Although Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee refused to describe the deal with the Maoists as a surrender, the comparison made by the West Bengal home secretary with the Rubaiyya Sayeed and Kandahar episodes gave the game away. Considering that the state government had lost control over the Lalgarh area for nearly three months before the central forces intervened, it is clear that the CPI(M) hasn't a clue as to how to deal with the Maoist threat.

The reason for the state government's earlier retreat from Lalgarh was the CPI(M)'s loss of moral and administrative authority. It was after an abortive attempt by the Maoists to target the chief minister's and then Union steel minister, Ramvilas Paswan's convoy with landmines that the police and the Marxist cadres descended on Lalgarh to locate the culprits. Their harsh treatment of the local people helped the Maoists to win their support and evict the local administration. The similarity with the Nandigram events is obvious, for there, too, the rampaging Marxist militia and the police had alienated the locals.

Mamata Banerjee's dubious role in this volatile situation complicated the situation. As in Nandigram and Singur, she had a tacit understanding with the Maoists based on the old theory of an enemy's enemy being a friend. Not surprisingly, she has been against the police operations in the region and even argued that the police officer might have been kidnapped by Marxists and not the Maoists. Her attitude showed how a narrow political outlook can boost elements who claim to be waging a war against the Indian state.

However, her foibles do not distract attention from the CPI(M)'s many follies. Foremost among them was the belief that with the help of a pliant police and anti-socials masquerading as cadres, it could rule the roost in West Bengal for the foreseeable future. But the challenge posed by the Mamata-Maoist combination has ensured that all its plans are being frustrated. The Bhattacharjee government can neither move forward with its industrialisation projects because no investor will enter a state which is both politically and administratively unstable; nor can the CPI(M) effectively counter the Maoist threat because of its own ideological bankruptcy.

It is worth noting that the CPI(M)'s deviations from its Marxist dogma have emboldened its partners in the Left Front like the CPI and the RSP to oppose both its wooing of the private sector and the use of what they call draconian laws like the Illegal Activities (Prevention) Act. The government's dependence on the central forces is also potentially embarrassing for the CPI(M) because it once used to describe the CRPF as a central occupation force when the P.C. Sen government deployed it against the Leftists in the mid-1960s.

What must cause further concern to the CPI(M) is that it isn't only Mamata Banerjee who has made serious inroads into its middle class base of support, a section of intellectuals, too, has demonstrated a soft corner for the Maoists, mainly because they are believed to be fighting for the poor against an oppressive state. Their views were articulated by Booker prize winner Arundhati Roy when she said in a television interview that “an army of very poor people” was facing “an army of the rich that are corporate backed”. Among the leading proponents of this line in West Bengal is the Sahitya Akademi award winner Mahashweta Devi, who is known for her sensitive writings on the tribals. Mamata Banerjee had warned, therefore, that Bengal will burn if Mahashweta Devi was arrested.

Given this permissive atmosphere where the Maoists are concerned, the Bhattacharjee government must be wondering what impact the forthcoming drive against the Maoists by 75,000 paramilitary forces will have on the party's as well as the CPI(M)'s political future. Although the major thrust of these forces will be in Chhatisgarh and Jharkhand, the political impact of the consequent loss of innocent lives caught in the crossfire is bound to be felt in West Bengal, as it will be in the rest of the country. Yet, the Bhattacharjee government has no option but to endorse the central operation, for its Lalgarh experience has shown how dangerous the Maoists can be.

It is also worth remembering that the Marxists and Maoists are blood brothers. The latter emerged from the CPI(M) in 1969 to form the CPI(M-L). As such, the rise of one of them spells doom for the other. From this standpoint, Bhattacharjee will be silently cheering P. Chidambaram's anti-Maoist offensive. (IPA Service)