Left unity has to be strengthened

Interview with A.B. Bardhan, general secretary, Communist Party of India.

BEFORE the 20th congress of the Communist Party of India (CPI) began in Hyderabad, there was considerable discussion at different levels within the party about general secretary A.B. Bardhans fervent request, citing his age, to be relieved of the responsibilities of the top position. In the end, his colleagues did not let it be. Instead, Andhra Pradesh leader S. Sudhakar Reddy was appointed deputy general secretary in order to take some burden off the 82-year-old leader. Bardhan spoke to Frontline about the deliberations at the congress, which he termed a landmark in the CPIs recent history. Excerpts from the interview:

You have termed the CPIs Hyderabad congress as a historic landmark. What are the reasons for this assessment?

The political, economic and social situation in our country today is very grim and the congress has taken note of and deliberated on all its dimensions and come up with specific proposals to address all important issues in this context. In terms of the international situation, we have made it clear that we will not allow any step that will draw India into the strategic embrace of the United States of America. Our opposition to the several steps taken by the UPA [United Progressive Alliance] government in this direction is directly related to this understanding. We are also determined, in this context, not to allow the operationalisation of the India-U.S. nuclear deal.

The congress has also decided to make all efforts to give a thrust to the democratic processes in our neighbouring countries such as Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh. It has also taken note of the inspiring strides that Left politics is taking in Latin America.

At the national level, we paid special attention to the disturbing economic situation caused by the pursuit of a thoughtless pro-liberalisation economic policy. Inflation and price rise are the most telling manifestations of the wavered economic policy, but there are many other not-so-visible ills, which could take a long-term toll. We have decided to counter this through several interventions, including mass agitations involving all Left parties as well as other secular and democratic forces.

The message from the CPI at the end of the last party congress in Chandigarh was one of cautious optimism. The BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) had been voted out of power, the UPA had taken office and there was a feeling that the policies of the UPA government could be influenced by the Left parties since it was dependent on their support for survival. What is the assessment of the Hyderabad meet about this expectation?

The defeat of the NDA in the 2004 Lok Sabha elections was mainly on account of its neoliberal policies. This peoples message was indeed pointed out to the UPA right at the beginning of its term. The Common Minimum Programme [CMP] for governance was evolved by the UPA and the Left on the basis of this understanding. And for nearly two years, the UPA stuck to the CMP. Several initiatives such as the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme [NREGS], the Right to Information Act [RTI] and the Forest Dwellers Act [FDA] came out during this period. But even through this period the advocates of fast economic growth were trying to push their agenda. And steadily they were able to take control of the government and turn around its priorities. Their focus was confined only to slogans like 9 per cent growth and enhancement of foreign investment.

Recently, sections of the government seem to have realised the socio-political cost of this wavered line and have started mouthing the new slogan of inclusive growth. But how can inclusive growth happen when there is no focus on core social responsibility areas such health care, education, food security and public distribution? The agitations that we have planned on economic policy issues will focus on all these issues.

So, what is the perspective on fighting the BJP and its politics of Hindutva after the Hyderabad congress? Would not the greater concentration on economic policy issues naturally dilute this?

It is our position that the fight against communalism and neoliberal policies are interconnected. A careful observation of the developments during the NDA regime as also during the UPA regime would show that both communal forces as well as the champions of neoliberalism are pro-imperialist. So, all three are interconnected. Hence our struggles will be carried out simultaneously against all the three negative forces. At the political level, we would not want the benefit of our struggles against the UPA to go to the BJP, especially at a time when the BJP is waiting expectantly after having announced a Prime Minister-in-waiting.

On the India-U.S. nuclear deal, the RSP and the Forward Bloc seem to hold a position that is at variance with the CPI and the CPI(M). According to some of their leaders, allowing negotiations between the government and the IAEA has weakened the struggle against the deal.

That is not correct. At the time we approved of the IAEA negotiations, the government had given an assurance that it would come before the UPA-Left consultative committee before finalising the draft on the safeguards agreement.

But the government has not shown the full text of the IAEA draft to the Left, only its so-called salient points

Yes. And we have told the government that we would be raising certain questions on the salient points they have shown us and on the basis of these questions they would have to come out with more or less the entire text.

But the initial understanding was that the whole text would be shown. Is there a feeling that the Left parties have been taken for a ride by the UPA leadership?

No. Nobody can take us for a ride. We are going through a process of democratic discussions and deliberations through a consultative committee arrangement. I do not think that the UPA leadership would violate democratic norms. And talking about democratic norms, the UPA should take into consideration the fact that the majority of Members of Parliament are opposed to the deal. Also, the government has to face an election in about 12 months. The U.S. government has also to face elections in the next few months. Then why should these two governments hurry through a deal like this?

Coming to organisational matters, there seems to be a stream of opinion within the CPI that the party leadership is overly dependent on the CPI(M). There have been suggestions that the CPI rank and file is going through a CPI(M) fatigue.

After a series of deliberations, the committed decision taken by the party congress is that Left unity has to be strengthened. I will not deny that there was some criticism on the relationship between the two parties. It is natural in such fraternal relations to feel that the bigger party is dominating. But it was also acknowledged that the Left and democratic alternative was the only hope for the country and for this Left unity has to be strengthened. A programme-based Third Alternative cannot be raised by the CPI or the CPI(M) in isolation. This understanding was one of the central outcomes of the congress.