There are few who would mistake Trinamul Congress chief and railway minister Mamata Banerjee for another Jayaprakash Narayan. The latter, a stalwart of the freedom struggle, spurned power and used his exalted status for many worthy ends, among them a determined bid to try and solve the Naga question at a time when government efforts were not making any headway. It was also largely through JP’s initiative — which involved instituting open jails and taking other steps to bring dreaded dacoits back into the mainstream — that the menace posed by the desperadoes could be ended in the Chambal ravines. JP’s efforts at peacemaking were credible as power was not his motive, and he was not a government functionary at any stage of his struggle-filled life. Ms Banerjee, on the other hand, is an eager power seeker. Naturally, any initiatives she might take will be judged accordingly.
The Trinamul supremo’s speech on Monday at the Lalgarh rally in West Bengal’s West Midnapore district, which is politically dominated by the Naxalites, was ostensibly directed toward the search for peace and was laced with promises of development for the poor tribal people of the area once she becomes chief minister. Calling for the withdrawal of the security forces and for a dialogue with the Naxalites, she urged a peaceful resolution of what is called the Maoist problem. But Ms Banerjee overlooks the fact that the conundrum thrown up by the Maoist question is not confined to her home state. The Trinamul leader gave no inkling that she was about to make it her life’s mission to end the Naxalite trouble in the country through dialogue. Such a goal would require a determined nationwide campaign. After all, the Maoist menace in the tribal districts of West Bengal is part of a larger issue which cannot be solved only in one corner of the country. Since Ms Banerjee is not about to take on this responsibility, her call for peace at the rally can at best be seen as having strong political underpinnings even if the mobilisation was officially billed as an “apolitical” enterprise. This becomes clearer when it is considered that the Trinamul Congress does not have a single MLA from the tribal districts of West Midnapore, Bankura and Purulia. Nor did the party make a mark in this area during the panchayat and Lok Sabha elections last year when there was a veritable anti-CPI(M) mood sweeping the state.
Eminent development activists such as Medha Patkar and Swami Agnivesh, who were present at Lalgarh and spoke with passion, have a laudable agenda which is not aligned to that of any party. In this instance, however, they appear to have unwittingly become instruments in the hands of Ms Banerjee’s party. The 33-year tenure of the CPI(M)-led Left Front has clearly brought little development to the lands of the tribal poor in West Bengal. The Maoists have thus been handed a perfect opportunity to seize on this. It is unlikely they will pay much heed to Ms Banerjee’s exhortation to embrace the constitutional and democratic process. At any rate, they have so far given no evidence of such thinking. The Congress Party is obliged to carry the burden of having the Trinamul in the government that it heads at the Centre. That is more than clear. But it was no less than opportunism on its part to stay away from the Lalgarh rally but extend it “moral” support, as its spokesman did. It is plain to see that the Congress hopes to ride to power in West Bengal riding on the coattails of the Trinamul Congress.