4-24-08, 11:26 am
Editor's Note: Teresa Albano is editor of the People's Weekly World. To see Albano's photoblog of her trip to India click here.
PA: Why are there two Communist Parties in India and what is their relationship with one other?
TERRIE ALBANO: The two Communist Parties in India, the Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) and the Communist Party of India (CPI) both derive originally from a united Communist Party of India, which was formed in the 1920s, during a time when many Communist Parties around the world were being founded in the wake of the Russian Revolution. The United Communist Party of India was part of the Indian independence struggle – the great anti-colonial struggle against British colonialism - and it has done tremendous things, both during that time and since. But in the 1960s, there was a split in the world communist movement that mirrored the Sino-Soviet split of that period between China and the Soviet Union. This split affected a number of communist parties around the world, including the Communist Party of India. It was then that a section of the Communist Party of India’s membership left the party and formed the Communist Party of India (Marxist). Those were pretty turbulent times in the world and in India, and the relations between the two parties became quite violent, with one party attacking the other. But since these parties had a common beginning and share a common vision in many ways, over the years they have managed to work out their differences and work very closely together. They are now part of the same electoral coalition and share a very similar political outlook.
PA: What is their current role in the Indian government?
ALBANO: The CPI-M and CPI are the two largest communist parties in India. There are other parties that call themselves communist, but these are the two largest and most active. Together they represent over 1.5 million members, and they currently head three state governments – similar to states in the US. There are 26 states in India, and the Communists lead the government in three of those states – West Bengal, Kerala, and Tripura, where they hold the chief minister position (similar to a governor here in the United States) and are the leading force in those governments. They also did well in the 2004 national elections, with the Left Bloc as they call it (the CPI-M, the CPI and two other left parties) winning around 65 seats in Parliament. They now support the Congress Party-led government, which is a coalition government. The most seats in Parliament were won by the Congress Party, so they chose to support the government – but “from the outside,” as they call it. In other words, they did not want to ministerial position in the national government, but they also did not want the far-right party in Parliament – the Bharatiya Janata Party or BJP – to be able to form a government, so the Left threw its support to the Congress Party and the Congress Party-led government. However, they did not want to be part of the government on the ministerial level, because they knew that then there would be limitations, and they did not want to be in a situation of not being able to deliver sound and helpful programs for the working people and farmers, the oppressed castes, women, etc. in India. So they support the government from the outside.
PA: The main reason for your trip, apart from a brief vacation, was to attend the conventions of these two Communist Parties. What were the main issues the two Communist Parties were talking about at their conventions?
ALBANO: The main issues were the issues of struggle – the mass struggles in India that the two parties are very much a part of. They are both very involved in educating and mobilizing the people, not only their political base, but also their bases in the trade union movement, the women’s movement, the farmer-peasant movement, and the student movement. Domestically, a big part of the two conventions dealt with issues regarding the agricultural crisis that India is now facing. India’s economy, although it is growing rapidly as a modern industrialized economy, is still largely agricultural, and they are experiencing a severe crisis in the agricultural sector, mainly among the smaller farmers. There are still quite a few big landlords, so small tenant farmers make up a huge percentage of the population – and they are saddled with debt. When their crops go bad, they are stuck with huge debts. Just over the past 10 years thousands of these farmers have committed suicide. That is just one part of the agricultural crisis they are facing.
One of the main things they were talking about at the Party congresses was fighting the rising cost of basic foodstuffs – cooking oil, grain, rice, vegetables, etc., and making plans for direct mass action immediately after the congresses. This is all part of the worldwide food crisis that many nations are seeing, including those of us in the United States – with food prices going up and up. This is happening for a number of reasons. One is the big emphasis now on using corn and other foodstuffs as bio-energy, which has created a huge leap in commodity prices. A more fundamental problem than that, however, is having the food we eat placed at the whim of the capitalist market system. That is the more basic question, and one that is causing food prices to go up around the world, in really crisis proportions in a number of countries. We’ve heard about Haiti recently, but this is happening in India, too.
The Communist Parties in India were taking concrete steps. There was a mass action yesterday and today on this issue. Since they have seats in Parliament, they are working on that level too to insure that there is food security for the masses of India’s people. I had already heard that about half of the world’s hungry are in India, and when I was there they had an exposé on Indian television about the number of children who face hunger. So this is a big and growing crisis for India. The Communists were talking about that a lot – and not only about the prices. In India they have a system of public food distribution which has come under attack and dismemberment, like so many public programs around the world that have suffered privatization and, of course, deterioration at the hands of neo-liberal economic policies. India has had to face that too. So they are actively discussing and working on many levels to reinvigorate the public food distribution system, fighting hard against the private interests that have been hoarding food and pushing for privatization, etc. they are doing all they can to save this basic safety net that serves the needs of the people.
PA: What was your sense of the Indian Communist Parties’ view of US involvement in Asia generally?
ALBANO: I’m glad you asked that question, because the other major issue that the two congresses discussed, in terms of India’s foreign policy, was the proposed Indo-US nuclear deal. The Left in India has been successful in holding up the signing of this treaty. They realize that the US imperialist forces – the big corporations and the military – are trying to gain a foothold in India in order to make Indian interests subservient to US imperial interests in the region. Since winning its independence from the British, India has had a long history and a lot of pride in possessing its own, independent foreign policy. It always been a leader in the Nonaligned Movement, which was an important factor during the Cold War and still exists. India’s foreign policy has been subservient to no one. It is an independent foreign policy. They see this nuclear deal as having a lot of strings attached to it. One of them involves their long – and I mean thousands of years - relationship with Iran (formerly Persia). They have always had strong trade relations with Iran, and they currently have a deal with them to build a gas pipeline from Iran to India. But if this nuclear deal with the US goes through, one of the strings attached is that, in exchange for the nuclear energy and technology that the US would provide, they would have to abandon this longstanding pipeline project with Iran. There are many other strings attached as well. Granted India has great energy needs, but the Communists see this deal as not being the way to meet them.
To answer your question more directly, the Indian Communists clearly recognize that US imperialism has a plan for Asia, and that plan is to continue to strengthen US military and corporate domination in the region. The US imperialist interests are facing a big challenge, and that challenge is coming from China, which is itself, like India, a developing country, but also a rapidly growing economic and political power, especially in the Asian region. The US, of course, does not want to see China’s influence increase, so they are attempting to draw India into the US orbit as a kind of a tool to be used against China. I was asked a lot of questions by the Indian media about the nuclear pact. My response was that Indian foreign policy has long had a stabilizing effect in South Asia and the region, and that we just have to look at the last 8 years of the Bush administration’s policies in Iraq and the Middle East to see what a destabilizing factor it has been. I think the Communists are making some very good points about why the Indian people need to be very alarmed at the signing of this deal, as well as about the possibility of making India a junior partner in US imperialist goals in the region of Asia.
PA: Finally, could you talk about some of your experiences in India that were not related to politics, things that really sum up your trip there and give us a feel about what it was like?
ALBANO: India is a vast country of great contradictions. There is so much richness among its people, its culture and history. There is great wealth that is concentrated in very few hands in India, and there is also incredible, grinding poverty that is really hard to compare with the poverty we have here in the United States. Yet, at the same time, the richness of the people and its history and culture is so vast that it would take a lifetime to even scratch the surface of it. India is a very diverse country – I saw that with my own eyes – in terms of religion, ethnicity, and language. I was in two southern Indian states for the Party congresses. South India is made up of four states – Karnataka, Andrha Pradesh, Tamil-Nadu, and Kerala (so now when you go to South Indian restaurants you’ll know where the food hails from!). These states have four very distinct languages, which themselves are very distinct from the languages of the North. The linguistic base in South India is not Indo-European but Dravidian – that’s one of the many things I learned when I was there.
In India you are talking about a very complex and ancient culture. The friendliness of the people – especially the comrades – but the friendliness and interest of the Indian people in general toward the United States and our delegation from the Communist Party, USA was really wonderful. We also got to see a bit about the lives of working people there. We visited a cotton mill and a garment factory, and we visited market places – so we saw how everyday people live their lives. These images will always stay with me.
After the Congresses, I was able to go for a week in Delhi where I had a chance to be just a tourist. I guess the biggest thing for me – and I’m saving the best for last - was that I was able to go to see the Taj Mahal. That was just a spectacular trip. I am sure that when anybody in the United States thinks about India, they think of the Taj Mahal – and it really is a tremendous monument. I was really taken aback, because I never really made the connection until I was there that the Taj Mahal is really one of the highest forms of Islamic architecture and art. It has inlaid stone with the writings of the Koran all around it. I simply didn’t realize the extent of Muslim influence in India – I thought it was much more localized to areas like Andhra Pradesh and Hyderabad in South India, but it is very much an influence in India as a whole.
