As everyone knows, multiple theories have been doing the rounds on who exactly came up with the name INDIA for the current grand Opposition alliance.
Going by speculations, Congress leader Rahul Gandhi and West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee were apparently involved in choosing the name.
'We for India' or 'Victory for India' was the suggestion put forth by late Sitaram Yechury, then CPM general secretary. The name was promptly turned down by other leaders who felt it sounded more like a campaign slogan. Nevertheless, Yechury remained -- till his last breath -- one of the biggest binding forces and a bridge among leaders of every hue within the alliance.
Yet, post-Yechury, the CPM has been taking great pains to distance itself from the INDIA Bloc.
As the CPM heads towards its 24th Party Congress in Madurai from April 2, a slew of questions hangs in the air over the probable path the biggest Communist Party in the country would tread in the future.
The CPM, under interim coordinator Prakash Karat, is already heading towards an ideologically obstinate realm, as opposed to its earlier pragmatic approach.
Just the other day, Karat made it clear that the INDIA Bloc lacks clarity, and coordination. Earlier too, Karat had stated that the INDIA Bloc was meant only for the 2024 Lok Sabha polls.
The ex-CPM general secretary is of the view that the alliance would continue, not 'dependent on what happens on a national level', but on agreements reached on a state-wise basis. There was a clear mention of Kerala and West Bengal - two states, where the CPM has always been in direct conflict with its INDIA partners.
With the West Bengal unit gradually waning within the CPM, it is the Kerala CPM -- led by Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan -- that calls the shots in the party now. The Kerala party, which has always toed the path of hardliner Prakash Karat, as against a more practical Yechury, is all set to have its say once again. Naturally, the Pinarayi-Karat will play the most decisive role in the Madurai Congress.
The shift in approach within the CPM over the INDIA Bloc per se is there for all to see, right from the initial draft of the political resolution for the 24th Congress, presented at the Central Committee meet last November.
The party should stay away from the Congress' economic policies, and should be critical of its compromising stance on Hindutva communal issues, it observed.
While saying that the INDIA Bloc can continue as an Opposition platform, the draft made it amply clear that the CPM should protect its electoral interests in traditional strongholds like Kerala and West Bengal.
The CPM should work on its tactics and come up with a state-specific approach, it said. It was evident that the leadership has taken a more vigilant approach, especially when it comes to sharing joint platforms with the Congress.
"The INDIA Bloc, as a loose platform that seeks to gather secular Opposition parties, mainly for uniting and pooling anti-BJP votes, should continue. Its main focus of work will be obviously Parliament and periodical elections," read the initial draft, which further stressed that the CPM cannot be part of any alliance with the Congress - a position that the party had reiterated at its 22nd Congress in Hyderabad.
However, it doesn't stop there. It went on to elaborate on the political dangers of the INDIA Bloc occupying the Left political space. It stressed on the need to "counter any tendency to substitute the independent role and activities of the party with the INDIA Bloc. We must also be clear about the class character of the main party in the INDIA Bloc - the Congress," said this draft.
It further warned that any blurring of the CPM's distinctive policies and identity will be detrimental to its growth.
The initial draft hadn't spared even ally CPI for its political proximity to the INDIA Bloc. The report, which was highly critical of the CPI's inclination for the INDIA Bloc, rather than for a Left platform, accused the Communist Party of India for standing in the way of Left unity.
"Despite its tall claims, the CPI appears to have prioritized winning LS seats, over building of a broad Left platform," the report pointed out.
It further alleged that the CPI showed no interest in being part of the LDF in Tamil Nadu.
The initial draft, which was subject to thorough discussions and debates within the party forums, was finalized with modifications. The revised and final draft, approved by the Central Committee last January, was ironically surprisingly mild in its critique of the INDIA Bloc.
"The Congress was able to improve its strength in the Lok Sabha from 44 to 100, benefitting because of its allies in the INDIA bloc. It was able to garner Muslim minority support in a substantial manner all over the country. The Congress base per se has not expanded significantly," observed the new draft.
Moreover, the revised draft chose to restrict its mention about the INDIA Bloc to the bare minimum level.
"The Party will cooperate with INDIA bloc parties in Parliament and, on specifically agreed issues, outside Parliament," was the only curt remark regarding CPM's stance on the Opposition platform.
It did however clarify that the CPM will join hands with all secular democratic forces to vehemently oppose all onslaughts against democracy including the use of draconian laws to suppress dissent or subvert the Constitution and the democratic institutions of the state.
The anti-CPI remarks too were dropped in the final draft.
If not Pinarayi, who else?
One of the stories frequently shared by old-timers in the party sheds light on how the CPM once functioned. "Let Chadayan speak” - Chadayan Govindan was the party secretary -- was how Communist stalwart and first Chief Minister of Kerala EMS Namboodiripad –- often chose to respond to journalists who sought his opinion on various issues. Such was the clout enjoyed by a party secretary back then.
Of late however, things have taken an abrupt turn in the party.
The CPM in Kerala has been overshadowed by one individual, Pinarayi Vijayan, who enjoys a Modi-like reputation within the state.
In the backdrop of the party’s persistently poor show in both West Bengal and Tripura, it is the Kerala CPM that has long been calling the shots. And as far as the Kerala unit is concerned, even as Pinarayi remains the unquestionable leader, there's no dearth of discussions within the party on who would succeed the Kannur supremo.
Curiously, the way Pinarayi has been projected as the sole leader -- both in the party as well as the government -- has not gone down well with many leaders. But none dare say it aloud -- either in public or within party forums.
In the run-up to the 24th Kerala party state conference too, there were discussions within the party on strengthening the second-tier leadership in a bid to empower them to the top rungs.
Veteran leader PK Gurudasan publicly said that no exemption ought to be made for Pinarayi, the next time around. He cited a few names, including that of state industries minister P Rajeeve, finance minister KN Balagopal and excise minister MB Rajesh, who could succeed Pinarayi.
However, none of the current active leaders dare propose such a change themselves.
Back when Kodiyeri Balakrishnan was alive, discussions on Pinarayi's successor would naturally point to just one person – Kodiyeri himself, the undisputed second-in-command, who would, someday, by default, occupy the chair vacated by the 'mundu-clad Modi'.
But Kodiyeri's sudden demise created a vacuum in leadership that is felt even today.
Incumbent secretary MV Govindan is yet to prove his mettle as a worthy successor. What worked in favour of Govindan is undoubtedly the TINA (There Is No Alternative) factor. Had it not been for the demise of Kodiyeri, he would have ended up as a mere ideological face or just another minister in the Pinarayi cabinet.
"In fact there have been some rumours within party circles that the secretary would be replaced. Govindan took over the reins of the party, solely due to an unexpected turn of events. He's yet to garner wholehearted acceptance among both the leaders and cadres. His ideological approach doesn’t help either. At one point, there were talks of P Rajeeve - considered to be an efficient leader - replacing Govindan as party chief," shared a CPM leader from the state capital.
The recently concluded state conference however chose to go with MV Govindan at the helm, for one more term.
Pinarayi, who enjoys strong backing from Prakash Karat, has been the CPM's face in Kerala for about three decades, ever since he took over as state secretary, following the demise of Chadayan Govindan in 1998. Curiously, it was his soon-to-be bête-noir V.S. Achuthanandan who propelled him to the top. Since then, he has single-handedly led the party – as state secretary from 1998 to 2015 – and later, as the Chief Minister from 2016.
The Kerala CPM witnessed the most bitterly fought factional feud in its history during the initial days of Pinarayi’s secretaryship.
VS vs Pinarayi began with the 2002 Kannur conference, and continued through the 2005 Malappuram conference. The conflict climaxed at the 2015 Alappuzha conference, where VS walked out, after outgoing secretary Pinarayi termed him a renegade with an anti-party mindset.
All through the fierce feuding, VS enjoyed the strong backing of Sitaram Yechury, while the official Kerala unit stood by the Pinarayi-Karat duo. Now with Yechury's demise, and VS incapacitated due to extreme old age, factional fights are definitely a thing of the past. While this does sound good on paper, one can no longer ignore the flipside -– less debates, few dissenting voices and a sore lack of diverse opinions.
In short, the 24th Party Congress in Madurai seems all poised to be a less eventful chapter –- compared to the previous editions -- in party history. Minus the idle curiosity over who would actually succeed Yechury as the party general secretary, and who all would make it to the Politburo, the Madurai Congress is expected to toe all the conventional lines -- a paradoxical affair indeed!
