Satyapal Malik's 'Governorspeak' a negotiating gambit with angry farmers?

Might Malik's statements have been primed by powers-that-be to resume negotiations? His advocacy of farmers' demands may be a credibility-building exercise to take a role in facilitating negotiations

The Governor of Meghalaya, Satyapal Malik, has cautioned the government not to prolong the farmers’ agitation. His public speech in western Uttar Pradesh warned of dire consequences and, potentially, political assassinations, if the issue was not quickly resolved. As a one-time member of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and an incumbent Governor, the tone and substance of his speech is, on the face of it, inexplicable.
 
He suggested that concessions could be easily made by the government: “You only have to give a legal standing to MSP and the whole thing will be over. Once this is done and amendments made to these (three farm) laws, for which the government is ready, the whole issue will be resolved.”

 
Rounding off this suggestion with an ominous warning, he said: “However, if this (protest) continues for long... I don’t know how many of you know Sikhs. But I know Sikhs. After Mrs Gandhi conducted Operation Blue Star, for a month she organised Mahamrityunjay Yajna [a ritual to bestow longevity, ward off calamities and prevent untimely death) at her farm house. Arun Nehru told me when he asked her why she had organised the ritual, she replied: ‘You don’t know (them) but I have destroyed their Akal Takht, they won’t spare me. That is why I have organised this (yajna)’... General Vaidya was assassinated in Poona.” 

 

Malik has claimed that after failing to do so himself, he asked a close friend of the PM’s to convince him that “to send the farmers back using oppressive force and insulting them is not right. First of all, they will not leave (empty handed). Secondly, even if they leave, they will not forget (the insult) for 300 years.”
 
Given the remarkable restraint shown by Sikhs in the prolonged non-violent protest, Malik’s defamatory references to Sikh vengefulness while he holds high constitutional office are difficult to understand. The good Governor has neither retracted his statements nor complained of being quoted out of context. In fact, this speech was followed by two interviews in the same vein. To a reporter in Rajasthan he said: “Even when a dog dies, our political leaders send condolence messages. Here 250 farmers have died (during the protest) and no one has spoken up. Someone should have spoken up.” He also told NDTV that if the government’s indifference to farmers persisted, the BJP would suffer huge losses in Western Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan and Haryana. “There is a lot of anger in the villages,” he said.

 
Satyapal Malik has been a survivor in politics. The 74-year-old has successfully travelled the entire non-Communist political spectrum – from the Lok Dal, Bharatiya Kranti Dal, Congress, Jan Morcha and Janata Dal to the BJP. Besides having been an MLA and an MP, he has also been the Governor of Bihar, Odisha (additional charge), Jammu & Kashmir, Goa and now Meghalaya. Nevertheless, he must be painfully aware that his use-by date is fast approaching and that he can hardly reinvent himself as a farmers’ leader now. Nor can he compete with Mahant Adityanath’s belligerent Hindutva for the 2022 UP state elections. So what explains his apparent reckless and colourful outbursts?

 
Might Malik’s seemingly outlandish statements have been primed by the powers-that-be to restart negotiations with farmers? His strong advocacy of farmers’ demands could be a credibility-building exercise to assume a role in facilitating negotiations. Malik has claimed to be “in touch with both sides” and that as “there is isn’t much distance between the positions of the two sides” a way out can be found.
 
He already seems to have a formula for breaking the deadlock – providing a legal status to MSP and then amending the three laws; as opposed to the full repeal demanded by farmers. The man who says the prime minister does not listen to him is also at pains to point out that he is a “reasonable” man and that some farmers' leaders have also become “more reasonable”.

 
Malik’s background and statements suggest that he might choose to facilitate negotiations with Bharatiya Kisan Union (BKU) leader Rakesh Tikait. Both of them come from Baghpat. Malik claims to have saved him from arrest. “The day there was talk of Tikait being arrested, I intervened at 11 PM making sure it did not happen.”
 
Today, Tikait is the face of a farmers’ agitation which began in Punjab. In its early days, despite a collective leadership, a lot of influence was wielded by the Kisan Union leaders of Left parties and other Left-oriented farmers’ unions of Punjab and Haryana. However, Tikait’s emotional outburst on live television on January 27 seems to have pushed him into a major leadership role as a spokesperson for farmers.

 
Some say this had the consent of Punjab farmers’ leaders as they did not want the Sikh community to be targeted nor the movement maligned as Khalistani-inspired. However, others have cast doubts on the political reliability of Tikait. His family’s record during the Muzaffarnagar riots shows that the BKU was hijacked by the BJP in 2013. Both Rakesh and his brother Naresh Tikait have made no secret of their political ambitions in the past. Although of late Rakesh Tikait has publicly criticised the communal politics of the BJP, many believe he could still flip.
 
It is important for the government to find a single leader to negotiate with. So far, negotiations with over 30 farmers’ representatives across the table have been unable to reach a common agreement. The government might hope that if it can reach a settlement with a hyper-visible leader like Tikait, other internal opposition will dissipate or be silenced by describing it as ‘anti-national”. It is a pattern that the Centre has developed in India’s Northeast. After reaching a much publicised agreement with one group of protestors, those who continue to oppose are delegitimised as seditious in the public eye. Could Satyapal Malik then be the pawn in gaming such a ‘resolution’ of the farmers’ movement? Should the strategy fail, of course, a pawn can always be sacrificed.