My Account | RSS
| ||
|
[ Sign in ] | |
Women of Strength
Kamala Sarup
Maoism in India
Kathmandu, Nepal, June 18 — The Maoists are gaining power in India, including the People's War Group in Andhra Pradesh and the Maoist Communist Centre in Bihar, bordering Nepal. The Maoists plan to create a “Compact Revolutionary Zone” stretching from Andhra Pradesh in the north through central and eastern India. This will not only offer Maoists solidarity, but also help them procure and distribute weapons illegally.
Indian journalist Dr. I. Arul Aram said, "Insurgency in India could impact such Indian states as Bihar, West Bengal, and Jammu and Kashmir, particularly if more weapons are delivered clandestinely by foreign powers to militants. The Maoists' struggle may even spill over to Bhutan. The cross-border linkage of the Maoists poses a great threat, now that they have become a major force. But India's military power can ensure that the spillover of the insurgency is checked within its territory.”
He went on to say, “In India, the state of Andhra Pradesh has brought forth a fairly lasting ceasefire with its insurgency group, and talks are underway. As the bigger power, it would be safer for India not to get into a quagmire with its neighbor, except to give military support, if needed. Of late, India’s policy toward Sri Lanka is the same, and that is why Norwegians have come in as mediators."
“Negotiations with the Maoists depend on give and take. Or else, the options are (i) rapid development of rural areas (underdevelopment being a fertile ground for militancy); (ii) militarily eliminating the Maoists; or (iii) a combination of both," according to Dr. Aram.
It is true that the Maoist-communist groups in universities and schools during the 1970s tried to launch a Marxist revolution and failed, and those groups that attempted a communist revolution were rejected. After that, Maoists in the form of the Black Panthers tried for the support of blacks in the United States, but again they were rejected. Maoist groups were active in the Vietnam War and with the Shining Path in Peru; those too disappeared. Lacking support, the Maoist movement apparently faded away.
The fact is that Indian Maoists are members of the International Revolutionary Movement. True, we cannot compare composites of political and economic systems, i.e. capitalism (polity and economy) with Maoism (polity and economy). They are not the same. A capitalist economic system creates greater amounts of money and higher average living standards, which are distributed equally among its people. The Maoist economic system also successfully raised general living standards, but socialism failed to produce sustained income and wealth for most of its citizens.
The Maoist authorities of many countries were able to bring a radical change in their systems of production and distribution. Their stakes in that undertaking were high and so were their hopes for making improvements. It turned out that even their systems failed to achieve the desired economic progress. If economic control is thought to be the most powerful instrument for economic change, why then did those regimes fail?
Keywords
India Maoism communism capitalism economy
Indian journalist Dr. I. Arul Aram said, "Insurgency in India could impact such Indian states as Bihar, West Bengal, and Jammu and Kashmir, particularly if more weapons are delivered clandestinely by foreign powers to militants. The Maoists' struggle may even spill over to Bhutan. The cross-border linkage of the Maoists poses a great threat, now that they have become a major force. But India's military power can ensure that the spillover of the insurgency is checked within its territory.”
He went on to say, “In India, the state of Andhra Pradesh has brought forth a fairly lasting ceasefire with its insurgency group, and talks are underway. As the bigger power, it would be safer for India not to get into a quagmire with its neighbor, except to give military support, if needed. Of late, India’s policy toward Sri Lanka is the same, and that is why Norwegians have come in as mediators."
“Negotiations with the Maoists depend on give and take. Or else, the options are (i) rapid development of rural areas (underdevelopment being a fertile ground for militancy); (ii) militarily eliminating the Maoists; or (iii) a combination of both," according to Dr. Aram.
It is true that the Maoist-communist groups in universities and schools during the 1970s tried to launch a Marxist revolution and failed, and those groups that attempted a communist revolution were rejected. After that, Maoists in the form of the Black Panthers tried for the support of blacks in the United States, but again they were rejected. Maoist groups were active in the Vietnam War and with the Shining Path in Peru; those too disappeared. Lacking support, the Maoist movement apparently faded away.
The fact is that Indian Maoists are members of the International Revolutionary Movement. True, we cannot compare composites of political and economic systems, i.e. capitalism (polity and economy) with Maoism (polity and economy). They are not the same. A capitalist economic system creates greater amounts of money and higher average living standards, which are distributed equally among its people. The Maoist economic system also successfully raised general living standards, but socialism failed to produce sustained income and wealth for most of its citizens.
The Maoist authorities of many countries were able to bring a radical change in their systems of production and distribution. Their stakes in that undertaking were high and so were their hopes for making improvements. It turned out that even their systems failed to achieve the desired economic progress. If economic control is thought to be the most powerful instrument for economic change, why then did those regimes fail?
KeywordsIndia Maoism communism capitalism economy
|
