Is Eelam Over?

And though their hopes and dreams were shattered
let their deaths not be in vain
We must keep forever burning
freedom's torch, the victor's flame.

-Cheryl Berger

The Tamil Tigers are over, Eelam is over. So claimed the Sri Lankan government on the 18th of may - a claim which was echoed by many sections of the Indian media as well. Gory images, of what the Lankan government claimed to be, the bodies of Velupillai Prabhakaran and his son, Charles Anthony were telecast on news channels. The Lankan government also claimed that the entire top brass of the Tigers, including Pottu Amman and Soosai, were killed in the “final assault” on the Tigers. Till now, however, the Tigers have confirmed only the deaths of Nadesan and Pulidevan. They claim that the high command is still alive and active.

Yet, the images had their effect. Many in my family were horrified when they saw the image of a “dead Prabhakaran” on TV. Some wept. So would have thousands of Tamils across the world, for the charismatic leader of the LTTE meant many things to them. A cherished son to the old, an inspiring Annan to the young, a Sooriyathevan (sun god) to some fanatic supporters, a revolutionary icon, a romantic hero, a guardian. Above all, he symbolized hope. Even those Tamils to whom he was a ruthless despot now feel that the strongest voice that represented their cause has been silenced.

On the other side of the racial divide, among the Sinhalese, there was jubilation. Many news channels showed vulgar public display of triumph by the Sinhalese in Colombo. They were seen bursting crackers, beating drums, feeding sweets and cakes to “their heroes,” the security personnel. For them, it was not merely a victory of the army over the LTTE - it was the establishment of Sinhalese superiority over the Tamils. A Tamil contact from Sri Lanka told me that Tamils were harassed in many parts of the country, especially in the capital city. He said that Tamils were forced to shell out money to Sinhalese mobs so that they could buy sweets for the victory celebrations. Back home in Tamil Nadu, a friend who is closely associated with the Sri Lankan Tamils Protection Movement (SLTPM) said that if at all there is justice in the world, the Sinhalese would pay with their blood for every drop of tear shed by the Tamils. The victory of the Lankan army, if anything, has only accentuated the existing Tamil-Sinhala divide.

Prabhakaran dead?

After the news channels flashed disturbing images of “Prabhakaran’s body,” many theories emerged on his death. Some say he committed suicide. Some say that a close aide shot him. The Lankan army claims that they finished him off - and the Sri Lankan government has given half a dozen versions of the final encounter. Pro-LTTE outfits say that the body is not Prabhakaran’s, that it is a decoy. They also claim that the Lankan Army has used this ploy to divert attention from the large scale massacre of Tamil civilians that occurred in the last one month and to demoralize the Tamils. In fact, even the Tigers don’t seem to be unanimous in their stance. Selvarasa Pathmanathan, LTTE’s head of International Relations, claimed on May 24th that Prabhakaran “attained martyrdom fighting the military oppression.” This was promptly denied by the Tiger’s intelligence wing the very next day. Controversy, it appears, would not elude the elusive leader ever.

So is Prabhakaran dead? Or will he remain a mysterious disappearance like Subash Chandra Bose? The loopholes in the government’s versions have been pointed out by many experts on the issue. At the same time, unless there is a concrete proof that he is alive nothing much can be said on the Tigers’ contention that he is still active. What needs to be analyzed at the moment are the factors that led to the fall of the Tigers.

How the Tiger was trapped

The single greatest factor that contributed to the defeat of the Tigers was their transformation from guerilla warfare to conventional warfare. The Tigers were considered masters of guerilla warfare, placed on par with the Viet-Minh. They waged successful battles against the Sri Lankan army in Eelam Wars I, II and III and managed to capture huge swathes of territory. During the IPKF operations in Sri Lanka from 1987-90, the LTTE, who had a cadre strength of around 3000, were able to secure a decisive victory over a 100,000 strong army by deploying guerrilla strategy.

For an insurgent outfit, the greatest asset is fluidity. By Maoist terminology, the discontented Tamil masses were the “water” in which the guerilla fighters, the “fish,” could swim freely. But the transition to conventional warfare restricted the fluidity of the Tigers. In their transition, the Tigers flouted two main rules of insurgency - not to engage in battles that cannot be won and to be on the move continuously. The conventional mode of war is more suited for a state’s army - not for non-state actors. The Tigers functioning as a state’s army, providing no space for criticism and self-criticism, weakened them internally.

The defection of Karuna in March 2004, partly engineered by the Lankan government, came as a great blow to the LTTE. Karuna, who was the Eastern commander of the Tigers, took along with him a sizeable group of experienced fighters. They provided the Lankan army the much needed inside information on the Tigers. Soon after his defection, the Eastern provinces under the control of the Tigers fell to the military offensive like a house of cards.

‘World opinion,’ or the opinion of politically and economically powerful countries of the West, turned against what they dubbed ‘terrorism’ post 9-11. The governments of these countries saw no difference between one group and another - any non-state actor waging an armed struggle against a recognized state was considered terrorist. The eventual proscription of the LTTE in the US, Canada and the EU hit them where it hurt the most - their endless supply of funds from the Tamil Diaspora.

The political isolation of the Tigers in the South-Asian region, though it didn’t matter initially, worked against them in the long run. India, Pakistan and China, each having strong economic interests in Sri Lanka, went head over heels in their attempts to woo the Lankan government. While Pakistan and China were overt in their military assistance to Sri Lanka, India could not afford to do so, fearing a backlash in Tamil Nadu. It, however, covertly provided military equipment, training for Sinhalese soldiers, intelligence inputs and radars. Plus, Israel and Russia also provided military support to Sri Lanka through arms deals. One similarity about all these countries is that all face some form of secessionist-liberation struggles back home. Without any support from any government in the region, the Tigers were fighting a full fledged war against not one, but six forces. They were outnumbered and outgunned.

To sum it up, an analogy can be drawn between the predicament of the Tigers and the fate of Abhimanyu in the Mahabharata. Like Abhimanyu, the Tigers entered a form of battle that they were partially accustomed to. They fought against larger forces, with all odds against them. And like Abhimanyu, they fought valiantly to the last. The dubious role of Jayadratha, the character who prevented the Pandavas from reaching Abhimanyu in time, is best suited for India. In the past, India had prevented many an arms consignment from reaching the Tigers at crucial times in the war. So what was the role of the Lankan army in the Kurukshetra of the Vanni jungles? Similar to the role of Dushasan’s son who dealt the death blow to a battered and bruised Abhimanyu. They killed a wounded Tiger.

The idea of Eelam

“There is no end for Prabhakaran,” thundered Vaiko at a massive rally organized by the SLTPM on May 21st in Chennai. There is an element of truth in his statement. Prabhakaran was synonymous with an idea. An idea of Tamil Eelam, that emerged as a concrete concept after the Vadukkodai resolution of 1976. An idea of an independent state that the Tamils could call home. An idea of an egalitarian society sans bias, sans discrimination where free men and women would progress and prosper. An idea of struggle for justice and freedom. Prabhakaran is among those individuals who were identified with certain ideas and who survive in public memory through the ages. Prabhakaran used to say that history was his guide. The history of Prabhakaran and the Tigers serve as guides for any future action towards securing justice for the Tamils. Whether he is alive or dead, the idea of Prabhakaran lives in the hearts of millions of Tamils world over. And as long as that survives, the dream of Eelam will persist among the Tamils and will haunt Sri Lanka as a nightmare. This critical moment in the timeline of the Eelam struggle signals only the end of a phase, not the struggle as such. Tamil Eelam is not over. It has reached a new beginning.

Atithi Devo Bhava for us, “curry bashing” for them

The Indian Tourism Development Corporation (ITDC) has added another weapon to its “Incredible India” arsenal. Yes, the same campaign which seeks to sell India as a safe, oriental and culturally exciting destination to the rest of the world. This latest “weapon” is simply the new advertisement that the ITDC has been circulating on most television channels lately – that of a culturally sensitive and clearly right-wing Aamir Khan saving the day for two white, foreigner girls as they shop around in the back-lanes of Bombay – that oriental paradise that Gregory David Roberts (incidentally from Australia himself) hails as the city of cities and one that is closest to his heart.

 

Anyway – so there’s this ruffian, see? And he tries to touch the girls and then tries to sell them a cheap hotel room, and then he’s joined by taxi drivers, tourist guides, auto rickshaw drivers et cetera – each selling his own…er…”service”. As the two unassuming and helpless girls drown in a sea of invitations and echoes of “Madamji, madamji”, their knight in shining armour appears – to reprimand his own countrymen for the ill treatment that they are subjecting their foreign guests to and reminds them of their ancient heritage – of their land being that of guest worship (read deifying anyone with a less-flatter nose and better skin tone – you know, as part of our continuing respect for our erstwhile colonial masters). What he does is all too visible. However – what is of consequence, in my opinion, is what he says. Aamir Khan of the Narmada Bachao aandolan and Lagaan fame says “respect them because its from them that you get your income. If you cause them displeasure – believe you me – they’ll go back with a very bad impression of our company (oops! I meant country) and never come back!” How…beautiful! This is certainly a great service that Aamir does the country, you know – no matter how right-wing and begging for the love and respect and (don’t forget) money of the global tourism community he seems. A country which is so firmly entangled in the web of international politics, the neo-liberal economy and needs resources from the world market to fuel it’s ever-expanding capitalist fantasies. We surely must respect the world community then,  shouldn’t we? Of course!

 

As the idea for this post gets formed in my head – I change the channel as soon as Khan’s tirade is over – to a news channel. The events in Australia – quite well-referred to as “curry bashing” present a sad irony, to say the least. So I realize, that as I watched Aamir Khan reprimand his countrymen for the lack of respect that they show their foreign “guests” (who come here to do nothing except get their illegal income exchanged for the US dollar, or buy cheap drugs, or smoke the best hashish in the world, or to molest minors or participate in ‘rave’ events) some hooligan in Australia stabs an Indian student at a party just because his skin is a few tones darker. Some good for nothing “mate” with another one of his “mates” with nothing to do, decides to throw a Molotov on an Indian student who's reading in his front yard. The media – as we know it – was surely sent into a tizzy. Coverage – yes. Adequate coverage – I don’t think so.

Compare this group of incidents (I believe 4 at the time of writing) to the hullaballoo that had been created when a Swiss and a German tourist had been molested in Rajasthan and raped in Delhi, respectively. The Tourism Ministry went into denial initially, but was soon forced to acknowledge the incidents and apologize to the world's tourist community. Similar was the case of Scarlett Keeling – the teenage neo-hippie girl of a classic hippie mom who had come to India to have a “nice time” (read mixing psychotropic drugs like LSD and Ecstasy with alcohol for that ultimate kick) – but ended-up getting raped and killed instead. The country was again criticized for not being able to provide a better environment for drug-crazed junkies and a few police officials were suspended and their seniors transferred. The media ate it up and barfed it for months. However, is the media acting with the same “responsibility”  now?

 

Sure. We’ve got the Australians saying that the attacks were not racially motivated. Then we have Indian officials saying that they were. Then the Australians say, “Yeah – I guess” and then the Indians say “How bad! How rude, I say!” and the victims of these assaults lie in hospital – either in coma, or nursing head injuries, or 30 per cent of their burned bodies.

 

MR S.N MISHRA, SHRIMATI SONIA GANDHI (it is an established fact that YOU run the government) MR. PRIME MINISTER – I’m sure you know about these attacks. But – what are you doing about it/them? Does your dialogue with Australia depend only on nuclear energy raw-material sharing agreements? Like the time you were in constant touch with that country when you needed plutonium so that you could go ahead with the Indo-US nuclear deal?  

 

What is more aggravating is the fact that there are completely ludicrous reactions coming in AND being reported – that Indian students are more vulnerable to such attacks - being one of them. Oh please! Wouldn’t they be? Because they hail from a country whose government is more into making money from its foreign trade and tourism? Which has recently bent over backwards to the US on a million counts and occasions?  A country which WANTS to send scapegoats to these rogue states in the name of bilateral relations? The establishment clearly doesn’t care about what happens to these people after they’re out of the country’s borders (as if they really did while they were inside it either, hah!). So while Air France routinely ill-treats passengers of Indian origin, Sikh sects clash in Vienna and Indian students in Russia (oh dear) as well as the US are targeted – we should all sit in our homes and watch the story unfold on the corporate media’s stage (most of their bosses are American, Russian or European anyway). We watch what they want us to watch. We read what they want us to read – after doctoring it, deleting whole paragraphs of information which is considered “sensitive” for us brownies. As the white man expresses his dejection at being knocked-off the world’s stage and Indian middle class families indoctrinate their kids with “ideals” such as minding their own business while in another country – the establishment kisses the international community’s feet. After all – we can’t blame the parents, can we? They’ve been privy to the Indian government’s disregard and lack of involvement for a long, long time and hence, are in a position to give such advice.

 

Well – I’ve got a solution. Something that LTTE supporters may approve of. MISTA PRIME MINISTA – why don’t you send the IPKF to Australia? They can go there – have a few drinks, check out the Sydney Opera House and then get down to doing what they did when they were sent to Sri Lanka to quash the embryonic eelam struggle; something that they’re best at – raping women of all ages and sizes (lets keep the looting and plundering details to orselves this time at least!). But hey – this time it’ll be better than the last. There’s no Prabhakaran to blow-up a war criminal in India. Besides, guess all those who believe in punishing such wrong-doers by death have started looking to America, the European Union and Israel. Which is a good thing for the Congress and especially the UPA government.

    

Humari zaroorat, humara bank!

(OUR NEED, OUR BANK)

 

It’s a true Robin Hood-esqe tale with a modern twist. Cadres of the much-despised Communist Party of India (Maoist) are literally giving the establishment that THEY despise a run for their money (read: financial gains wreaked on unsuspecting and economically unstable farmers in the form of interests to be paid on loans for business and other purposes). The CPI (Maoist) has successfully implemented a parallel system of banking in the Pashim Champaran, Purvi Champaran, Sheohar and Sitamarhi districts of North East Bihar – providing financial assistance to those who need it at terms which vary according to the purpose for which the money is required.

 

While the rate of interest for the purpose of financing education and/or marriage varies from two to four per cent, the rate of interest for financing business activities that the applicant desires to undertake is slightly higher. Two things need to be pointed out here: not only is this a fitting reply to those critics of the Marxist ideology – that is, the naysayers and doomsayers who reprimanded the Indian Left for it’s “anti-people” and “totalitarian” policies, rejoicing in its failure to garner support in West Bengal and Kerala, and hence concluding that its stint in the country was over, but also a wake-up call to the degenerate scum that the more liberal Left political groups have become. THIS is what a socialist setup is supposed to look like, people – not like the abominations that you’ve created in Kerala and West Bengal.

 

Not only is this parallel system of banking more “people-friendly” – advancing loans on easier financial terms and according to the needs of those who need it (Marx did predict a Communist society in which the mantra was to be “From each according to his ability, and to each according to his need) – but also in perfect symmetry with Marx’s own critique of the extent to which business activity becomes the reason for the existence of man in a Capitalist setup. Hence, not only is there a sort of “preference” – if you will – for the causes most crucial to the development of the “human potential” that Marx believed was the ultimate goal of man’s existence (through cheap finance for activities such as marriage and education) but by the extra interest being charged for business activities, the banking system seeks to reduce the rural sector’s emphasis on business activities rather than undertaking productive activities such as agriculture et cetera – activities more sited to a rural setup.

 

Needless to say, the money being got is from bank hold-ups and kidnappings – activities that characterize the Maoist ideology and rightly target individuals/establishments that nourish themselves by the blood that they suck from the villager in the form of the ridiculous amount money that they charge as interest. The fact that the outfit has been able to formulate and implement this system – in spite of all governmental and other hassles - is reason enough to laud it and cherish it as an articulation of the fact that there is hope, still.

Thanks for keeping the war on Jug Suraiya

Jatin, i don't know how to thank you for bringing to my eyes one of the most valuable pieces of knowledge ever crafted in Indian Press. Shit, what did i write? sorry, that can be attributed to consciousness being held on momentary ransom by some, green, hallucinogenic substance--found in nature though. Okay, here goes. Jatin, i don't know how to thank you for bringing to my notice one of the most shameless, unapologetic pieces in support of free-market propaganda and corporate governance i have ever come across in the Indian Press. Its crass, rude and unimaginably insensitive. I must say i am amazed, truly. They say news media shape opinion,  manufacture consent and serve as the vigiante fourth-effin-estate (The last bit endorsed by  more idealists than Chomskians). 

Jug Suraiya, unashamedly supporting an economic system that is guided solely by the motive of profit maximisation, describes people supporting Socialism and Nationalisation as "doomsayers". Beautiful. He also calls the debt-ridden exploitative Social Darwinist societies and economies of the West as having reached "great heights". Great imperialist, colonising, expansionist societies that developed at the cost of the un-development of their colonies. Great societies that are responsible for each and every single problem faced by the contemporary global village. 

The worst, and also the funniest, thing about this article is that Suraiya is trying to make us all  believe in the good samaritanism inherent, by default, in capitalism; or trying to convince us how liberating full-blown liberalism is. Sorry sir, but before your very enlightening article could save us, we kind of  got indoctrinated by a belief system that strives to achieve liberty by 'propagating' equal redistribution of wealth through state-intervention as opposed to the concentration of it in a few hands through free-market fundamentalism. Bad, no?

And he goes to great lengths to substantiate this point by constantly harping on the unparalelled success of Grameen Bank in bailing out the ailing common man through the generation of tough, gutsy, immune to economic crises--micro credit. How romantic. But hey, what did Grameen Bank succeed in? Oh, yes, it succeeded in taking capitalism beyond capitalism; beyond urban industrial consumerist societies to agrarian rural ones; it succeeded in taking capitalism from Big capital intensive industries and corporations to the common man, the farmer; it succeeded in taking control of food production; in making the helpless farmer give away his/her land for ecologically inconsistent, cash farming because the state simply didn't care. It succeeded in making way for Monsanto (The Monsanto-Grameen bank initiative. http://www.greens.org/s-r/17/17-15.html).

And thats not all. He saves the best for the last--by appealing, giving out the ultimate call to complete corporate governance--hoping, almost in teenage dreaminess, of corporate India contesting the next General Elections by forming a secular, economically liberal political party. Whoa, you really took it far sir. 

And then, he ends by dreaming, concealing his dreadful vision as the heart-warming naivete of a teenager, of a beautiful alliance being formed between the common man (I don't know why did he leave out the women) and India Inc.Hey, i remember someone talking about co-production someday (Professor Nigel Thrift, talked of co-production  as a new, smarter, more evolved form of capitalism, in his lecture on "The new forms of capitalism")

Seems like Modi, Advani, the BJP, the entire Hindutva spectrum AND the UPA  (led by the Chicago School slave economist Dr. Manmohan Singh as the Prime Minister )with its desperation to initiate more 'reforms' not enough to satiate the needs of the capitalists of our country. 

Ab aur kya kahein yaar...ee toh saala parliament ko hee privatise karne ka baat kar diya....!!

Mahim

We have our Mussolini - lets recreate Italy too!

Indian fascism should come of age?

Now this is something that immediately caught my eye (and made me suppress an unusually strong impulse to retch as I went through it). It seems there are no limits when it comes to being featured on the "SUBverse" column that the TOI carries every alternate day, I believe. The following text is that of the same column. The date of publishing was the 27th of April. The article/opinion piece was called "Right way to go". Please read through it before you read my reaction to it at the end of this post. I wasn't surprised when my reaction didn't get published. However, I was actually taken aback when they published a...well...I believe RIDICULOUS is the word I'm looking for - "opinion" in support of Suraiya's argument was published THE VERY NEXT DAY.

Right way to go

27 Apr 2009, 0000 hrs IST, Jug Suraiya

India's political spectrum is incomplete: it lacks a credible right-of-centre party which represents private enterprise. A capitalist party. To 

talk about capitalism in the midst of a global economic crisis caused by unbridled greed in the fountainhead of the market economy, the US, might sound as inane and insensitive as Marie Antoinette's remark about people eating cake if they couldn't afford bread. With the American government having had come to the aid of stricken financial institutions in a move similar to nationalisation, the US has been renamed the USSR by those who would celebrate the death of capitalism and the rebirth of socialism. Such doomsayers overlook one point: it was capitalism not socialism which enabled the western economy to scale the heights from which it has, temporarily, fallen. Far from being dead, capitalism is merely gaining its second wind to lead the race again. (Even as the US government bails out bankrupt organisations, the founder of 'barefoot capitalism', Grameen banker Muhammad Yunus has started operations in the US to rescue small businesses through microcredit schemes, suggesting that the evils of capitalism are best solved not through state intervention but through more capitalism, appropriately applied.) 

In India, with the vote of the aam aadmi the cynosure of all political ayes, no party can afford to talk about economic liberalisation. Economic reforms have remained on the back burner for the greater part of the UPA government's tenure, thanks to Left opposition. But despite the populist rhetoric churned out on his behalf, India's aam aadmi remains an endangered species. In Maharashtra alone, debt-ridden farmers on an average commit suicide at the rate of two every day. State intervention, in the form of much-touted loan waivers and employment guarantee schemes, has been unable to break the lethal, centuries-old stranglehold of the rapacious moneylender, whose usurious rates of interest continue to ruin millions of rural households through successive generations. 

Both in order to break the shackles of its age-old poverty and to rise to the challenge of the global economic crisis, perhaps what India really needs today is what it does not have: a liberal capitalist formation, like the Swatantra Party of old. Contrary to popular belief the BJP has not filled this political vacuum. Far from espousing competitive free market dynamics which are the hallmark of true capitalism, the BJP with its base of petty traders represents monopoly interests which are anathema to economic liberalism. 

As the success of Grameen banking has shown in Bangladesh and elsewhere (which now hopefully includes the US) the proper deployment of private capital to generate enterprise and wealth is not an exploitative privilege of the rich; it is the enabling prerequisite for the poor. Poverty alleviation measures based on state capital (loan waivers, employment schemes) are like leaky sieves; corruption and inefficiency drain almost everything away, leaving little or nothing for the targeted recipients. Private capital, through microcredit and other non-state financed systems, has to be efficient in order to survive. 

It is too late for this election. But perhaps for the next polls which could well be sooner than anyone wants corporate India should think of forming its own secular, economically liberal party to contest at the hustings for its legitimate space in the political sphere. Why should India Inc fund this or that party, be it the Congress or the BJP or any other, which time and again not only fails to deliver on business expectations but also on providing succour to the common man? It's time aam aadmi and corporate India realised that their mutual fortunes are inextricably interlinked: if rural India prospers so does India Inc; if rural India hurts so do the sales figures of India Inc. So next time around might we see a party which stands for the common, capitalist good of corporate India and aam aadmi? Right on. 

NOW READ MY REACTION TO IT.

This is in response to Jug Suraiya’s ‘Right way to go’ (Apr 27). Mr. Suraiya’s endorsement of a fascistic right wing political group representing the interests of India Inc. is ridiculous, to say the least. By dismissing state intervention in the form of farmer loan waivers, employment schemes and other such measures aimed at improving the economic conditions of the rural poor, only in the name of socialism, Mr. Suraiya makes a ludicrous sweeping generalization. May one remind him that it is ‘implementation’ where these state sponsored schemes lose out. It is the money-mindedness and corruption – or capitalist outlook – of those in bureaucratic positions which is to blame for their ineffectiveness and not state intervention. Is not the recent Satyam scandal enough to demonstrate the effect of the unbridled greed that capitalism entails? And as far as farmer suicides in Maharashtra are concerned – has heard of a little American corporation called Monsanto and its hegemony over the BT cotton market – a direct consequence of the neo-liberal policies of the Indian government ushered in after the economic liberalization of 1991? With its new-found tainted image – thanks to Mr. Raju’s misadventures in the global IT corridors of power – the aam aadmi stands to lose out on more due to capitalism than socialism. Mr. Suraiya, while reprimanding the country’s Left for keeping economic reforms on the back burner for years – should also acknowledge the fact that it is the same Left’s opposition to neo-liberalism that the Indian market has been insulated to the effects of the global financial meltdown to a large extent.

Jatin Anand 

Delhi

The Revolution - now and forever

Hey...Karthick dude - this is for you :)

Revolutionary guerrilla warfare has gradually become an accepted alternative to the more conventional forms of organized war craft, as can be interpreted from various guerrilla offensives cropping-up all over the world in general, and the Indian sub-continent in particular. Though the historical roots of subversive warfare lie in the unorganized, nationalistic offensives of less-developed and militarily inferior countries against the hegemony and exploitation of Imperialist nations, the tenets of guerrilla warfare, or ‘camouflaged war’ have also been used in retaliation to the cultural, ethnic and economic atrocities of modern-day repressive, neo-imperialist and neo-fascist regimes against unsuspecting, and ill-equipped peoples and communities.

While nationalist outfits such as the Hamas in the war-torn Gaza strip and the Hezbollah in Lebanon - which have risen in retaliation to the expansionist and exploitative ambitions of Israel in the Middle East, the Al Qaida and the Taliban with their roots in the Afghani offensive against Soviet imperialism – are examples of the former, outfits such as the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in Sri Lanka, the Naxals and the Telangana struggle in Eastern and Southern India, the Jaish-e-Mohammad and the United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA) are but a few outfits crusading against the cultural and economic imperialism of repressive regimes.

Guided by the principles of Karl Marx and campaigning for the establishment of an equitable social setup using the force of subversive warfare to overthrow repression and exploitation – whether that of an invading aggressor or of an oppressive government, these outfits differ only on the basis of their motivations. However, experts and commentators are divided not only on the relevance of such grass-root struggles in this era of techno-based military strategy and armament, but also on whether or not to classify them as guerrilla forces. The purpose of this piece is to analyze these dichotomies from an informed point of view.

The relevance of guerrilla warfare was first questioned on the achievement of what is considered the epitome of modern military might – the nuclear bomb. This might was further amplified by the development of the thermo-nuclear H-bomb in 1954.

The United States of America was at the helm of a new world order inaugurated by various political and technological developments during the second world war and on account of its new-found diplomatic and military power adopted the policy and strategy of ‘massive retaliation’ as a deterrent to all kinds of aggression. The then-Vice President of the U.S, Richard Nixon announced: “We have adopted a new principle. Rather than let the Communist nibble us to death all over the world in little wars, we will rely in future on massive mobile retaliatory powers.” The implied threat of using advanced nuclear weaponry to thwart myriad bands of ill-equipped guerrilla warriors in terrain inimical to conventional warfare such as mountains, heavily-forested areas and urban centres was absurd. In his foreword to the writings of Mao Tse-Tung and Che Guevara, Guerrilla Warfare, Capt. B.H Liddell Hart compares it to “talk of using a sledgehammer to ward off a swarm of mosquitoes.”

Capt. Hart goes on to underline the fact that the use or even the threat of using the nuclear deterrent against the unconventional form of warfare practiced by guerrilla warriors actually increases the possibilities of limited war pursued by widespread local aggression and testifies to the fact that guerrilla warfare is not only relevant, but the only retaliatory response to such massive military force – making ‘camouflaged’ offensives the future of warfare.

According to Professor S. Irfan Habib, Historian and Research Analyst, “America’s proclamation was ridiculous. God only knows how and why they thought their tracking equipment and nuclear missiles capable of locating fluid bands of nomadic warriors acclimatized and fully-informed of the terrain of some of the most thickly-forested and naturally covered areas in the world. In addition to this, these guerilla fighters had also created subterranean networks of supply chains and communication, for instance in South Vietnam, as well as other routes which America, in my view had no capability of discovering whatsoever. What did they plan to do? Throw grotesquely expensive and powerful nuclear bombs and missiles in every cave and crevice they found in the countryside?”

In the words of Professor S S, Department of Political Science, Delhi University, “There should be no qualms about the fact that guerrilla warfare has indeed succeeded the conventional forms of war that characterized the conflicts of the pre-WW II era. Guerrilla warfare is the only kind of war that fits the conditions of the modern era well-suited as it is to take advantage of social discontent, racial ferment and nationalistic fervour – conditions that have shaped the contours of conflicts after WWII.”

Agrees Professor D G, Department of Sociology, Jawaharlal Nehru University, “In my view, the Naxalite movement in India is the biggest and most lucid example of the success of guerrilla warfare. In the four and a half decades since it has been operational, the movement has successfully carved out for itself a substantial part of the Indian mainland for itself. The debate centered on the morality of this struggle aside, it’s definitely a successful people’s movement and proves the mettle of guerrilla warfare.”

However, there are some who believe it is no match for the superior weaponry and techno-based manoeuvres that modern warfare entails. Believes Professor L K, Department of English, Delhi University, “Look at what has happened to the LTTE in Sri Lanka – they’ve almost been wiped out completely. And even the Hamas and Hezbollah in the Middle East are proving futile in the face of the carnage that the Israeli Defence Force is unleashing. Regardless of the plausibility and justness of the causes that these groups espouse, they are quite clearly succumbing to modern military techniques and weaponry.”

The other issue that experts and commentators are divided on – as has been mentioned before – is whether the motives and the causes that these groups espouse justify their classification as partly unorganized liberation groups practicing guerrilla warfare to achieve their ends.

In this regard, Professor Habib feels that it is fallacious to identify every unorganized anti-state outfit as a grass-roots organization modeled on the Russian, Chinese and Cuban revolutions just because their preferred means of retaliation happen to be those of guerrilla warfare, “I don’t agree with it. The Russian, Chinese and Cuban revolutions were struggles of emancipation from imperialist hegemony and economic exploitation. They were not ethnic or cultural movements in any way like the Naxalite movement in our country or the ethnic-lingual struggle in Sri Lanka. I think the only grass-root struggles that deserve to be recognized as being true to the spirit of these great revolutions are the Hamas and the Hezbollah’s actions in the Middle East – battling are they are against American hegemony and defending their inherent sense of nationalism in the process. I am not questioning the validity or the justness of the LTTE’s struggle for Eelam or the Naxalite movement. I’m just saying that it is erroneous to put them on the same plane as these great revolutions of the past.”

Professor G disagrees when he says, “What should form the core of this discussion is the fact of exploitation. I don’t agree with Professor Habib because these grass-root struggles should be seen as retaliation to exploitation – no matter whether it is nationalistic, cultural, lingual or ethnic. I think they are on these struggles are truly modeled and should be seen as being on the same plane as the great revolutions of the past.”

Professor S agrees with this view, “What are a handful of peasants and unarmed civilians supposed to do in the face of an armed and exploitative state that takes joy in sucking their blood to fill its own coffers? They pick-up the gun – just like the Bolsheviks, Mao’s followers and those who shared Fidel Castro’s dream of a Cuba free from the tyranny of Batista and his inhuman regime.”

As Capt. Hart argues, guerrilla warfare is a kind of war waged by the few but dependent on the support of many. Although in itself the most individual form of action, it can only operate effectively, and attain its end, when collectively backed by the sympathy of the masses. That is why it tends to be most effective if it blends an appeal to national resistance or desire for independence with an appeal to social and economic discontent, thus becoming revolutionary in a wider sense.

Grass-root struggles hence can be said to be justified as the last resort for the utterly exploited – whether politically, culturally, economically or socially – depending on the nature and severity of the exploitation and the discontent it entails among its victims. As long as there is exploitation - of whatever nature and degree - there will always be a struggle to destroy the source of that exploitation. Whether an expansionist aggressor, insidious economic discrimination or social degradation due to the hegemony of a biased government - the forms of exploitation and its agents may change, but exploitation will remain – in one form or another. It is as an answer to this that the revolution is – and shall forever be imminent.

Branding of the Lifeworld: Corporate Colonization

I agree with Chetan about the hegemonic and dehumanizing influence of brands in our lives. I also concur with the importance of movements like the Swadeshi movement and how they are strong post-modern expressions of resistance against cultural imperialism. But when one talks of brands and the danger from them, I believe it would be naive to just stop at foreign brands. The colonization of the lifeworld occurs regardless of where a brand originates from. Brands are corporate identities. And a Corporation is a corporation, regardless of nationality. Its a psychopathic apparatus of exploitation and it remains that whether it exists in India, America, Europe or Pakistan.

Reliance is as exploitative as Wallmart and Tata as exploitative as Ford or Toyota. The fact that they are Indian does not change anything. Although they keep playing on their Indian-ness through high profile CSR campaigns and advertisements, making us believe that just because they are from the same country as us, they are more credible, less exploitative and are therefore less likely to engage in unethical business practices. 

They make us believe that the money we give them will stay in India and be used for the development of India, when actually all it is used for is corporate expansion, sponsoring governments, altering policies pushing for more neo-liberalisation and less state interference and furthering their own profit. The biggest fraud that they play upon draws fuel from nationality. They propagate that becasue they are from India, they will work towards the advancement of this Nation. And unfortunately, the Government supports them in this opinion manufacturing process. 

The fact that their only motive is to earn ugly, insensitive and irrational profits makes them all the same no matter which country they come from. Now they don't care where they get it from, as long as they get it alright. Coming to apparel manufacturers, they employ, like any other corporation, the same production methods designed to give out bare minimum wages and maximise profits. All they are concerned about is that they get their products made for the least possible cost. They don't care if this is achieved through making laboureres work under sweatshop conditions and extreme violations of human rights. The fact that they are 'Indian' or 'foreign' or even 'multinational' does not change anything. 

More on these lines, Indian textile or apparel makers today, are following the same design trends as their multinational counterparts. This is such a dumb submission to cultural imperialism. They would never design ethnic Indian wear on a mass scale. The trends are dictated by the west and they follow it blindly. The corporation is therefore, a highly deterritorialized entity. It exists in the same way regardless of geography; it exists for the same purpose, for the same reason and for the same class of people everywhere.

Further Reading: No Logo by Naomi Klein

The Corporation by Joel Bakan

The tragi-comedy of choice

I don't get it! Why on earth was Amma cribbing over the Chennai Central seat (CPM was dying to have it) so much, when her party isn't even campaigning for it? D. Pandian, CPI’s state secretary and Chennai North candidate, may have had a better chance here against a candidate that can match his arrogance.

The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) isn't splitting too many hairs on the seat because they are sure of victory; the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (ADMK) candidate S. M. K. M. A. Jinnah is sticking to his pocket borough of Triplicane while the Desiya Murpoku Dravida Kazhagam (DMDK) is going berserk printing pamphlets in English.

The BJP, which has forgotten Sukumaran Nambiar, hasn’t even fielded a candidate and the BSP’s Yunus Khan remains content with sending a campaign jeep into Triplicane Mosque in the dead of the night.

The Youth and Students Party, which seems strangely familiar to the Syrian Christian Youth Club, is parading its pathetic slogans on a tempo on Uttamar Gandhi Salai. As if all this wasn’t enough, Nungambakkam residents found themselves staring at Pyramid Party of India pamphlets (with a flowing white bearded Maharishi peeping out), as they started their vehicles in the morning.

I am sorry to say that I may have ended up voting for Hyder Bhai of the Manithaneeya Makkal Katchi (MMK), if I had a vote in the constituency. The joke that the Chennai Central campaign has been reduced to, has made even a party like MMK seem ideal to the few incurable romantic socialists that live in this constituency. No, there’s no sign of the Socialist Unity Centre of India (SUCI).

Coming home, to vote in Krishnagiri constituency, was fun. The Election Commission has played the perfect party pooper (literally) from the hinterland to the state capital, ensuring nobody has any campaign kondattam except the BJP.

This is the only party I find actually campaigning in Tamil Nadu. Kovai to Krishnagiri is dotted with saffron flags and banners with images of Advani, Karthik and Sarath Kumar and Subramanian Swamy on them. What a sangam;D

The flags don’t seem to bother either of the squabbling Dravidian twins, who are busy clashing from Luz Corner to Anchetti forest, apart from stoning the Central Industrial Security Force in Krishnagiri. The vinyl banners though, are a comic relief.

Much to the chagrin of my photographer roomie Kapil Ganesh, the election stalls of the DMK in Hosur are attracting more crowds than any others. I think I spotted late Com. Mohit Sen’s United Communist Party of India flag, among the many others, decorating a DMK stall opposite the town’s police station.

T. Rajendharr’s Latchiya Makkal Katchi’s teeny-weenie stall lay barren beside it. I actually appreciate the man for not joining the bandwagon of ‘election-parties’ that are the NDA in TN this time, but he really does push his luck to ensure the joke is on him doesn’t he?

The UPA may not be so lucky in Salem, where the Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam’s mobilisation coupled with the Vanniyar loyalty to the PMK is punishing poor Mr. Thangkabalu. Yes, all you Tamil nationalists, I actually like Mega TV :)

Nowhere have I seen the DMDK so popular, as in my district. The night before polling two bubbly gentlemen came home to give our voting slips with the ‘Murasu’ (DMDK’s drum symbol) on it. These courageous poll code violators seemed like excited little children stealing mangoes in the dead of the night.

Despite their charm, I violated the Party line and pressed the ‘Udaya Suryan.’

Poll Punch:

1. All you Dakshin Kannada voters who think you did a favour to the cause of pub-going by voting for BJP rebel Ram Bhat, think again; he's backed the the Sri Ram Sene

2. Ever visited Kerala's Left Democatic Front website. There'a only CPM, CPI and Kerala Congress (Joseph). See Mr. smart pants RSP and AIFB, the CPM finally gave it to you tit-for-tat for South 24 Parganas and Dinhata. Long live saala Left Unity!

Naivety or something else?

I just came across this picture on a news portal. Although it is a good thing to vote, but what is this middle finger doing here? It should be the index finger, right?

Is it naivety or something else?

Brands, what for?

What a better can be of showing your love for your country than quitting on foreign brands.

Popular brands in India have ownership outside the country. We still do not know if it is because of the better quality of the product or some sort of subtle fetish for them because of, well, whatsoever reason. But more then possibilities, lets talk about realities. The reality is that the money you spent for going branded has just paid for someones vacation at the French Riviera or someones Hum-vee or a villa next to the Black Sea. It has just pushed the most ridiculed characteristics of the capitalism one step further, i.e., inequality.

Agree to the part that big brands with the selling part, also have factories in the (host) country which creates employment. But before that lets use some of our common sense. Trust me it wont hurt a bit. How expensive can a best possible white cotton t-shirt, made in India, cost? In any condition not more then 500 rupees after using best of cotton, spinning, weaving and labor. Now how much does the same t-shirt will sell in a showroom with a "tick" on its left chest. 1500 rupees? It is hard to believe that the impingement of these brands over our faculties is strong that we forget that quality cannot be ad infinitum. For the extra 1000 bucks, no further improvement has been there in the product. But contradictorily, most people buy brands for quality, when the same quality is available for a third of its price; what will one call this kind of behavior? The cost of raw material and labor is a fraction of the final price you pay for the "tick". And rest of the money go to those villas and vacation and yes, in advertisement that makes you believe that with a "tick" the Rs 500 thing becomes worth 1500.

Thus, the quality excuse alone is not enough for supporting the brands. But we said they create employment too. However, the ratio of employed compared to the the capital employed is far less in case. A 50 crore high tech plant at the most can employ 75 people. The expensive is the capital, the lower the number employed. And lets compare it agriculture sector where a 50 crore investment can employ no less than a thousand people. Obviously, The money that these branded corporates saved through cutting on employment is the money going to their pocket, the money spent on ostentatious luxuries and the money the money to that country has lost opportunity to. Instead buying a brand for that 1000 extra bucks, had it been spent on local products, it would have created much more employment and the money would have stayed in the country, helping it grow.


Brands thrive on our weakness of trying to be different. no! i wont say that being different is a weakness but yes, trying to show that you are off beat is definitely one. Brands are just inside people's mind, so they say. And they create inequality too, which no one talks about. So whats their use? go unbranded and or for local brands, they create relatively more employment and have huge multiplier effect. And no! they don't leave any corn or put extra strain on your spinal cord and at the end of the day they are worth their price!

PS- Worth reading will be Swadeshi Movement led by MK Gandhi.