Unity of Communist Revolutionaries – Experience of CPI (ML)

We came to the conclusion that following the dialectical method is the correct way to overcome the political and ideological differences among the communist revolutionaries. The stand taken was identifying the points of agreement and differences, uniting on the basis of agreements and then striving for the resolution of the differences through internal discussions. A provision was made to allow the expression of the differences outside the organization without jeopardizing the unity of organization.

The Note of 17th January 2003 brought a turn to the bipartite and tripartite talks for unity. In this Note, we reached a clear agreement on the political, ideological and organizational stands, to translate them into practice, mobilise the people into agitations, struggles and movements, and to identify the wrong trends on the basis of Marxism-Leninism and Mao’s Thought as our world outlook and the tasks that emanate from it. Petty Bourgeois anarchism continue to manifest in many forms in the Indian revolutionary movement-one is the revisionism, reformism and right opportunism, second is the ultra anarchism, terrorism and left opportunism. Both these trends are harmful to the revolutionary movement. These twin trends cause an immense harm to the very cause of revolution. They create pessimism, despair and inaction. They sow doubts on Marxism-Leninism and thus ultimately leading to the liquidation of revolutionary movement and organization. Ideologically, these twin trends are based on metaphysics and departure from the dialectical method. Though they may rear their heads as separate entities and appear as different, they are mutually supportive of each other. Hence the Party will not remain healthy and loses its capacity to lead all the forces unless a determined and thorough going struggle is waged against them at ideological, political and organizational planes. The revolutionary movement will encounter serious impediments in the way. This under-standing formed the basis of our unity.

In accordance with this basis of unity, we took up the task of building a genuine Communist Party in its true sense. We found that it will be impossible to build a genuine Communist Party without fighting and defeating right and left opportunisms, revisionism and sectarianism ideologically, politically and in practice which played havoc with the eight decade long Indian communist movement. It means concretely that we have to fight against the opportunism of revisionist parties and the left sectarianism and terrorist methods followed by the AICCCR and CPI(ML) of 1968-69. Our newly formed organization had taken up this stupendous and heavy responsibility with the understanding that Naxalbari which rejected the above two trends is the continuation of the Telangana line and we are a continuation and a part of the Indian Communist Movement which started in 1920s.

Our party declared Marxism-Leninism-Mao’s thought as our world outlook and decided to give the name of CPI(ML) to the united organization. Even though the name is that of 1969, we were clear in our understanding that it is a new organization which severed from left sectarianism and policies alien to Marxism-Leninism. Moreover, it also severed from the reformism and policies alien to Marxism-Leninism that plagued the Communist Party in India for the past eight decades. At the same time, it is part of the eight decades of Communist movement in India. We are partners of its effects, both good and bad. We are partners and inheritors of positive and negative aspects of the movements of toiling people.

While upholding the significance of these struggles, we were able to make note of deviations from Marxism-Leninism. We rejected the individual terrorism in all its forms.

At the same time, the opinion that ‘left is better than the right’ continues to haunt us. This softness and sympathy towards left sectarianism, at times, become a mental impediment in our efforts to implement the revolutionary mass line, develop the revolutionary ranks and rally the forces into our organization.

Left opportunism appears ‘better’ to the extent of opposing revisionism, but these two twins born out of the same womb. Both these trends, ultimately, go against Marxism-Leninism.

While opposing the state repression against the left sectarian forces, we have to carry on the struggle against ‘left sectarianism at ideological, political and organizational planes.

We firmly believe that heroes are not makers of history and people alone are the real makers of history. The duty of the communist revolutionaries is to take the knowledge of Marxism-Leninism to the people. Then only the people can fight against the exploitative society as it make them capable of applying it to their own experience of life and of analyzing the experiences of the past struggle and thus enable to advance the movement.

Revolution is not a shadow boxing. It is not drum beating making hollow sounds. We firmly believe that revolution means bringing the people into action with concrete practice.

II

This orientation helped the unification of COI (ML) and CPI (ML). We applied the method of combining theory with practice to the process of unity. By Unity with differences we did not mean unity with anybody giving priority to numbers and relegating the politics to back seat. It means uniting with the forces that can be united and going into practice with the achieved unity. We formulated the policy of further strengthening unity with experiences gained in the practice. We adopted the Programme, Path and Constitution for the new organization. We kept the question of reversal in China open for discussion. Yet we had the confidence that it would not remain as a difference. So we left it to the discussions in the conference. By that time, Comrade Kanu Sanyal was paying critical attention to the policies and practices of the Chinese government and party. 

However, the comrade was of the attitude that we can wait for some time without characterising now keeping in view that the CPC has a history of waging many a internal struggles against deviations and defeating the opportunist forces. “Here both the organizations adopted a flexible attitude. There was no occasion in the later period when we referred to it as a point of difference.

The Unity Declaration of 17-1-2003 gave guidance to the unity. It contained a principled stand on basic issues and flexible attitude on secondary issues. The unity declaration concluded with the following para:

“The COI (ML) has serious reservations and criticism on CPC. We can conclude the differences on CPC through discussions. There may be some divergencies on the practice of tactical line and also on some strategic issues. We agreed to resolve them through discussions. We agreed that these divergencies can be expressed within and outside the organization. But here primacy should be given to the unity of organization. We are firmly committed to the task of taking forward the unity of communist revolutionaries”.

III

The Co-ordination Committee of COI (ML) and CPI (ML) functioned for three years. During the general elections it gave a call, “Defeat all the ruling class parties; Vote for democratic forces and revolutionaries”. We attended the Asian Social Forum at Hyderabad with differences. Comrade Kanu Sanyal participated in the forum of left parties on behalf of the Co-ordination Committee. We held bipartite discussions with CPI (ML) RF (united organization of Red Flag and Red Star) as Co-ordination Committee. We came to the understanding in the second round of talks that there were differences. Number 1: On the character of Indian society, number 2 : Principal contradiction, number 3 : Path and the evaluation of Party History for 1967-72. 

The CPI (ML) RF was internally divided into two sections due to differences. The important CC members who participated in two rounds of talks went away from KNR section. Our relations were continued with KNR’s section. We entered into Co-ordination relation. We jointly organized an international seminar at Bombay. Some other programmes were also organised jointly. We tried to find ways to unite while keeping the differences on some questions. We got the approval of lower ranks for our basic documents as part of the preparations for all India plenum. According to the agreement reached with the Ramachandran group we left four issues to the future. Regarding the Path, we broadly upheld armed struggle line while opposing the parliamentary cretinism. In the Outline of the Programme, we formulated ad hoc stands. Out line of the programme and constitution were adopted for practice up to the arrival of final conclusion of divergent views and differences.

Those are:

Imperialism, during the colonial period brought changes in the feudal relations in India to suit its exploitation and protected it. Since then feudalism changed into semi-feudalism, and became the social basis of imperialism. After the transfer of power, the Indian big bourgeoisie in compromise with the landlord class maintained the status quo and strengthened it through rural credit, panchayat raj, fake land reforms, green revolution etc. The big bourgeoisie is making hidden and open compromises with imperialism since 1947. Thus imperialism, feudalism and big bourgeoisie became impediments to the progress of Indian society.

In the course of time, especially after the imperialist globalisation, changes in the agrarian sector were further speeded up to serve the needs of imperialist capital and its market system. In the present world situation, the neo-colonial form of exploitation is intensifying with every passing year and various imperialist powers are contending for a dominant position in India.

So we could come to a clear  understanding.

Stage of Revolution,

1. “In the present world situation, the neo-colonial form of exploitation is intensifying with every passing year and various imperialist powers are contending for a dominant position in India”.

2. We also defined that, “the big bourgeoisie is making hidden and open compromises with imperialism since 1947. Thus imperialism, big bourgeoisie and feudalism became impediments to the progress of Indian society”.

3. We also defined that: “In the present stage, the contradiction between imperialism and Indian people, and the contradiction between feudalism and broad masses of people are two basic contradictions. These contra-dictions are interpenetrating and interacting”.

With these definitions, we recognized the main enemies. The Outline of the Programme gave scope to wage struggles against the main enemies. Similarly the basic documents gave a clear understanding on enemies, friends, motive forces, stage of revolution, united front and its leadership. 

4. It also gave understanding that the path would be formulated based on the concrete conditions in our country and taking the experiences of all hitherto revolutions in the world and peoples’ revolutionary movement in our country.

5. “Rejecting the parliamentary cretinism and the line of individual terrorism, and upholding the revolutionary mass line, we resolve to utilise all forms of struggles and organizations to seize the political power through armed means. Strategic united front of all revolutionary classes and forces with the working class as the leading force and the peasantry as the main force based on worker-peasant alliance as well as necessary tactical united fronts should be developed for furthering the people’s revolutionary movement”. 

Though it is a repetition, it must be said the understanding contained in the Outline of the Programme gave ample scope for us to conduct the anti-feudal and anti-imperialist tasks, to build agrarian revolutionary movement and to build revolutionary party. It gave ample scope to build mass organizations and joint action forums, to conduct the revolutionary activities in a concerted manner and to build militant struggles. It held high the revolutionary mass line while rejecting the parliamentary cretinism and individual terrorist line.

There is no need to harp on the inadequacies in the Programme. We acted with the confidence that the differences on the nature of the society, principal contradiction and path could be discussed after deeper study and could be resolved basing on the practical experiences. The basic documents of CPI (ML) that were formulated under the leadership of Comrade Kanu Sanyal on the basis of the Note of 17th January 2003 through three years long efforts of co-ordination committee, were kept aside for onerous the purpose of unity efforts and only with this understanding and confidence and the Outline of the Programme was adopted. It is not a small matter. Here we were guided by the overall interests of the unification of CRs and the revolutionary movement.

[From the POR of CPI(ML) Central Conference held in 2016]

An Approach for Resolving the Differences - Forming a Single Revolutionary Party

     The Global economic crisis and the all round crisis engulfing Indian society is devastating the lives of the people. Dissatisfaction among the people is like an ember. This has been exploding many a time. Our responsibility is to mould these conditions to the advantage of revolutionary movement. In this vast India different languages, nationalities, religious customs and principles, regional cultures are existing. In the economic and political conditions also there is glaring uneven development. By keeping these aspects in mind, the onus and responsibility is on the forces of revolutionary movement to organize and consolidate the progressive forces, to realize the new democratic revolutionary transformation.

     The left forces mean the parties, organizations and individuals who aspire for socialism. These forces include CPI, CPI (M), socialist parties and parties declaring their objective as achieving socialism and democracy. We have ideological differences and ideological struggles with these parties. Even in practice we may have certain friction with them. But we shall not equate these parties with the bourgeoisie, feudal and communal parties that are exploiting and sub-serving the imperialism. Our approach shall be to make them come together and unite them to oppose the ruling classes. We shall note that it is natural that disputes arise with them during elections and trade union struggles.

     We keep in our mind the differences over many aspects between the above said two forces viz between left and democratic forces and the revolutionary forces. The Central Committee proposes that we have to examine objectively the land question, tied with the feudal economic, political and cultural issues and discuss the studies and arguments of different organizations and make efforts to act unitedly basing on the joint and common understanding arrived at on land question. It is also felt that we have to discuss the capitalist forms penetrating into the agricultural sector and about the forms of imperialist exploitation.

     The Central Committee expresses its hope that a cordial atmosphere be created between the progressive forces and the revolutionary forces so that we can continue united action with the “Communist Manifesto” as the minimum basis. We can discuss the following aspects and come to an understanding:

1. Feudalism, one of the main enemies, is a subject that is related to the change of feudal, economic, social and political conditions.
2. We have to prove that imperialism has penetrated into all sectors and it is one of the principal enemies. We have to decide how to face the imperialist exploitation in the present stage.
3. The agrarian sector is the main source of production, and so the ownership of the land is to be decided. This sector solves the problem of food, clothing and other basic needs of the crores of people.
4. We have to discuss the industrial sector which is a source of employment and meets the needs of crores of people entrapped in the oppressive clutches of imperialist plunder.
5. The question of distribution of the wealth created by the working and toiling people in the agrarian and industrial sectors.
6. The question of bringing the progressive forces, Communists, Communist Revolutionaries and Socialist forces together which are the leading forces in raising the political, economic, social and cultural level of the masses of Indian people.
7. We have to debate on the philosophical, ideological and political questions in a democratic and healthy atmosphere and strive to resolve them. The question is one of evolving the forums of united action and functioning them with proper coordination and on the basis of fraternity.
8. The question is how to view the forms of struggle and the struggles that are being carried on in accordance with ones’ own method. The question of extending solidarity is to be discussed and resolved. Extending solidarity does not mean just condemning the state repression, but standing politically and physically in support of achieving the aims of struggle and aspirations of the people. Besides this, the spontaneous movements are exploding on communal attacks, upper casteist attacks, murders in the name of encounters, atrocities against women and girls, suicides by the peasants, humiliating harassments of the girl students, women professionals and employees and many other problems. The question before us is how to forge ourselves into a united force in dealing with daily and unending problems of our people.

United Action and United Front:

     There is a need to clarify once again and evolve our stand on united action.

     Ours is a revolutionary party struggling for the victory of New Democratic Revolution with the ultimate aim of achieving socialism. Our Party Programme has pointed out the necessity of the United Front and the responsibility of building a united front.

     Our party opines that we must build up the UF against feudalism and united action on the basis of issues relating to the feudal exploitation.

     Almost all political parties representing the bourgeois and landlord classes had taken upon themselves the responsibility of protecting the interests of big bourgeoisie and landlord classes and directly and indirectly the interests of pro-imperialist forces. These parties are behaving as though it is their birth right, traditional right to occupy the seats of power and it is their sacred duty to usurp the same. They are cheating the oppressed classes by boasting about socialism and social justice.

     The CRs are divided into several groups-small and big. Some of them had deviated a lot from the orientation of revolutionary ideology. They had tilted to right, left, terrorist and semi-terrorist deviations. Though there is a basic unity on the Programme and Path of Indian Revolution, they sharply differ on some questions.

     The differences on these questions are manifesting even among the groups which hold the same understanding to the extent of taking up the struggle, protest and propaganda up to one level against the forms of imperialist and feudal exploitation. This is because of the attempts by some to gain an upper hand over the particular areas of struggle and organizations. It went to the extent of adopting an unfriendly (from having no relation) and antagonistic attitudes. In some cases they have gone to the extent of mutual assassinations.

     It remains a hard reality that there is inability to communicate on the need of forging UF that can unite the revolutionary classes and forces. We could not evolve even stable unified forms of struggle on the basis of immediate problems of the masses of people. We are encountered with many hurdles on the way of building a single revolutionary party which is the greatest need of the day. This is a big weakness which we have to overcome.

     The revolutionaries who broke away rejecting the CPI (M)’s theoretical positions and practices and who presently belonging to many sections of CPI (ML), some groups of Maoist Centre (MCC) and some groups of UCCRI(ML) shared the same orientation from 1967 and till the beginning of 1968. After the 7th Calcutta Conference, an analysis of the policies of CPI (M) with a critical view began. Prominent comrades of communist movement and people’s movement continued discussions and analysis as a concerted team. The government of 1964-66 began repression against the cadres of CPI(M). On the pretext of the border clashes with China the government arrested and incarcerated them under Defense of India Rules (DIR). From then on questions like: nationalities question, developing of class struggles into militant struggles, the experiences and lessons of Telangana Armed Peasant Struggle and such other issues were debated by the top leadership who were in jail. Reviews and examination on the theoretical level started. The CPI (M) top leaders of Telangana Armed Struggle and other leaders who played a responsible role were all in prison. Under the conditions of repression also the discussions were held frankly to some extent specifically and concretely and on some with indeterminacy. The issues discussed were: the history of world communist movement and its lessons; the question of nationalities in India in relation to the issue of Kashmir; the trends in foreign policy and economic policy of Indian government.

     By that time since the feudal forces in AP had already mounted onslaught on the class- struggles of the communists, the debate about the forms of struggles led to the debate on the issue of the Party’s tactical line which came to the fore. In the Party Programme, clause 112, adopted by the 7th Calcutta Conference a clause was included to the effect that if a condition arises excluding all the possibilities for peaceful struggles, then the possibilities for non peaceful struggles always exists as an alternative.

     After the communist leaders of Andhra Pradesh were released from jails in 1966, regarding the above issues divergent stands became evident in their practices, speeches and in the party classes held in1966-67. To fight against the wrong theoretical stand of top leaders a concerted team was not formed. Due to the respect placed on top leadership; due to the regard on the life of sacrifice at personal level, in Andhra the alternative discussions and opinions on their policies were limited to be expressed internally within the committees. The militant attacks on landlords occurred in Warangal, Nalgonda, Khammam, Nellore and Srikakulam districts and Rayalaseema of Andhra Pradesh. These incidents made the leaders to think over the forms of the struggle to be waged. Though our anger and furore was being expressed in the party organs and in the state assembly, the party top leadership had not seriously taken into account of the fact that feudal class, government and the state machinery are intent on oppressing communist organizations systematically. They thought of talking to the Prime Minister and make him reprimand the state government on the repression unleashed on the Srikakulam girijan movement. The then party General Secretary had also written a letter to the Prime Minister on the matter.

     After the formation of the left front government and assuming power in the 1967 general elections, through the document of “New Situation and New Tasks” CPI (M) held high the parliamentary illusions and directed the tasks accordingly. In the Central Committee meeting held in Madurai, for the internal discussion of the document on international situation, it imposed restrictions and limitations on the scope of discussions and released the document. Through the ‘Peoples’ Democracy’, the central organ of the party it was known that in West Bengal disciplinary action was taken against some leaders (The allegation on them was that they were advocating ultra left politics). Andhra Committee seriously questioned these actions. In 1967 in Naxalbari the police armed action against poor peasants led to armed resistance by the peasants and it reached its zenith by the end of May that year. Calcutta as the centre, Anti-revisionist Committee, Naxalbari Solidarity Committee and Naxalbari-O-Krishik Sangram Samithi were formed and they openly revolted against the revisionist path of CPI (M) and of the oppressive state.

     Naxalbari peasants’ revolt became a turning point to the revolutionary politics. All India Committee for Coordination of Communist Revolutionaries (AICCCR) was formed. A call was given to the forces opposing the politics of CPI (M), to come out and join in AICCCR. The rebel leaders in the CPI (M) state committee of AP, while acting as a concerted group in AICCCR, continued the internal struggle in the committees, and conducted agitational programmes opposing the ongoing repression on the people’s movements. While continuing relations with AICCCR, they were waging an internal struggle within CPI (M) on theoretical positions. From lower plenum to All India Plenum they participated in theoretical discussions. In that course through a general body meeting, the APCCCR was formed. This committee kept its critical observations on some of the policy matters published in the ‘Liberation’ magazine. It has been exchanging its opinions with the AICCCR committee. They undertook the task of organizing the peoples’ forces after preparing the document “Lay Foundations for a Struggle - Oriented Movements”.

     Various trends like dismantling of mass organizations, declaring that armed struggle is the one and only struggle, the sole organization is armed teams, Naxalbari peasants revolt is the very first armed struggle in the communist movement; elections need not be treated as a form of struggle and boycott of elections in the entire stage of the revolution-such erroneous calls were published in ‘Liberation’ magazine. APCCCR joined AICCCR with an approach to discuss these matters with in the co-ordination committee. In this course of events, some misunderstandings and misgivings against the leadership of Andhra were being propagated. They gave the slogan ‘Rebellion is a Right’ and establishing direct contact with some Guntur students and Srikakulam district leaders encouraged them to ‘rebel’ against the leadership of Andhra Pradesh Committee of Revolutionaries. With clandestine relations AICCCR organized a revolt against the leadership of AP Revolutionary Committee. Moreover it expelled APCCCR from AICCCR but ironically declared to continue friendly relations with it. AICCCR declared itself as the revolutionary authority over the Revolution in India. In May 1969 CPI (ML) party was formed. It adopted the attitude that it was the real beginning of the communist movement in India and that the past communist movement need not be reckoned with. It declared that GS was the sole revolutionary authority in the party. It organized class enemy annihilation teams and pushed forward the line of annihilation of class enemy. It confused the definitions of the nature of our socio-economic system reached in the beginning. The writings such as declaring Srikakulam as a red area, and as Yenan of India and that the victory of revolution is in the vicinity are nothing but metaphors of exaggerations. Moreover these writings and signals came at the time of the closing of all means and ways for revolutionary push.

     When the revolutionaries broke up with the parliamentary politics of CPI (M) under the leadership of APCCCR and intended to implement the concept of base areas and concentration pockets and started to develop the movement in Telangana forest districts, Vizag and East Godavari districts, the ‘Liberation’ magazine ridiculed the Andhra comrades as Jungle theory walas and Banjarists. AICCCR fell into self imposed confusion setting aside its earlier declared policies. It destroyed the cordial atmosphere between the revolutionary forces. In many areas, the organizations that stepped into the agrarian revolutionary programme given in accordance to the slogan bhoomi-bhukthi-vimukthi (land-food-liberation), could not take the organized form, and had succumbed to the path annihilation of class enemy. These developments occurred in West Bengal, UP, Bihar and AP. Party ranks and people fell into a state of no recovery. Experienced leaders, and leaders involved in the organization of the movement and activists were kept aside from the organizations. Some have delinked themselves from revolutionary activities.

     We travelled beyond borders of India in search of political and theoretical guidance for the peasant revolts that erupted in the Terai areas. We went to China to get international benefit of advice for the on-going Naxalbari movement. People who obtained pieces of advice have not informed of them to the party committees. But they reported to the General Secretary only who had the revolutionary authority and kept quiet. Whether the advice given by China is useful or not was not even discussed. We need to come to an understanding on this matter. We have to assess the positive and negative experiences as well as the merits and demerits of them. Probably an assessment could have been done. It should have been at least reached to the leadership of certain level.

     We had to analyze the above mentioned matters with much more information, by pooling the experiences gained. But before making such an analysis we concluded on lessons in a hotchpotch way and moved ahead. Instead of making objective assessment of the role of the individuals, the role of the committees that assumed responsibility, the highlighting of the role of their sacrifices and the role of their intellectual efforts, made the matters vicious and we suffered losses after losses. To put an end to this is the need of the hour and in fact, immediate need.

1. Was the formation of CPI (ML) a positive step or a negative step? The discussion about this question is only an aspect in the review of revolutionary organization. Moreover this is related to the issue of the merits and demerits of the political and theoretical approaches. It contributes only to the postponement of the opportunities for dispassionate discussion. It will come as a hurdle in evolving immediate and future tasks. It already came as a hindrance.
2. While describing the contribution of the individuals, the authority of the individuals is coming to the fore. This will lead the comrades to live in a subjective world forever.

     Is it of any use to brush away the positives and negatives of the experience of many years of communist movement and to hide the fact that the communist party in India was born in 1920s and to entertain that the communist party of India was born on 22 April 1969? Is it proper to think that the policy of armed resistance began only with the formation of that party? Each revolutionary group will have its own formation day. Shall we continue celebrating those days? This will push forward various subjective and petty bourgeoisie perspectives. So the formation of those parties and groups and the policies adopted and implemented by them, and the positives and negatives of those policies are of definite importance. The policies formulated in those times may be changed by the experience for the good or they may fall prey to opportunistic tendencies. All of us together also have to examine to which side those policies were leant and on what basis. But presently claiming a particular party is the genuine and the only revolutionary party and demanding all others to recognize that party as such and join in it, is causing the loss.

     Building a revolutionary party is a continuous process and is never possible according to the subjective wish of a group. It is not their subjective necessity too. Since a revolutionary party is necessary for the success of revolution, some revolutionary groups are striving and making efforts to form such a party. Revolutionary organizations are also striving and continuing the unity efforts with the same objective.

     Various leaders and cadre of revolutionary organizations have come through various unity processes and splits. They led their own organizations at that time and came into the unity process.

     So at present there may be a lacuna in united and comprehensive integration in all matters. In an All India Organization consisting members of different organizations, different regions, different languages and cultures, it is natural that the old influences or their outlooks will be expressed in the united organization. So it is inevitable that our organizations will also carry some shades of differences. By discussing the outlooks and the issues being faced during the course of practice in a systematic method, we can achieve integration. Achieving unity with fraternal organizations and evolving integration is much more tedious.

     It is incorrect to think that unity will be achieved only through unanimity on all the matters. If unity is achieved on fundamental matters, on the differences on secondary matters a course may be evolved to resolve them. Then only we can build organizations of unity. Will there be no split again after such a unity? Split may arise in future. But the approach so followed will not go in vain. We have the experience of antagonism at the field level though the unity is achieved at the higher level. Those obstacles in the unity process will be chasing us today and tomorrow also. The higher level leadership shall take initiative and responsibility to awaken the field level organizations and resolve the obstacles. Another method for unity also came into the fore that after comprehensively discussing the issues that shored up in all the previous splits there will be unity. But if we dig all the past issues it will be time consuming bereft of any benefit. So it has to be tried for achieving unity on the political plane. With a minimum basis and minimum organizational arrangements there is the need to uphold the unity aspiration. It is the need of the hour.

Comrades,

     The effort to build a proper communist party has become an endless process. The opinions that were expressed are: The concept of “all issues are to be discussed before unity” prevents our advance to achieve unity. The unity discussions are as slow as a turtle’s pace. The declarations are high sounding. Yet we shall not be disappointed and despaired. We should be able to propose a more flexible and a broad-based approach.

     We have to examine the anti-feudal and anti-imperialist tasks broadly, decide on the approaches relating to practice, evolve a plan of work concentrating in rural areas, urban areas, and select areas of concentration; prepare an organizational path and a constitution; and finally examine the possibilities for creating a single organization.  Keeping these aspirations in mind, continuous efforts should be made through discussions and practice to give concrete form to the strategic as well as tactical matters. We have to undertake time bound comprehensive discussions. These efforts are to be continued within the frame of united party constitution and its regulations. We have to think about making this approach as our proposal. We have to think for some more ways also to achieve our objective of formation of a single united party.

           

[This approach is finalized according to the adopted document POR by CPI (M.L.), All India Conference (2022, September) by Central Committee on November 15-11-2022]

Fight Against Revisionism

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jXKSRwvW68YdaYClCXMJCdW_wHiE3oyg/view?usp=sharing 

Political-Organisational Report.

Adopted at the Seventh Congress of the Communist Party of India, Oct. 31 - Nov 7, 1964, Calcutta.

Published by CPI, in December, 1965.

Andhra Plenum Rejects The Neo-Revisionist Ideological Draft

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cmMr5fSN86tXQ4Z48kQrYN0-vHfX69qn/view?usp=sharing 

Resolutions of the Andhra Communist Committee Plenum at Palcole. 

Published in September, 1968.

Janasakti Publications.

No one has Right to Play War Game with the Lives of People

         By the overambitious and adventurous move to arrange for admission of Ukraine to the NATO as well as the EU by manipulating its close allies in Europe the US imperialists tried to kill two birds at a time. First was to make military presence at the border of Russia; and second was to put a wedge between Russia and two other heavyweights in Europe, Germany and France, who were befriending amongst themselves. Thanks to the energy and environmental crisis they were coming close. The plot was ready through Euro-maidan movement in 2013, which engineered a “regime change” in Ukraine and brought Zelensky to power. But things went hot and finally through MINSK-II AGREEMENT among France, Germany, Russia and Ukraine brought peace in 2013. But Ukraine was not willing to go by it at the behest of the US. So the crisis continued. 

Result was attempt to bring Ukraine to the fold of NATO and arm it to the teeth. Russia opposed and started warning of dire consequences. But armed by the US, Britain and some other European powers Ukraine paid no heed and took a belligerent posture. 

Russia wanted to play one up by attacking Ukraine. They also wanted to achieve two goals. One, to stall Ukraine’s membership to the NATO and the EU once for all; and two, to solve the problem of recognition of the Donbas region (Donetsk and Luhansk) as autonomous region. 

Moreover it had an eye to get full control over Odessa and Mariupol, as warm water ports which Russia need very much.  

Ukraine turned out to be a pawn used by both the US and Russia to settle their Plan geostrategic contention of which Europe is an important part. The US wants to use the NATO to cement its sphere of influence in Europe. Contrary to it Russia wants to befriend some of the EU countries through its oil politics. 

The US, Britain and some other European powers which are avoiding direct involvement are arming Ukraine with most modern weapons. At the same time they are trying to make Russia bleed white by imposing stern economic sanctions. But in that attempt also, the US is facing difficulties as some of the big countries, like India and China, are not ready to abide by it.

So the war is going on. Zelensky has been urging the leaders of the West for their direct involvement which will lead to another World War. But all others including the US and Russia want to avoid it. But both want to achieve peace on their own terms. Result is the continuation of war. Sufferers are the soldiers of both the sides and thousands and thousands of citizens and residents of Ukraine. 

In this situation the CPI (ML) feels that; 

To the people of the world the ongoing war is nothing but senseless butchery. It must be stopped. Henceforth the US and the NATO countries stop meddling in Ukraine. Russia must stop war immediately. Above all Zelensky must go for peace talks without delay, as no one has right to play war game with the lives of people. 

Viswam,

Kolkatta,                                                                                                                  General Secretary,

23-03-2022                                                                                                   Central Committee, CPI (ML)

Remembering - Kanu Sanyal

  Born in 1929 Kanu Sanyal came in contact with the communist movement some time in 1949. He earned the party membership of the undivided communist party in early 1950 after a brief stint of jail life for participating in a protest demonstration organized by the party against the then visiting state Chief Minister Dr. B.C. Roy. He became a whole timer. He opted for working in the Terrai rural area. In the context Comrade Kanu Sanyal once reminisced that his association with Comrade Charu Majumder - the then CPI Jalpaiguri district leader (whom he first met in 1950 while he was in the Jalpaiguri jail) led to the revival of the agrarian movement in the Terrai region.

The middle class origin and urban background did not deter KS to integrate himself completely with the Adivasi people and live among them. He and other comrades worked with dedication to mobilize and organize the people and lead them to wage class struggles against feudal exploitation to earn their right on land and the crops as well as their place in the society itself. “His was the call to the peasants, land belongs to you, occupy and till it”.

The years between 1951 and 1967 were fraught with series of open confrontation often militant with the Jotedars, tea planters, the police and the administration. And KS was imprisoned on several occasions during this period along with his comrades, sometimes under Defence of India Rules while at other time under PD act.

Comrade Kanu Sanyal dedicated his whole life for revolution, breathed in March 23rd 2010. 

No One Justify the War !

 The War of Hegemonist Powers !!

    The anti-imperialist, anti-fascist forces must understand that this is America’s ploy. Competition between the powers of Imperialist monopoly capital; It should be understood as political, economic and military competition. The US and its NATO allies are using the Zelensky government as a pawn to fight Russia, their contender in Europe as well as the world. Putin, the President of Russia is also trying to move fast to arrive at a quick solution, even it be an armed one. The victims of the war were civilians. So, no one should justify war, in a war which is being forced upon the people of Donbas and Luhansk, upon the people of Ukraine is being waged by imperialists to establish their hegemonic ambitions. While opposing war thrust upon the people of Europe and Russia the oppressed people of the world must continue their struggle against imperialist exploitation, aggression and bullying. They have a duty to change the system of exploitation of their own countries. At the same time, the Central Committee declares its condolences and sympathy to the victims of the war, and we oppose NATO alliance actions that are responsible for this war episode. We haven’t considered Russia and Ukraine countries are that have to go to war as belligerent nations.

Viswam,

General Secretary, Central Committee, CPI (ML).

26-02-2022