marxistindia
news from the cpi(m)
Given below is the full transcript of the interview given by Sitaram
Yechury to Karan Thapar for the programme Devil's Advocate which was
telecast on May 24, 2009
Karan Thapar: Prakash Karat has accepted that the election results are a
major setback, but the truth is actually much worse than that. Can you
deny that this is the worst electoral performance in your party's
45-year-history?
Sitaram Yechury: Not at all. I don't deny it. This is the worst debacle
we have had. Soon after we were formed in 64, the first election we
contested in 1967 we won 19 seats--today we won 16.
Karan Thapar: So you have literally gone back below your starting point.
Sitaram Yechury: And this is a serious matter. It is a matter which the
politburo has admitted is a very big debacle and we have to understand
why this happened and seriously introspect.
Karan Thapar: Let's for a moment pause over the statistics of your
performance. You have gone from your best ever electoral perfomance to
your worst ever in just five straight years. This time around you have
lost 63 percent of the seats you had, or to put it differently you have
lost 68 percent more seats than you have won. Those statistics are
worrying and actually they are appalling.
Sitaram Yechury: Statistics are statistics and you can always manipulate
them but that is not the point. The fact is that you cannot escape from
this reality that this has been a very big debacle for us. It's been the
worst performance electorally by the party.
Karan Thapar: Let's then come to why you did so badly. To begin with,
can you accept that breaking with the UPA (United Progressive Alliance)
was a mistake? The voters didn't understand why you did it and worst of
all it made CPI-M look like a party which was promoting instability.
Sitaram Yechury: All these issues we have decided will be
discussed--both national and state-level issues—introspected upon and a
very serious, honest, self-critical review will be made by us.
Karan Thapar: Let me quote to you what your defeated MPs are saying.
Prashant Pradhan, your defeated MP from Kontai, says: "People have not
taken kindly to the withdrawal of support from the UPA government. The
poor and the farmers never understood why we wanted to topple the
government."
Sitaram Yechury: You see these are points of views which have come
across. As I said all issues will be discussed by us and on all of them
we will come to some honest, self-critical conclusion.
Karan Thapar: Let me quote to you Amitabh Nandi, a defeated MP from
Dumdum. He says: "From day one of withdrawing support from UPA our
slogans, our activities have proved we are against stability."
Sitaram Yechury: These are opinions that have come and as I said all
these issues will be discussed thoroughly and that process has already
begun. By the middle of June I think we will come to our conclusion.
Karan Thapar: But can you accept that these are very valid opinions?
Sitaram Yechury: These issues will be discussed, definitely.
Karan Thapar: These are not inexperienced, foolish people talking. These
are some of your most senior, cherished MPs, now defeated. They know
what they are talking about.
Sitaram Yechury: They have been our leaders in Parliament. There is no
way we are going to discount anything anybody says within the party.
Everything will be taken seriously and discussed.
Karan Thapar: Now the second problem with breaking with the UPA was that
you forced the Congress into the arms of the Trinamool Congress, thus
creating a coalition that was able to attract the anti-Left votes in
West Bengal at a time when you were yourself suffering from Nandigram,
Singur and beginning to realise that the Muslim population could be
disaffected. Rather than divide your opponents you ended up uniting and
strengthening them
Sitaram Yechury: But remember that the Congress and the Trinamool always
had a ground-level understanding even without an alliance. What happened
this time was that the de facto converted itself into de jure.
Karan Thapar: Which was a disaster for you.
Sitaram Yechury: This had its impact, definitely. There's no doubt about
it. We anticipated that this would have an impact on the marginal seats,
but there are other reasons why this defeat has occurred in Bengal and
those have to be seriously examined.
Karan Thapar: Absolutely. No one denies there are other reasons in
Bengal. But given those other reasons, the worst tactic for you was to
unite your opponents on a single platform. You should have divided them,
not united them.
Sitaram Yechury: Like I said we will review all of this.
Karan Thapar: But can you accept this was bad tactics?
Sitaram Yechury: Not just this, all other questions will be discussed
and reviewed. All that I can say right now is that on any one of these
issues we have not come to any conclusive decision.
Karan Thapar: But you accept that given that you already had problems in
Bengal, devising a strategy that unites your opponents was a pretty
silly thing to do?
Sitaram Yechury: But it could well be that our opponents were going to
unite any way?
Karan Thapar: Maybe but you prodded them into it. If you hadn't broken
with Congress they might not have gone with Trinamool and then you would
have faced a divided opposition not a united one.
Sitaram Yechury: In the last elections, remember, of the 61 Left MPs 54
came to the Lok Sabha defeating Congress candidates. So going into
elections with the Congress was never the issue.
Karan Thapar: But the problem was that this time, by breaking with the
UPA, you pushed the Congress into the arms of the TMC and thus created a
platform of unity against you which otherwise would have been two
divided parties.
Sitaram Yechury: That is the reason why I am saying that what was de
facto has become de jure.
Karan Thapar: And that was a disaster.
Sitaram Yechury: We will review that.
Karan Thapar: Is it true that Jyoti Basu advised the CPI-M leadership
not to break with the UPA?
Sitaram Yechury: He may have had his opinions within the committees but
there is no advice that has come to us.
Karan Thapar: What opinion did he express in the committees?
Sitaram Yechury: That I can't tell you. That is something which even he
won't tell you.
Karan Thapar: Can I infer that within the committees he expressed a
measure of dissent about breaking with the UPA?
Sitaram Yechury: You see breaking from the UPA was not a one-time
decision or which happened one-off. It was a series of developments
which were taking place as a result of which it culminated in our
withdrawing support. On various steps in this process he had some issues
to tell us which he told.
Karan Thapar: So there were various moments when he expressed his
opinion; there were issues he had to speak about which he did speak
about.
Sitaram Yechury: Yes, definitely. Inside the party all of us will give
our opinion but once we collectively decide that is our party matter.
Karan Thapar: Thank you, I think you have said it all. You can't confirm
it but within the party at various stages he had opinions to express and
he did express them.
Sitaram Yechury: He conveyed what he felt at a number of times.
Karan Thapar: He conveyed what he felt at a number of times, not (just)
once or twice.
Sitaram Yechury: Even today he does.
Karan Thapar: The second biggest mistake was in fact the Third Front. We
all knew what it didn't stand for--it was anti-Congress, anti-BJP--but
no one actually knew what it stood for. As a result of which it lacked
credibility and it projected negativity.
Sitaram Yechury: We in the politburo have come to the conclusion that
the Third Front …. you understand how this Third Front emerged? It was
state-level alliances in various states. Now this was brought together
as a national alternative, which people obviously found had neither
credibility or viability. Both were lacking. Thus the result. That is
what we have accepted.
Karan Thapar:Finish the sentence you half began before you interrupted
yourself: "We in the Politburo have to come a conclusion about the Third
Front" and then you stopped. What is that conclusion?
Sitaram Yechury: That it was neither viable nor credible.
Karan Thapar: Would you therefore say that it was a mistake?
Sitaram Yechury: The way it was projected was a mistake. I'll tell you
why. The CPI-M always had this opinion, which we still continue to have,
that India requires a third political alternative. This third political
alternative will have to bring about a shift in the policy trajectory in
the country. But that cannot be a cut-and-paste job on the eve of
elections.
Karan Thapar: This was a hastily put together cut-and-paste job?
Sitaram Yechury: A cut-and-paste job, and to achieve our objective of a
third alternative there are no short cuts. It will have to be done
through sustained, prolonged, popular struggles. .
Karan Thapar: This was an attempt at putting together a Third Front, not
just by cut and paste but by short-cut methods and that was a mistake.
Sitaram Yechury: Yes. That is something which will be a subject of our
review in the central committee (of the CPI-M).
Karan Thapar: But in fact it was not just the projection of the Third
Front, it was not just the haste and the cut-and-paste manner in which
it was put together. Even the composition of the Third Front was wrong.
To begin with, almost all its members were former BJP allies. Two of
them, Jayalalithaa and Mayawati, face serious charges of corruption. As
a result of its composition this front undermined your cherished
principles of probity and secularism. These people should have never
been your allies.
Sitaram Yechury: That is why in retrospect we are saying that people
didn't find it credible. They did not find this front credible.
Karan Thapar: No doubt the people did not find it credible. The election
results prove that. But can you accept that at a prior stage you chose
the wrong allies? You should not have approached people like
Jayalalithaa, like Mayawati.
Sitaram Yechury: In the states we had electoral understandings--with
Jayalalithaa it was an understanding in Tamil Nadu; with the TDP it was
an understanding in Andhra Pradesh. But we brought all this together as
a national alternative. That did not find credibility with the people.
Karan Thapar: You're accepting that projecting a state level
understanding into a national understanding was a mistake. But even at
the state level it was a mistake. Just look at the speed with which
Jayalalithaa left you. She left you immediately after the elections and
before the counting. The TRS left you after the voting and before the
counting. As soon as the counting was over the JD-S and the BSP left
you. They showed no loyalty to you at the state or national level.
Sitaram Yechury: The AIADMK has not left us formally, but you are right
about the BSP, JD-S and TRS. That is precisely the point I am
making--the front was neither credible nor viable. This (election
result) has only confirmed that.
Karan Thapar: One other thing. At a time when the country was yearning
for a strong and stable government, no one believed that the Third Front
could offer it and more importantly the prospect of Mayawati as Prime
Minister put a lot of people off, maybe even frightened them.
Sitaram Yechury: I don't think it was only a question of stability that
people wanted. If it was stability then they would have found little to
choose between the UPA and the NDA. They wanted stability with a
commitment to the secular, democratic foundations of India. This was the
combination which they found the Third Front lacked the credibility to
give. And Commitment to secular, democratic foundations the NDA would
never give. Hence the result.
Karan Thapar: The reason you lacked credibility in terms of secular
foundations of India is not just because of the composition of the Third
Front. But if you look at what your party did in Kerala your alliance
with (PDP leader) A N Madhani was another mistake.
Sitaram Yechury: There was no alliance with Madhani.
Karan Thapar: Your own local partymen in Kerala have called it an
alliance and say it is a mistake.
Sitaram Yechury: In Kerala, not only Madhani, various other issues that
have impacted on these elections, all of them will be reviewed.
Karan Thapar: Let us briefly talk about the manner in which your two
bastions--of West Bengal and Kerala--undermined your performance. To
begin with, how did you permit yourself to go into an election when your
entire Kerala unit was not just feuding but acrimoniously tearing itself
apart?
Sitaram Yechury: But remember in Kerala this sort of situation prevailed
in the 2006 elections and that time there were street-level
demonstrations (as well).
Karan Thapar: Except that the situation had got much worse. On the eve
of elections your state secretariat wanted V S Achutanandan removed as
Chief Minister.
Sitaram Yechury: No, that was not true. That was only a media-created
rumour. But the point is in 2006 what was seen as acrimony between our
leaders resulted in a two-third majority victory in the Assembly.
Karan Thapar: Except that by 2009 you were no longer the beneficiary of
doubts in the minds of the people. They were convinced by then 3 years
of feuding meant that you were tearing yourself apart and you were
allying with people like Madani. You were losing credibility.
Sitaram Yechury: Remember the elections in 2009 were for the Central
government not state government. In Kerala and Bengal people are very
conscious, they know what choices they want and whom they want where
(i.e. at the Centre).
Karan Thapar: Alright let me quote to you Hanan Mollah, one of your
defeated MPs. This is what he told several papers: "We have been
severely punished. Did we lose touch with ground reality?" What is your
answer to that question?
Sitaram Yechury: That is precisely what we are examining. That is the
answer we will give in our Central Committee when we meet in June.
Karan Thapar: What is your hunch? You are a political man, no doubt a
definitive answer will come after the analysis but what is your
instinct?
Sitaram Yechury: Obviously we have lost touch otherwise this sort of
result would not have come. But to what degree, why we lost touch, what
were the inadequacies, that is something we are seriously examining.
Karan Thapar: But you agree that you lost touch?
Sitaram Yechury: Of course, the results show that.
Karan Thapar: Let's take a break at that point. In part 2 I want to
discuss the issue: where does responsibility lie. See you after the
break.
Karan Thapar: Welcome back. In part 1 we talked about the reasons why
your party has come to its worst ever electoral debacle. Now let's come
to the question: where does responsibility lie. I want to quote to you
what one of your defeated candidates, Amitabh Nandy, has said. He says:
"When we complete our introspection it will certainly emerge that the
party's top leadership has failed." Would you agree?
Sitaram Yechury: Please understand one thing that this has been a very
big debacle for us. Also understand the fact that this is for the first
time in the last two decades that a secular government is being formed
in India in which the CPI-M has no role. This is a big setback--people,
therefore, are expressing their disappointment. All these sentiments
will be taken into account by us.
Karan Thapar: When you say this is the first time a secular government
is being formed in India for 2 decades without any role or presence of
CPI-M, you are underlining how irrelevant or marginalised you have
become. So let us come back to Amitabh Nandy. Will you accept that the
party's top leadership has failed?
Sitaram Yechury: That is what we are examining. Of course the top
leadership of the party will have to take the leaderships role, I mean
play the leaderships role. That it will.
Karan Thapar: Will the question when you do your examination be raised:
has the leadership failed? Will that question be raised?
Sitaram Yechury: Of course it will come. Of course it will be discussed.
Remember a Communist party functions by what we call the Leninist
principles of organisation, where it is collective functioning with
individual responsibility.
Karan Thapar: Both the collective functioning of the leadership will be
inquired into as well as the issue of individual responsibility?
Sitaram Yechury: Of course. Yes. All of this will come in to the review.
Definitely.
Karan Thapar: Your allies have absolutely no compunction at all in
pointing the finger of blame straight at the Delhi leadership of CPI-M.
Debabrata Biswas has done it, Abani Roy has done it and now increasingly
A B Bardhan is doing it. They say the CPI-M leadership was arrogant and
it had lost touch with the masses.
Sitaram Yechury: We have also heard these comments but all of them were
party to all the decisions that were taken together in the Left parties'
meeting.
Karan Thapar: No doubt but is there any truth in their claim that your
leadership was arrogant?
Sitaram Yechury: If our allies are saying all this we will definitely
take that into account in our review. Definitely.
Karan Thapar: You won't turn a deaf ear?
Sitaram Yechury: No, definitely not.
Karan Thapar: You won't sweep it under the carpet?
Sitaram Yechury: No, it is for our own survival to get back the people
who have been alienated from us and to advance further that we have to
be candid, honest and rigorously honest in this self-critical
examination.
Karan Thapar: If you want to be candid and rigorously honest then I put
this to you: after facing a similar disastrous electoral performance, L
K Advani offered his resignation to the BJP as Leader of Opposition. Why
in similar circumstances in the CPI-M has Prakash Karat not found fit to
make a similar gesture?
Sitaram Yechury: Leader of Opposition is a position in Parliament and
that Parliament has ceased--the 14th Lok Sabha. And that Parliament has
ceased to be. So whether he resigns or not that Parliament has finished.
Karan Thapar: We are talking about the need for candidness, for
transparency and for winning back the people you have lost. Surely
therefore Prakash Karat must make the gesture of accepting
responsibility as General Secretary.
Sitaram Yechury: The point again here is that it will have to be a
collective assessment that we will make of these results, of why these
results have resulted in this sort of manner. And remember, resignation
also can be escape from responsibilities.
Karan Thapar: You said a very interesting thing. A collective assessment
will be made.
Sitaram Yechury: Yes.
Karan Thapar: Now your Central Committee is due to meet in June. At that
meeting what are the chances that Prakash Karat will either step down
voluntarily or be stripped of his responsibilities.
Sitaram Yechury: Again let me tell you the Central Committee is going to
discuss the reasons for our debacle.
Karan Thapar: And they are going into the question of leadership?
Sitaram Yechury: Leadership of course. In that process. But it will not
be on the basis of who is going to resign or not--that is not the issue.
The issue is what are the mistakes, why were they committed and how can
they be corrected.
Karan Thapar: But can you rule out the possibility of Prakash Karat
accepting responsibility at that stage and resigning?
Sitaram Yechury: The Central Committee, as I said, will comprehensively
review. Beyond that I cannot go today.
Karan Thapar: Let me put this to you. There is no doubt that the two
issues on which you ended up losing seats were the break with the UPA
and creation of a less than credible Third Front. Of both those Prakash
Karat was the central architect. Is it not therefore the case that, as
the Press is saying, he has the greatest measure of direct
responsibility for this defeat?
Sitaram Yechury: Prakash Karat is the General Secretary of the CPI-M.
These were the decisions of the CPI-M and he as General Secretary will
articulate these decisions, naturally.
Karan Thapar: In most organisations when things go wrong the man at the
top takes the responsibility.
Sitaram Yechury: But I think that is also one way of escaping
responsibility.
Karan Thapar: Are you going to hold him to the job to punish him rather
than let him go?
Sitaram Yechury: It is not a question of an individual. As I said, we
will collectively assess what are our mistakes.
Karan Thapar: And therefore if you are going to collectively assess, his
future depends on the outcome and decisions of the central committee.
Sitaram Yechury: Well, the future of the party depends on it.
Karan Thapar: Absolutely. I think with that you've said it all. My
thanks for this interview.
_______________________________________________
Marxistindia mailing list
Marxistindia@cpim.org
http://cpim.org/mailman/listinfo/marxistindia_cpim.org
http://wwww.cpim.org
