Sunday, 02 June 2013
The war on Maoists has to be fought by Governments of States which are bearing the brunt of Red terror. They must not get distracted by a dishonest Centre and the monkey chatter of jholawallahs
A week after the ghastly massacre by Maoists at Darbha Ghati in Sukma district of Chhattisgarh, there is little or nothing to suggest that the Union Government has stirred itself into action in combating what has been described as the “most serious threat to India’s internal security” by the Prime Minister and “a significant challenge” by his Home Minister. Instead, what we are witnessing is a despicable attempt by the Congress to politicise — a term the party leading the UPA regime often uses to berate and ridicule the Opposition — the hideous attack by Red terrorists on May 25 in which its top leaders of Chhattisgarh died a gruesome death.
Mahendra Karma, who had launched Salwa Judum, the tribal counter-offensive to Maoist terror, was shot and then stabbed 78 times by female cadre of the banned extreme Left organisation. Eyewitness accounts tell us the Maoists danced on his lifeless body. Chhattisgarh Pradesh Congress Committee president Nandkumar Patel was ‘interrogated’ and then ‘executed’ along with his son. Among the dead were eight security personnel for whom no tears have been shed. Former Union Minister Vidya Charan Shukla was grievously injured.
Rather than swear vengeance and call upon the Government to declare all-out war on Maoists, the Congress has begun a smear campaign, levelling outrageous allegations against Chhattisgarh’s Chief Minister Raman Singh and the BJP Government of the State. Conspiracy theories have been floated to insinuate that the BJP is hand-in-glove with the Maoists; that adequate security cover was not provided to the Congress leaders who had ventured forth into Maoist-controlled territory for a political rally; and, that it may well have been a conspiracy to eliminate top Congress leaders to ward off a serious challenge to the BJP in the State Assembly election scheduled for later this year.
Admittedly much of this sinister propaganda is the handiwork of lesser mortals in the Congress but the studied silence of the party’s senior leaders has served to fuel the conspiracy-mongering. A day after the massacre, Congress vice president and heir apparent to higher office Rahul Gandhi had described the carnage as an “attack on the idea of India” (also reported as “ideals of India”). Clearly, such highfalutin statements are lost on his, and his mother’s, minions. They would rather use this as an opportunity to heap calumny and worse on the BJP; the nation and the national interest are welcome to wait. The Government, meanwhile, has roped in the NIA to investigate the crime — the agency will no doubt do an excellent job of botching up the investigation and catching hold of the wrong people to please its political masters. That’s what it has been doing ever since it was set up after the 26/11 bloodbath.
What the Congress does not realise is that given the UPA’s patchy record of fighting Red terror and the party’s deplorable pandering to those who wage war on the Indian state (Digvijaya Singh has described Maoists as “misguided ideologues”; Sonia Gandhi has rewarded Binayak Sen, guilty of working as a courier for those who dream of setting up a Pol Pot-like regime and currently on bail under pressure from EU busybodies, with a post on the Planning Commission’s panel of health), two can play the game of floating conspiracy theories. Just because Delhi’s puppet media, which shamelessly describes itself as ‘national media’, does not provide space and airtime to the counter-conspiracy theories does not mean they do not exist. Here are 10 points that have been raised by those appalled by the Congress’s crude politicisation of Maoist terror that confronts the nation and threatens national security:
>Ajit Jogi always travels in an ambulance within Chhattisgarh. But on the day of the political rally that ended with the massacre he travelled by helicopter to the venue and returned ahead of other Congress leaders who travelled by road to and from the venue of the rally.
>As soon as Jogi finished his speech at the rally, his associate and Congress MLA from Sukma, Kawasi Lakma, went to him and audibly whispered into his ears: “Sir, aap ko teen bajey tak chalna hai.” (Sir you have to leave by 3 pm.)
>Jogi told TV channels later that when his helicopter circled above the venue of the next rally, the pilot told him, “Sir, yahan log nahi dikh rahey hain.” (Sir, I can’t see people here.) Jogi said the reference was to absence of security personnel there. But was the pilot referring to the ‘absence’ of policemen or the poor turnout for the rally?
>Jogi’s controversial son Amit Jogi was untraceable for a month recently and resurfaced only after the May 25 incident. All the while his mobile phone was ‘switched off’ or ‘unreachable’. Where was he? There are tales doing the rounds that he was in the jungles of Bastar during this period. If true, what was he doing there? Was he in contact with the Maoists? For what purpose?
>Why was Kawasi Lakma freed by the Maoists and allowed to flee although he is a sitting Congress MLA and, therefore, an important Congress leader of the region?
>Why are there discrepancies in the statements by Lakma and his driver to various TV channels although they went through the same experience?
>Lakma has said he was in the same car as Nand Kumar Patel and his son Dinesh. When the Maoists started firing on the motorcade, they slipped out of the car and hid behind a boulder, but were discovered soon. The Maoists asked Lakma why was he there. This would suggest that the Maoists were surprised to find him travelling in the convoy.
nAccording to the driver, the Maoists then marched Patel, his son, Lakma and him up the hill. There Lakma asked the Maoist cadre to go to their leaders and ask if he was also to be killed. Some of the Maoists went inside the jungle, came back and asked Lakma and his driver to leave. The duo came back to the road to find a motorbike without any rider but with its keys in place, as if waiting for them. They promptly drove off from there. Isn’t it curious that Lakma was not only allowed to go but his escape was facilitated? Whose motorbike was this?
>Sahara TV has shown footage in which Congress leader and former Union Minister of State
Charandas Mahant is seen scolding Lakma at the Jagdalpur hospital, “Tu ne marwa diya sabko.” (You got all of them killed.)
>Who is the State Congress leader to whom Lakwa is very close? Everybody says it is Ajit Jogi.
I have merely quoted the counter-theorists. But there is merit in their assertion that the NIA should consider these 10 points during its investigation. We can be rest assured it won’t do that. Or else there would be a fair inquiry into what happened, something which we should not expect from the Congress-led Government at the Centre.
Meanwhile, the Chief Ministers of the nine States which have been bearing the brunt of the Maoists should take a call on whether attending the next conference on internal security, scheduled for June 5 and organised by the Union Government, is worth their time and effort. Listening to the same hackneyed speeches by the Prime Minister and his Home Minister will not take them anywhere near a solution to the menace. Not the least because there is a fundamental dishonesty about the Union
Government berating Maoists from the pulpit of a security conference while the Congress slyly sups with the Devil.
There’s nothing new about this. Way back in the 1970s when Nakshals (that, and not the illiterate anglicised ‘Naxal’, is the correct term) unleashed their fury in West Bengal, a term heard quite frequently was ‘Congshal’. Maintaining law and order is a State subject. The Chief Ministers of the Maoist terror-affected States should simply declare war on Red terror and take it to its logical conclusion. Aberrations by way of collateral damage should not deter them, nor should the excited and excitable monkey chatter of jholawallahs distract them.
As for the Supreme Court, it would be wise for the honourable judges to hold their counsel. This war is not about upholding the niceties of the Constitution of India; it is a war to protect the Constitution from those who are determined to supplant it with their twisted doctrine of blood-soaked hate in their pursuit of setting up a People’s Republic of Maoistan.
(The writer is a senior journalist based in Delhi)