Human rights groups: Maoists’ B-team

That human rights groups often act as B-team or over-ground operatives of Maoists is becoming increasingly evident. Often, the sympathies, if not affiliations, become obvious. A few recent statements by human rights champions smack of their ideological leanings.
People’s Union for Democratic Rights, Delhi (PUDR) secretary Gautam Navlakha wrote in The Economic Times (February 26), that the war against CPI (Maoist) should “be replaced by dialogue... The war on Maoists is not because they want to overthrow the presently-constituted Indian state—they have been trying that for nearly half a century.
“And, according to senior Maoist leaders themselves, it will take another 50-60 years to succeed. Besides, at present, in the PM’s words, the Maoists possess ‘modest capabilities.’ Nor is it because of their wanton acts of violence. The record of parliamentary parties, in varying degree of culpability, is not better, if not worse.”
Notice the audacity implicit in Navlakha’s candor: he makes no bones about the ultimate goal of the Maoists, that is, destruction of Indian democracy. Notice also the subterfuge: since the Maoists’ combat capabilities are modest, India should not take them seriously. We should fight them only after 50-60 years when they are ready! It is like saying that I should ignore my enemy who has sworn to kill me just because he is weak at this point of time! Let him strengthen himself, and then I should take him on—to get slaughtered at his hands!
And, of course, there is moral equivalence: the Maoists indulge in “wanton acts of violence,” but “the record of parliamentary parties, in varying degree of culpability, is not better, if not worse.” Such attitude is the hallmark of all arguments posited by Leftists and liberals
“Civil rights activists oppose war against our own people because political aspirations ought not to be suppressed militarily,” wrote Navlakha. Well, the Maoists are not “our own people”; they are the people of Mao. Therefore, they believe in the Great Helmsman’s dictum that power flows from the barrel of the gun. Those who live by the gun should not be complaining if they face superior firepower. And, at any rate, “political aspirations” are different from totalitarian intentions.
Unfortunately, Navlakha is not the only purveyor of lies; there are a large number of people, some of them public figures, who are compulsively mendacious. On March 1, some of them called a press conference to lament that the Indian state has turned monstrous in its war on Maoists (which, these worthies believe, is actually a war against tribals). Human rights activists, journalists and fact-finding committees were being targeted, advocate Prashant Bhushan alleged.
“The government has done little for the tribals and now they are trying to snatch their land. When tribals agitate peacefully, the State security forces descend on them, harass them and burn their villages. About 700 villages have been burnt in the past two years in Chhattisgarh. People are bound to protest and take up arms. For every 100 Maoists eliminated, thousands are created through collateral damage,” Bhushan said.
Notice the chicanery: the campaign against murderous Maoists has been transmogrified into a war against tribals. Of course, no evidence is given to support the outlandish claim. And those of Bhushan’s ilk will never accept that the Maoists are ruthlessly killing tribals in Chhattisgarh.
At the press conference, Justice Rajinder Sachar (Retd) was also present. This man is the embodiment of all that is ossified in India. An inveterate sympathizer of terrorists, he earned eternal disgrace for himself by heading a committee on Muslims and recommending boundless appeasement. He said: “The state cannot be a terrorist. It is the ultimate repository of law and order. Talks should happen between the government and the Maoists in an open atmosphere where there is no fear. Both sides should cease hostilities for dialogue to take place.”
The Navalakhas, the Bhushans, and the Sachars always tell us to embrace those who kill us. Pakistanis send jihadis to bomb our cities and slaughter our citizens, but we should continue to hold talks with Islamabad. The Maoists gun down our security personnel and liquidate the common citizens not falling in line—as the brave tribals in Chhattisgarh—but “talks should happen between the government and the Maoists.”
And, by the way, Mr. Sachar, which “both sides” are you talking about? Can the thuggish Maoists by any stretch of imagination be equated with the security personnel? On the one side are the followers of the world’s greatest butcher, Mao; on the other side are the soldiers of the biggest democracy. What is the comparison? Such moral equivalence just shows Sachar’s own moral bankruptcy and intellectual hollowness.
It is time the media and other opinion-makers exposed the duplicity and insidiousness of the so-called human rights activists.