)
CPI (M) politburo member Sitaram Yechury, who played a key part in the effort to bring regional players on a common platform for the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, tells Archis Mohan that Left parties may agree to be a part of a broad secular post-election alternative, even with Mamata Banerjee in it but for that she must come clean on her position on communalism and neo-liberal economic policies. Edited excerpts:
What is the objective behind forming the so-called Third Front?
Our assessment is that people are totally badgered by economic burdens that are piling on them and are yearning for some relief. Now, the people have come to the realisation that this is not possible either with the policies that the Congress or the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) follow. They are looking for a policy alternative that can provide them relief. That sort of a relief can only come if there is a combination of parties keen to follow an alternative policy trajectory.
Also Read
Our own objective is to try and bring together political forces that will be able to form a government that can follow alternative policies. This sort of a front, we do not think, is possible before the elections. This is also in accordance with the Indian experience so far. Since 1977, coalition governments were formed after the elections, including [Atal Bihari] Vajpayee's National Democratic Alliance (NDA), Manmohan Singh's United Progressive Alliance (UPA), the United Front of 1996 or the V P Singh government. I don't think it is going to be any different this time.
Currently, we are concentrating on seat arrangements and adjustments in various states with regional parties and then on that basis to see post election if this third alternative is possible. We have a seat alliance with the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and talks are on with the Samajwadi Party (SP), Janata Dal (United), Biju Janata Dal and Janata Dal (Secular) in Karnataka.
Why are the Left parties joining hands with parties with a poor record on the issue of corruption, given the current political discourse of transparency and probity in public life?
The common perception is that there is not much difference between the Congress and BJP on this. There is an alternative being sought. Many of the other parties with whom we have an alliance also have certain corruption charges, there is no denying that. We believe that the main source of corruption today is deeply connected with neo-liberal economic policies. A change in economic policy direction is very important to stop corruption of this sort. The point is how do you stop this sort of loot unless you are able to reverse these policies?
Your ally, the Biju Janata Dal, supports the Posco project which your party has opposed?
Yes, we are opposing Posco. We are involved in the struggle against this sort of loot of natural resources. All of these parties, somewhere or the other, have a background where they have also implemented such policies. Now, the pointed issue is that we are trying to work out, in agreement, the kind of policies they (regional parties) will be following subsequently. There has been a history of this, no doubt about it. Some of these parties have been with the NDA and some with the UPA.
Many in the Left movement believe the Left should not ally with parties like the SP, with which it has burnt its fingers earlier? Why not focus on people's struggles to build credibility?
Our struggles are continuing. It is unfair that these are not reported. But when elections come, it is important that policies, which are putting a burden on the people, are overturned and for that our effort to build an alliance.
What is the status with N Chandrababu Naidu-led Telugu Desam Party (TDP)? Is it joining this third alternative?
Naidu was in between inclined for some time to go with the BJP. This was unfortunate since when we held the anti-communal convention he was the first to tell us that we should do it together, and right then it became clear that he was toying with the idea of going with the BJP, rather go back to the BJP. Nothing has happened tangibly, so we still don't know where he wants to be.
Would you be willing to share the stage on a broad secular platform with Mamata Banerjee if it is a repeat of 1996 or 2004, given that the Trinamool Congress claims to be a secular party?
That we are not very sure of. That is something that the Trinamool Congress has refused to clarify so far and they have worked with both the NDA and the Congress. At the moment, unlike other parties that have very clearly said they are going to be both anti-Congress and anti-BJP and are willing to consider the policy direction that will provide relief to people, the Trinamool Congress has so far doggedly refused to spell out its position.
What if the Trinamool Congress does?
Let's see, but I doubt it. Their overall attitude, the manner in which the government is working in Bengal, I doubt if there will be any prevarication on this issue.
What do you think of the Left's prospects in Bengal?
Our performance will be better than 2009 if our support base is allowed to vote. What we saw in local body elections earlier is that today there is a high degree of terror in Bengal. This is preventing people from coming out freely and frankly, and vote. The success of our last rally in Kolkata was a clear indication that people were willing to resist this terror. This will be reflected in the elections if people can come out to vote.
So a situation like 2004 where you supported the UPA from outside is possible?
A situation like 2004 is not possible. Lots of water has flown since then. Communal danger has grown in the last 10 years because of the Congress' functioning and policies. The general discontent among the people is what the communal forces are trying to exploit for their benefit. What is required is to stem this discontent and provide better livelihood for the people.
What do you think of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP)? People's Democracy in one of its editorials expressed admiration for the party?
AAP is a product of people's general discontent and yearning for relief. People found AAP as an alternative in Delhi. However, AAP has not crystallised its policy yet, as far as communalism is concerned.
Their economic policies are also crystallising towards neo-liberal attitudes. The invocation (by Arvind Kejriwal) of Margaret Thatcher's famous saying that the government has no business to be in government was the launching of the Thatcherite economics. Look at Britain today. It was the cradle of the industrial revolution, but doesn't produce even a safety pin today.
Their (AAP's) inspiration for economic policies is similar. AAP has to come out clearly on its policy positions on two crucial issues. One is on the effort to maintain unity and integrity of India, that is, you have to firmly fight communal forces, and the second being the economic policy issue to improve the livelihood of the people. On both these issues, AAP's position is very ambivalent.
Is this ambivalence deliberate?
It's possible or it could be a combination of various forces that have combined to form that party and people within the party moving in opposite directions.
