S. deal. Some leaders of parties such as the Revolutionary Socialist Party and the Forward Bloc seem to be of the view that the CPI(M) and the CPI are a bit soft in the struggle against the deal. They are apparently even opposing the approval given to the United Progressive Alliance government for discussing certain questions relating to the deal with the International Atomic Energy Agency.

The decision on allowing the government to hold talks with the IAEA was taken at a Left parties meeting. The understanding that the government would come back to the UPA- Left consultative committee after the IAEA discussions was also evolved after consultations in the Left forum. I do not think that there is any different interpretation or divergent view on that. Our fight, as I said and as Comrade [A.B.] Bardhan has said, is not against the IAEA safeguards agreement, but against the 123 Agreement. As long as the 123 Agreement is not operationalised, what is the problem?

The idea of a Third Alternative with a common policy foundation was put forward concretely at the last party congress. Now, it is being discussed more and more prominently and frequently. What was the evaluation of the 19th party congress on the progress of this alternative?

Our efforts to work out a common political platform with parties and forces that can come together agreeing on a common set of policies have made progress. But we have made it clear that we would take our time in building this up. We do not want to hurry or set up something that does not take off. We want something durable.

A document on certain policy matters presented at the Delhi CPI(M) congress was later finalised by the party Central Committee. The document was supposed to give a clear directive on engaging issues of globalisation and neoliberal economic policies. In terms of practical implementation, what has been the impact of this directive? There is a view that confusion persists in the CPI(M) in spite of the directive.

We have built on that policy document, which addressed some specific issues that had come up, and taken it forward in terms of the work of the Left-led governments. Some of those policy matters impinged on the functioning of the Left-led governments. Now we have broadened that and set out a framework. This addresses a number of vital questions. In the situation where the Central government is pushing forward policies of liberalisation and privatisation, and in the political situation of our country today, what can the Left-led governments do that will show that we are making a difference to the peoples lives? We are adopting pro-people measures, we are trying to put in place some alternative policies, and the framework would advance these efforts more concretely.

There is a stream of opinion that this policy framework being given to the party-led State governments would be at variance with the national policy perspectives of the CPI(M) congress with regard to liberalisation.

The partys understanding at the national level and the partys understanding as a whole is not something that can be translated through the Left-led State governments. The Left-led State governments are part of the Indian state structure. We are very clear as to what they can do and what they cannot do. We were clear about it from the first time we came into office in 1957. The question, however, is what the Left-led State governments can do within the Indian state structure, under the present set-up. What type of alternative policies can be pursued? Given the constraints under which they are functioning, what are the pro-people measures they can take forward? What are the new areas on which they should concentrate, what would be the thrust of their policies? The framework addresses these and related questions.

The framework is also for the party units outside these States to understand the severe constraints and difficulties under which the State governments are working and why they have to take certain steps and measures which were not what we would do if we had power at the Centre. It must also be noted that what we advocate at the national level, much of it is under the purview of the Central government. State governments have no say in the matter. Obviously, all the positions that we take at the national level cannot be automatically translated into the policy of the Left-led State governments. If the democratic forces were powerful enough to change all-India policy, then these three States [West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura] would not have to take some of these measures. The framework helps develop a common understanding on all these issues.

Would not this lead to a kind of confusion among the CPI(M) cadre?

There is no confusion. In fact, this perspective was with the party right from the 1957 government in Kerala led by E.M.S. Namboodiripad. Our party has been saying that we want to overthrow the big bourgeoisie. Still, the 1957 Kerala government had the Birlas set up a factory. Our cadre is very clear as to what our positions are at the national level and what our State governments are doing.

Organisationally, the last CPI(M) congress laid emphasis on strengthening the party in the north Indian States. What is the evaluation about this objective and its implementation?

We have reviewed our work on this aspect thoroughly in this party congress. Our view is that unless the party takes up three issues, it cannot make the kind of organisational impact that we aim for. Firstly, there are local issues, concerning the daily lives of the people and their livelihoods. Secondly, there are social issues, concerning questions like caste oppression, untouchability, problems of tribal people, and other social evils such as oppression of women. Thirdly, there are certain segments of the people among whom the party is weak. The party congress review is that we have had some progress in these areas, but it would take more time before it can be translated into political influence or development of our political base.

Developments in the CPI(M)s strong units such as Kerala have time and again raised calls for a strict rectification process within the organisation. What was the view of the party congress on this question?

We have been continuing with the rectification process. It was decided at the last party congress that we must bring out a revised, updated document or guideline for this process, taking into account the last decade or so. This document is yet to be prepared. This congress made a commitment that it will be prepared at the earliest and a rectification campaign will begin on its basis.