Towards

Socialism

60 Years of Independence

After 1990, due to introduction of market economy reforms in India, capitalists have had free hands to exploit and loot economic benefits. Even the foreign capitalists also got free access to Indian market to enjoy all sorts of benefits. During the past 15 years Agriculture has plunged into deepest crisis - During this 15 years period, Agriculture’s contribution to average national production came down from 31.3 percent to 19.6. It does not mean of course that the number of people engaged in Agriculture has come down and they are getting employment opportunities in Industry or elsewhere. The number of people engaged in agriculture came down from 64.8 percent in 1991 to 58.40 percent in 2001. Both the Central and the State Government (West Bengal) have gradually reduced their investment in Agriculture during this period, the planned and unplanned expenditure of the states in 1991-92 was 8.2 percent of the total expenditure, and that reached to 4.64 percent in 2005-06. Besides this, from 1995 the import tax on agriculture produce was withdrawn at the direction of the W.T.O. Whereas in the case of export, the minimum price was not fixed. Even the quantitative restriction on imports was completely abolished. As a consequence, pressure on domestic agricultural production and on small and medium industries’ consumer goods production was tremendously increased. Foreign and domestic industrialists were allowed to enjoy full tax exemption on agriculture production, processing and marketing. The cost of agricultural production is also steadily increasing. On the other hand, farmers could never get remunerative prices for their agricultural produce. Cotton producers of Maharashtra have to spend Rs. 2216 for every quintal, but the government has declared its supporting price as Rs. 1960.50 per quintal. The government is gradually discarding its programme of procurement of agricultural produce and leaving that fully to the market traders. The domestic farmers are paid @ Rs. 8.50 per quintal of wheat whereas the farmers of foreign countries are paid @ Rs. 12.00 per quintal. The statistics show that the average annual income of a peasant family in India is Rs. 25,380, whereas their average annual expenditure is Rs. 33,240 per family. The Expenditure for agricultural production is Rs. 8791 per family, whereas the income is Rs. 11628 per family (45 percent of total income). It means, a peasant family earns only Rs. 2837 from agriculture. Can any one run his family with this meager income? Can he meet the expenses for his agricultural production? Consequently, the peasants’ burden of debt is always increasing, From the year 1991-92 to 2003 the peasants’ debt has increased from 25.9 percent to 48.6 percent.

The net impact of reforms on agriculture and rural life is therefore ---- suicides. The number of suicides by this time has crossed the mark of one lakh. Peasants are losing their land, the number of agricultural workers is increasing. The people of the soil are being ousted from their rights to water, land and jungle. In India the supply of food per head was 175 Kg. in 1990 which is now reduced to 152 Kg. a reduction of 23 Kg. The 30 percent of the country’s poor families are provided with 1700 kilo calory food, whereas the international standards is 2100 kilo calory The prices of food articles are beyond the reach of the people. The common people used to depend so long on the government’s procurement of food and the public Distribution System. But the government is now withdrawing from the responsibility of food supply.

The industrialists of our country are now not taking interest in setting up new industries or for manufacturing industrial products. They are exporting capital outside mainly for collaboration and taking over. Within the country, they are devoting to service and infrastructural development business, mainly depending on foreign capital and technology. This can capital and technology. All these industrialists are driving agricultural production towards agricultural business, hotel business and tourism business. Entry of big industrialist’s into retail business and agriculture is once more going to create a big crisis in India.

As per the prescription of the WTO, the country’s border is made open. All barriers including customs duty are removed. But all these have not increased the rate of export. From 1969-70 to 1990-1991, the rate of export has increased 11.85 percent. From 1990-91 to 2003-2004 it has increased 11.7 percent. In world-trade, the share of developing countries is 42.4 percent, while that of India is 0.8 percent. And that of China is 7.2 percent.

In the name of export-promotion, various concessions and facilities have been offered through “SEZ 2005” Act. The SEZ-owners will receive tax – exemptions amounting to Rs. 23475 crores per year. From the record of our export performance it will be evident how far the SEZ is successful. In 2003-04 the export quantum of the SEZ area is 0.047 percent of total export. In actual figure it is Rs. 13853.58 crore. In 2004-05, the income from exports of 11 SEZs is Rs. 18309 crore (0.05 percent of total income). Employment generation is one lakh. On the other hand, exports of small scale industries are 35 percent of total export and that have generated employment for 2 crores of people as per estimate of 2002-03). But the government has no interest to offer any concessional facilities to these small scale industries. Small and Medium Enterprise cluster (SMEC) has contributed 60 percent of industrial products export. Still the Union government’s industrial policy is for big capital. Profit is the main object of private capital. It has no commitment for the society not for the employment oriented industrialization. If the union government has any such commitments, its industrial policy should not have gone against the small scale industry which contributes 40 percent of total industrial production and 35 percent of total export and which constitute 80 percent of industrial work-force.

Presently, 2.6 crores of people of India are hungry and deprived. 40 percent of world’s under weight children live in India. Its 75 percent children upto 5 year’s age are anoemic, 57 percent children have deficiency in vitamin ‘A’. 30 percent of new born babies are of 2.5 kg. weight. As per the report of the UNDP, India’s rank is 126^th among 177 nations. In such a situation the All India Forward Bloc will launch country-wide movement to demand guarantee of ‘Food for all’. It is a matter of shame that 26 crores of our population is deprived of food. It can not be tolerated that peasants will commit suicide and the small farmers will leave their land due to non-availability of any employment scope in villages. If the 86 percent small farmers can not survive, the country will not survive. Industrialisation or urbanization only remains merely as a dream. Hence the party must raise powerful slogan – ‘Save the agriculture, save the country’. Unorganised workers of cities and villages, agricultural workers and small farmers constitute the strongest force in our struggle for changing the society. The main task is to inspire the revolutionary spirit of these people.

[Extracts from the author’s original Bengali article published in ‘Lokmat’ dt. 25 June-2007, Translated by B.M.)

Editorial

A Bunch of Promises, with

no Commitment to fulfill

In the customary style, on the 60th Independence Day, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh addressed the nation and offered them a bunch of promises for their solace and comfort. After 60 years of independence, Prime Minister now aspires to create an educated India, with promises of 6000 new high quality schools ----- one in every Block ----- and colleges in 370 districts, along with five Indian Institutes of Science Education, eight Indian Institutes of Technology, seven Indian Institutes of Management and 20 Indian Institutes of Information Technology. The P.M. thus aims to make India a nation of educated, skilled and creative people. But he conveniently forgets to implement the long-cherished need of universal free primary education. So long whatever he has done in this respect, he has taken the course of levying "education cess" twice, and even with no appreciable success. It may not be difficult to assess the reason for his now shifting to the area of high quality and higher education. As the big Corporate houses are now growing speedily with accumulation of enormous wealth and profits under the unprecedented patronage of the Government, they obviously now need more and more educated and skilled hands to run their business. To feed and satisfy their needs, the Government is now devoting its energy and resources to create a sophisticated group of educated elite people. Who is there now to feel for the millions of poor little sons and daughters of the aam admi. Rajeev Gandhi once tried to build up a limited group of enlightened schools ("Navodaya Vidyalaya"), now it's the turn of Manmohan Singh.

But interestingly, Manmohan Singh is pleading simultaneously for an "inclusive growth" of the society after a long spell of Congress-raj for many decades. What a splendid confession now the PM is making on the 60th anniversary of independence. He states ------ "Our economy is now growing at historically unprecedented rates. However, we can not become a nation with islands of high growth and vast areas untouched by development, where the benefits of growth accrue only to a few. This is good neither for our society nor for our polity." This is exactly what we have been saying during the last two decades. But the Government did not care to listen to us. Now a prime leader of the government and the Congress party cannot justifiably make such candid submissions, as it is he or they who have been responsible for all such uneven and exclusive growth. Since 1992, long 15 years ago, when they have started imposing on the Indian people. Economic Reforms, this un-inclusive growth have started, creating a handful of privileged class and depriving a vast majority of poor people. Hence, the responsibility is theirs, the responsibility is of the entire Congress regime during the post-independence period, responsibility is of their faulty planning and their pro-rich approach. The onus, therefore, lies on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to first publicly admit the faults of their planning and their wrong approach to development. Then, and only then, he can make such confessions and swear to make a new beginning with a new pro-people approach. Otherwise, all such high sounding promises and admission of failures to make an inclusive society from the ramparts of the Red Fort will remain merely as a speech, and not any guide to action.

Kamal Guha Passes Away

Com. Kamal Guha, Chairman of All India Forward Bloc, Bengal Committee and a member of the Central Committee passed away on 6th August 2007 at Coochbehar town, North Bengal. He was 79 and left behind two daughters and only son, who is also a leading member of the party.

Better known as a powerful outspoken leader of the masses, Kamal Guha started his political career right from his school day, being inspired by the revolutionary ideals of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose. Through relentless struggle all his life he strongly built up the party and other mass fronts in his district and the state and in the country as a whole. He had a long record of heroic struggle for inclusion of the native state of Coochbehar in the Indian Union, Border movement from Berubari to Teenbigha, long drawn struggle for the cause of the poor jute farmers and integrated development of the North Bengal. He had a keen sense of correctly identifying the grievances and causes of misery of the people and he had also an exemplary capability to build up mass movements for addressing those grievances.

Com. Kamal Guha was a minister in the Left Front government of West Bengal for more than 20 years. He was the minister of Agriculture, Public Health Department, Community Development, Rural Water Supply in different times. He was member of Legislative Assembly, West Bengal from 1962 to 2006, excepting 1971. He was elected uninterruptedly from Dinhata Constituency of North Bengal. He was the chief whip of the Left Front in 1967. He refrained from contesting on health ground in 2006 election. As a minister of Agriculture, his vision and planning helped the state to reach a commendable position in the production of rice, jute, vegetable, etc.

He was a leader of the people and always fought for the rights of the toiling mass. He was a fighter, fire brand orator and a good organizer. He was an ardent follower of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose and dedicated his whole life to propagate the ideals of Netaji Subhas.

The party expresses its deepest condolence on the death of Com. Kamal Guha. His demise is a great loss not only for the party and the people of West Bengal, but also for the Left movement of the country.

Numerous meeting, were held throughout the state to condole his death. The party centrally organized the condolence meeting presided over by Sankar Dutta, Deputy Chairman, at Mahajati Sadan, Kolkata on 14 August 2007. The speaker in the meeting included Asok Ghosh, General Secretary, AIFB State Committee, Budhadeb Bhattacharya, Chief Minister, Biman Bose, Chairman of the Left Front, and Nanda Bhattacharya (CPI), Debabrata Bandopadhyay (RSP), Probodh Sinha (DSP), Pratim Chatterjee (FB-M), Moni Pal (Socialist Party), Mihir Byne (RCPI), G Devarajan, Gobinda Roy and Hafiz Alam Sairani of Forward Bloc, and others.

Among many other mass condolence meetings, the notable one was the largely attended meeting at Dinhata, his home constituency and at Rabindra Bhawan, Coochbehar, addressed by Debabrata Biswas (AIFB), Shyamal Chowdhury (Congress), and other leading Left Front leaders of the district.

The Central Committee of the AIFB and the people of various states of the country paid their respectful homage to their beloved leader Com. Kamal Guha to draw inspiration from his struggle-full life.

Accept Netaji Probe Report, AIFB Tells PM

The Members of Parliament of All India Forward Bloc under the leadership its General Secretary Debabrata Biswas met Dr. Manmohan Singh, Prime Minister of India and asked him to accept the Netaji Enquiry Commission Report.

The Netaji Enquiry Commission Report, emphatically proved with evidence that Netaji did not die in the alleged plane crash on 18th August, 1945.But the government without showing any valid reason, rejected the report and closed the chapter.

The AIFB delegation very categerically asked to the Prime Minister, why the government of India is ignoring Netaji and not accepting the report. What is the political reason behind this ignorance. Debabrata Biswas told that, the AIFB while decided to support the UPA government from outside alongwith other left parties, specifically informed that the AIFB will not compromise on this matter. The government failed to declare Andaman & Nicobar island as 'Shahid' and 'Swaraj' as named by Netaji. The DAVP of I & B ministry did not spent a single pie for propagating the ideals of Netaji even on 23rd January, the birth day of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose during the last three years. The Prime Minister has given a patient hearing and promised to consider the matter seriosly.

Apart from Debabrata Biswas, other MPs of AIFB viz, Subrata Bose, Dr. Barun Mukherjee, Hiten Barman and Narhari Mahato were the members of the delegation.

The full text of the letter is as follows :

Dear Dr. Manmohan Singhji,

We would like to apprise you once more about our wounded feelings and grievances as well regarding the manner in which the UPA Government has treated the Report of the Justice Mukherjee Commission of Inquiry on the alleged disappearance of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose.

As you are aware, this Report was submitted to the Govt. of India on 8th November 2005 and subsequently it was tabled before each House of Parliament on 17th May'06. But most unfortunately, the Report was tabled with a brief cryptic ‘Action Taken Report’ saying that the Government were not in agreement with the findings of the Commission of Inquiry, without assigning any reason for arriving at such a decision.

After a long and strenuous persuasion we could at last include it in the agenda for discussion in both Houses (on 2nd & 3rd August'06 in the Lok Sabha and on 24th August'06 in the Rajya Sabha), wherein members of various political parties actively participated and each of them severely criticised the Government’s aforesaid decision. In fact, the Honourable Members voiced the countrywide people’s protest and resentment about the Government.’s attitude and action in the matter.

The Hon’ble Home Minister’s replies in both Houses were also very unsatisfactory, unconvincing and evasive, without having any logic based on facts. His outright rejection of the Hon’ble Members’ submission in the House have also created adverse reaction among the people.

Accordingly, hundreds of public meetings were held in different parts of the country to voice their protests against the Government’s outright rejection of Mukherjee Commission report. Even on 12 July,06 mass deputations were held in various state capitals to submit Memorandum, addressed to the President of India, to the respective Governors.

It will be wrong to assume that the public protests will eventually die down in course of time. We, on behalf of the All India Forward Bloc, would like to remind you that the people of India are not ready to accept such a stand of the Government of India in respect of their most respectful beloved leader Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose. All that has been done so far on behalf of the Government appears to be pre-planned and motivated. Hence their cryptic Action Taken Report can not be accepted.

We reiterate our demand that the Government of India must immediately :

i) Accept the findings of the Mukjerjee Commission of Inquiry,

ii) Withdraw its ‘Action Taken Report’, and

iii) Accept the fact that Netaji did not die in the alleged plane-crash at Taiwan on 18 August 1945, which didn’t occur at all and the so-called ashes kept at the Renkoji Temple of Japan were not of Netaji.

It is our commitment to the people that we will continue our relentless fight, with renewed programmes, till the aforesaid demands are fulfilled.

It is unfortunate that our party has been compelled to come in confrontation with the UPA Government on such a sensitive and vital issue, although as a partner of the Left Front we have been continuing our support from outside to the UPA Government.

We hope, you would personally take the lead to apply your judicious mind on the issue and accept the justifiability of our demands.

With regards,

Yours sincerely,

Sd./ Debabrata Biswas, M.P. (Rajya Sabha), Subrata Bose, M.P. (Lok Sabha), Dr. Barun Mukherjee, M.P. (Rajya Sabha), Hiten Barman M.P. (Lok Sabha), Narhari Mahato, M.P. (Lok Sabha)

Ugly face of Communalism : Attack on Art and Culture

Dr. Barun Mukherjee

Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, during the days of freedom struggle, repeatedly warned his countrymen against the two sinister menace-----imperialism and communalism. These two menance, Netaji asserted, caused tremendous damage to India. While the British imperialism ruled and exploited our country, communalism - as created, fomented and nursed by the Britishers - was one of their dirty weapons, which kept the people of India divided and weak as a consequence of their infighting. Eventually the right reactionary vested interest groups, in collusion with the British rulers, exploited communalism and divided the country to effect transfer of power. But most tragically, even after independence the evil forces of communalism are still active in India and continue to cause, through sporadic outbursts of communal riots, loss of many innocent lives of both the communities and damage the basic interest of the Indian people and the country as a whole.

Not only causing riots, communalism has many ugly faces which have their naked exposure through many incidents of attack on art and culture even.

One such recent incident took place on May 9, 2007 at the reputed Maharaja' Sayajirao (M.S.) University at Baroda in Vadodara (Gujrat), where a young student artist Chandramohan was attacked and beaten by Hindu communal forces of VHP on the grounds that his work of art hurt the religious sentiments of two communitis through vulgar depictions of gods and goddesses. The VHP activities were led by a local BJP leader, Niraj Jain, who stormed into the final year student's exhibition at M.S. University's Faculty of Fine Arts. To make the situation worse, the police arrested the young artist. When acting Fine Arts Dean Shivaji K. Panikkar attempted to intervene, the police threatened to arrest him also. Following nation ----- wide protests, Chandramohan was released several days later on bail. Most regrettably, the Vice Chancellor Manoj Soni refused to extend any support to Chandramohan. Instead, Soni sided with Niraj Jain and asked Chandramohan and Panikkar to apologise. Both refused. Panikkar was, therefore, subsequently issued a suspension notice, All these show the ugly faces of communalism and fanatic Hindutva which are out to attack the freedom of expression and miserably expose how academic and cultural freedom is in peril. Artists, painters and cultural activists throughout the country condemned this sort of high handed moral policing.

Just before this incident in Vadodara the renowned artist of our country, M.F. Hussain has been targeted repeatedly by communal groups for his alleged irreverence to Hindu religion. Hussain's paintings like 'Bharat Mata' in which India is represented as a nude woman, infuriated fanatic Hindus who in retaliation attacked the artist and his paintings. Since early 1990s, Hussain has been targeted for painting Hindu deities. In 1996, an exhibition of his painting in Ahmedabad was vandalised by VHP activists. In 1998, Bajarang Dal members attacked his house on charges that his painting showing nude Sita has hurt their religions sentiment. In last May, Hussain’s art work was also targeted on similar charges, which exhibit the fanatists' crude intolerance and communal passion. As a result of such repeated attacks, the veteran 92-years old artist now rarely stay in Mumbai; he spends most of his time in Dubai or London.

In Rajasthan also, similar incident of communal assault has happened in last April-May when a Christian Paster has been attacked in Jaipur. Walter Masih and his family have been targeted by a group of Vishwa Hindu Parisad (VHP) members, led by a city functionary of VHP Virendra Singh Ravana. This is also a case of religious intolerance against Christian prayers.

A recent incident at Hyderabad also shows an ugly scene of religious intolerance and attack by Muslim fanatics on works of literature. Bangladeshi author-in-exile Taslima Nasrin has been roughed up in the press club of Hyderabad on the last 9th August, 2007 by some legislators of the Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (MIM). It is a fact that this controversial well known Bengali author was also critised several times even before for some of her novels which had depicted oppressive treatment of Hindus by Muslim in Bangladesh. In continuation of that, Muslims fundamentalists attacked Taslima again when she visited Hyderabad Press Club to launch the translated version of her works at a press conference. As she had just completed her engagement about 20 MIM activists, led by MLA Syed Ahmed Pasha Qadri, Afsar Khan and Moazzam Khan, forced their entry into the conference Hall and hurled abuses against her and even began throwing books, bouquets, chairs, etc. The Muslim fundamentalists group wanted to physically assault her, but she narrowly escaped due to intervention of some journalists.

The matter went further during the next couple of days, when the state government announced their intention to take legal action against the attackers, but at the same time charged the author for hurting religious sentiment of the people. We hope, the law will take its own course. But this attack of the fundamentalists against the author must be severely condemned for their communal and extremist attitude and actions. Large section of academics of the country condemned this attack against democracy and freedom of expression.

It is a matter of concern that both Hindu and Muslim fundamentalists are thus occasionally bursting out against the art and culture, writings and paintings basically from a heinous standpoint of communalism These are the ugly faces of communalism. We must go a long way to raise our united voice against all sorts of communalism in the country.

Left Parties Statement On the Indo-US Bilateral nuclear Cooperation Agreement

No to 123 Agreement

The Left parties have consistently held that the nuclear cooperation agreement should not be seen in isolation from the overall strategic tie up with the United States. The nuclear cooperation deal is an integral part of the July 2005 joint statement, which has political, economic and strategic aspects. It is also closely linked to the June 2005 military framework agreement signed with the United States.

It is, therefore, not possible to view the next of the bilateral "123" agreement negotiated with the United States as a separate and compartmentalized entity without considering its implications for India's independent foreign policy, strategic autonomy and the repercussions of the US quest to make India its reliable ally in Asia. Following from the July 2005 joint statement, steps have been taken to entangle India into a complex web of political, economic and military relationships as part of the "strategic partnership". The talk of the two democracies working together on a global scale, the growing influence of US-India forums on economics and commerce and the increasing military collaboration seen through the negotiations for the Logistics Support Agreement, the steadily escalating joint exercises and the inevitable demand that India purchase expensive weaponary from the United States.

Even now, the briefing by the US spokesman on the bilateral nuclear agreement emphasizes the cooperation India extended in efforts to isolate Iran by voting twice against it in the IAEA and the clear expectation that it will continue to extend this "cooperation".

Such an expectation is in line with the Hyde Act provisions, which looms in the background. The bilateral agreement cannot be seen outside the context of the Hyde Act. However much the two sides have sought by skillful drafting to avoid the implications of the Hyde Act, it is a "national law" which is there, at present, and will be there, in the future. The agreement which binds India into clauses of perpetuity and which legitimizes the US abiding by its "national laws" is something which should be seen objectively for its serious implications.

Serious concern had been expressed by the Left Parties about various conditions inserted into the Hyde Act passed by the US Congress. A number of them pertain to areas outside nuclear co-operation and are attempts to coerce India to accept the strategic goals of the United States. These issues are:

l Annual certification and reporting to the US Congress by the President on a variety of foreign policy issues such as India's foreign policy being "congruent to that of the United States" and more specifically India joining US efforts in isolating and even sanctioning Iran [Section 104g(2) E(i)]

l Indian participation and formal declaration of support for the US' highly controversial Proliferation Security Initiative including the illegal policy of interdiction of vessels in international water [Section 104g(2)K]

l India conforming to various bilateral/multilateral agreements to which India is not currently a signatory such as the US' Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), the Australia Group etc. [Section 104c E,F,G]

All of these are a part of the Hyde Act. The 123 Agreement refers only to the narrow question of supply of nuclear materials and co-operation on nuclear matters. The provisions of the Hyde Act are far wider than the 123 agreement and could be used to terminate the 123 agreement not only in the eventuality of a nuclear test but also for India not conforming to the US foreign policy. The termination clause is wide ranging and does not limit itself to only violation of the agreement as a basis for cessation or termination of the contract. Therefore, these extraneous provisions of the Hyde Act could be used in the future to terminate the 123 agreement. In such an eventuality, India would be back to complete nuclear isolation, while accepting IAEA safeguards in perpetuity. Therefore, the argument that provisions of the Hyde Act do not matter and only 123 clauses do, are misplaced.

The Left parties have well known views against nuclear testing for weaponisation, but that does not mean acceptance of any US imposed curbs on India's sovereign right to exercise that choice. The direction in the Hyde Act with regard to the Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT) is unacceptable.

An important aspect of the Indo-US nuclear cooperation is the relegation of India's traditional commitment to universal nuclear disarmament. By getting accommodated in a US led unequal global nuclear order, India's leading role in advocating nuclear disarmament as a major country of the non aligned community is being given the go by.

While the 123 Agreement is being presented as a victory for India's positions and conforming to the Prime Minister's assurances in the Parliament, we find that there are a number of issues on which it falls short of what the Prime Minister had assured the Parliament. While the Indian commitments are binding and in perpetuity, some of the commitments that the US has made are either quite ambiguous or are ones that can be terminated at a future date.

Under the terms set by the Hyde Act, it was clear that one of the key assurances given by Prime Minister to Parliament on August 12, 2006 - that Indo-US nuclear co-operation would cover the entire nuclear fuel cycle - would be violated. The proposed 123 agreement while superficially using the original wording of the Joint Statement of 2005, "full civilian nuclear co-operation", denies co-operation or access in any form whatsoever to fuel enrichment of intent in the agreement that a suitable amendment to enable this access may be considered in the future has little or no operative value.

Further, this denial (made explicit in Art 5.2 of the proposed agreement) also extends to transfers of dual-use items that could be used in enrichment, reprocessing or heavy water production facilities, again a stipulation of the Hyde Act. Under these terms, a wide range of sanctions on a host of technologies would continue, falling well short of "full civilian nuclear co-operation".

It is also important to recognize that the fast breeder reactors under this agreement would be treated as a part of the fuel cycle and any technology required for this would also come under the dual use technology sanctions. This would be true even if future fast breeder reactors were put in the civilian sector and under safeguards. Thus, India's attempt to build a three-phase self-reliant nuclear power programme powered ultimately by thorium would have to be developed under conditions of isolation and existing technology sanctions.

It might be noted that dual-use technologies pertain to a wide variety of items, which are used well beyond the nuclear sector and by this clause the US has effectively armed itself with a level for imposing sanctions on a range of Indian activities. Even in the new facilities built for reprocessing the spent fuel under safeguards, the onerous technological sanctions implied by the "dual-use" label will apply. This is certainly a major departure from what the Prime Minister had assured the House that this deal recognizes India as an advanced nuclear power and will allow access to full civilian technologies.

Another key assurance that had been given by the Prime Minister was that India would accept safeguards in perpetuity only in exchange for the guarantee of uninterrupted fuel supply. Apply the acceptance on India's part of safeguards in perpetuity has been spelt out, the linkage of such safeguards with fuel supply in perpetuity remains unclear. The assurance that the United States would enable India to build a strategic fuel reserve to guard against disruption of supplies for a duration covering the lifetime of the nuclear reactors in operation appears to have been accepted in the agreement. The agreement also assures that in the event of termination of co-operation with the United States, compensation would be paid for the return of nuclear materials and related equipment. This will be small comfort for the damage.

However, whether the fuel supply will continue even after cessation or termination of the agreement depends solely on the US Congress. The Hyde Act explicitly states that The US will work with other Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) countries to stop all fuel and other supplies to India if the agreement is terminated under US laws. Since this agreement explicitly gives the domestic laws the over-riding power, it appears that fuel supply from the US will not only case in cease the US decides to terminate the Agreement but they are also required under the Hyde Act to work with Nuclear Supplies Grops (NSG) to bar all future supplies. The clause 5.2 on disruptioni of supplies therefore seems to be limited to "market failures" and not to cover a disruption that takes place under the clause of the Hyde Act. In such an eventuality, the US will have to pay compensation to India but all future fuel supplies would stop. Therefore, the 123 agreement represents the acceptance of IAEA safeguard in perpetuity for uncertain fuel supplies and continuing nuclear isolation with respect to a substantial amount of technological know-how.

It is clear that the UPA government looks forward to an agreement with the NSG that would be more wide-ranging than the 123 agreement allowing for access to enrichment and reprocessing technologies, support for building a strategic reserve and provision of nuclear fuel in case of disruption of U.S. supplies or termination or cessation of the 123 agreement. In the likely event that the NSG does not oblize, the terms of the 123 agreement would impact even more negatively than they appear now. The same consideration applies to any agreement that would be made with the IAEA.

The Prime Minister assured the Parliament that all steps would be taken by India reciprocally with steps by the US. The Agreement ties India into long-term virtually irreversible changes in its nuclear institutional structures and arrangements. It is crucial to ensure that India is fully satisfied on all aspects of the agreement as also other strategic an foreign policy concerns before it actually implements its separation plan and placing of its civilian facilities under permanent IAEA safeguards. Not only the provisions of the Agreement but also the sequencing of actions is therefore of vital importance.

The flawed nuclear cooperation agreement cannot be justified on the debatable basis of augmenting our energy resources, or achieving energy security. The motivation for the US side is commercial gains which will accrue for its corporates running into billions of dollars.

The bilateral nuclear agreement must be seen as a crucial step to lock in India into the US global strategic designs. Alongside negotiations for the nuclear accord, steps have been taken for closer military collaboration. The Access and Cross Servicing Agreement, otherwise known as the Logistics Support Agreement is being pushed ahead as provided for in the Defence Framework Agreement. This would lead to regular port calls by US naval ships in Indian ports for fueling, maintenance and repairs. The regular joint naval exercises have now been widened to include Indian in the trilateral security cooperation which exists between the US, Japan and Australia. The September joint naval exercises in the Bay of Bengal are a major step in this direction. The United States is exerting pressure on India to buy a whole range of weaponary such as fighter planes, helicopters, radars and artillery involving multi-billion dollar contracts. The aim is to ensure "inter-operability" of the two armed forces.

The Left parties had earlier cautioned the government not to accept nuclear cooperation with United States on terms that compromises its independent foreign policy and its sovereign rights for developing a self-reliant nuclear programme. It had asked the UPA government to desist from proceeding with the negotiations for the 123 agreement till the inimical provisions of the Hyde Act are cleared out of the way.

The Left parties, after a careful assessment of the text of the 123 agreement and studying it in the context of the burgeoning strategic alliance with the United States, are unable to accept the agreement. The Left calls upon the government not to proceed further with the operationalising of the agreement. There has to be review of the strategic aspects of Indo-US relations in parliament. The Left parties will press for a Constitutional amendment for bringing international treaties and certain bilateral agreement for approval in parliament.

[The statement was signed by Com. Prakash Karat (CPI (M)), Com. A.B. Bardhan (CPI), Com. Abani Roy (RSP) and Com. G. Devarajan (All India Forward Bloc]

Left Parties Meeting

Government should not proceed with 123 agreement

The leaders of the Left parties met on August 20, 2007 at New Delhi. They discussed the political situation prevailing since the Indo-US bilateral nuclear cooperation agreement. They have issued the following statement.

1. The Left parties reiterate their stand taken on August 7, 2007 that in view of the widespread opposition to the agreement and the fact that a majority in Parliament is against it, the government should not proceed further with the agreement.

2. The Left parties wish to state that this would require not taking the next step of negotiations for the safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency.

3. The Left parties can understand the setting up of a committee or any other mechanism which can go into the objections regarding the agreement and evaluating the implications of the Hyde Act for the nuclear cooperation deal. But this can follow only when the next step at the IAEA is not taken.

4. The Left parties appeal to all the parties in the UPA to see the reasonableness of the stand taken which is fully in the spirit of our parliamentary democracy and the government's commitment to the country's welfare. The Left parties await the response of the congress leadership and the UPA to their proposal.

[The meeting was attended by Com. Prakash Karat, Sitaram Yetchuri, S. Ramachandran Pillai (CPI(M)), Com. A.B. Bardhan, Com. D. Raja (CPI), Com. Debabrata Biswas, Com. G. Devarajan (All India Forward Bloc) and Com. Abani Roy (RSP)]

Intensify Campaign Against Imperialism

As you all are aware that the whole nation is now discussing the issue of Indo-US nuclear agreement (123 agreement). The Left parties have taken a strong position that we cannot accept this agreement and asked the government of India not to proceed further with the agreement. We consider that this agreement cannot be treated merely as an agreement for civil nuclear cooperation. It will strangulate the whole nuclear Research and Development programme of our country. Though it is termed as an energy agreement but it will adversely affect our economy, agriculture, military freedom and sovereignty. In fact the agreement is not ensuring the energy security. It is calculated that this agreement may contribute 10000 MW of power in the year 2015, for which the country has to invest a huge some of money. In order to invest such huge amount, the government has to borrow externally. Therefore, it is calculated that the nuclear energy will be costlier than other source of energy. Moreover, this model of energy production will be disastrous to the ecology and environment. But the information from the government side indicates that the government will move further with the agreement and will start discussion with International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Nuclear Supply Group. Meanwhile the Prime Minister and the External Affairs Minister made statements in the parliament without mentioning the negative impact of the Hyde Act passed by USA. In this circumstance, the Left parties have decided to stick to its earlier stand and asked the government to consider the sense of the house and not to go ahead with the agreement. If the government ignores the warning of the Left parties, we will be compelled to take more stringent action against the government including withdrawal of our support.

We have to intensify our campaign against imperialism. On the basis of the 123 agreement and the current political situation, we have to strengthen our anti-imperialist campaign. Therefore, you are requested to contact the leader of the Left parties in your state to organize joint campaign against the 123 agreement and the UPA government’s inclination for partnership with the US.

Oppose the Joint Naval Exercise –

The Left parties have decided to express our strong opposition to the joint naval exercise between India, USA, Australia, Japan and Singapore to be held in the Bay of Bengal from September 4th to 9th 2007. We will oppose any move of the government to make India as a strategic partner of America and to serve its goals in the willing sphere. In order to mobilize the people and develop a national protest movement against the naval exercises and the military collaboration with the United States, the Left parties have decided to conduct two Jathas:

1. From Kolkata to Vizag (Visakhapatnam)

2. From Chennai to Vizag (Visakhapatnam)

Both these Jathas will start on 4th evening and will culminate at Vizag in Andhra Pradesh on 8th morning. Big rallies will take place in Chennai, Kolkata and Vizag. On 4th September, nation wide protest rallies and meeting will take place. Central Leaders of the Left parties will lead the Jathas.

Therefore, you are requested to contact other leaders of other Left parties or your state to plan the action programme and implement the circular immediately.

Netaji Subhas Foundation Holds AGM

Annual General Meeting of member of Netaji Subhas Foundation was held at Kolkata on 18th August 2007. Shri Asok Ghosh, President of the Foundation, presided over the meeting.

While placing the Annual report for the year 2006-07, Shri Subrata Bose, treasurer apprised the members that the Foundation was given the possession of the land allotted to it by the West Bengal Government at Salt Lake City, Kolkata on 17th July 2007. Shri Asok Ghosh, president, appealed to all members to contribute generously to the Foundation's Building Fund and also to raise donations from their relations and friends so that the Foundation can set up an ideal centre of research on Netaji's life, work, ideas and ideals.

Members raised queries on the question of Government of India's rejection of the Report of Justice Mukherjee Commission of Inquiry on Netaji's disappearance immediately after the end of the second world war. Dr. Barun Mukherjee, Vice President, informed the members that all the AIFB members of Parliament met the Prime Minister of India on 10th August, 2007 under the leadership of Shri Debabrata Biswas, Secretary Geneal of the Foundation and sumitted a memorandum to him reiterating the demand that the Government of India withdraw their Action Taken Report and accept the Report of the Commission which came to the conclusion that Netaji did not die in the air crash in Taiwan on 18th August 1945 as alleged. Future course of action on this issue will be decided after waiting for a reasonable period for Prime Minister's reaction.

100th Year of Martyrdom of Khudiram

All India Student Bloc observed in a befitting way the 100th year of Martyrdom of Shahid Khudiram who was executed by hanging on 11th August 1908 at Muzaffarpur Jail (Bihar). A group of 70 students ---members of AISB started from Kolkata and reached Mashibari (Midnapur District), birth place of Khudiram, on 8th August 2007, where they paid their respectful homage to the great son of Bengal. Debabrata Roy, General Secretary, AISB, West Bengal State Committee was present there, along with other leaders of Student Bloc, Youth League and Forward Bloc.

A "Jatha" led by AISB leader Sujit Banerjee, started from there on 8th August 2007, and moved via Bankura, Hooghly, Burdwan districts of West Bengal, Jharkhand and Bihar to reach Muzaffarpur on 10th August, 2007. On the next morning on 11th August 2007 'jatha' entered the jail premises where Khudiram was hanged. A solemn fnction was held there, attended by Bhaktipada Ghosh, deputy speaker, West Bengal Assembly, Aritra Chatterjee, General Secretary AISB, Debabrata Roy, General Secretary of West Bengal Committee, Sanjay Bhattacharya, General Secretary, All India Youth Leauge, Ajoy Agnihotri, Central Secretariat Member, AIYL and others. At the end of the function AISB members moved in a procession around the Muzaffarpur town.

Demonstration against Reliance Fresh

There is growing discontent and opposition against the entry of corporate houses, big domestic and foreign capital - into the retail market, as that would harm the interests and livelihood of millions of small traders and their families of our country. But a big domestic corporate house like Reliance has been trying to spread its network throughout the country, not necessarily always through transparent means, to capture the bulk of retail market, particularly by entering into agri-marketing, and thereby ousting and jeopardizing the source of livelihood of lakhs of small retailers and farmers. Hence the people's discontents are bursting against their all such attempts in different places including Kolkata, as has recently happened through a spontaneous demonstration against the "Reliance Fresh" shop being established at Nanda Mulik Lane of Kolkata. On 18 August 2007, at the call of the TUCC, a meeting of small traders and workers of both organized and unorganised sector was held near the "Reliance Fresh" shop. Hundreds of members supporters of Students Bloc and Youth League went in a procession there and joined the meeting. They were demonstrating and protesting against the Reliance venture and the mob fury went up to such a high that eventually "Reliance Fresh" shop was attacked causing damage of their furniture and attachments. The demonstrators raised the slogan - 'We will not allow Reliance to enter the retail market anywhere in West Bengal'.

Left Parties Circular :

Jathas to Protest Joint Naval Exercise

The Left parties have decided to express their strong opposition to the joint naval exercise between India, United States, Australia, Japan and Singapore to be held in the Bay of Bengal from September 4 to 9 2007.

Since the UPA government came to a defence agreement between the United States in June 2005, the scale of military collaboration with the United States has increased dramatically. In the name of the "Malabar exercises", annual joint naval exercises are held with the United States. Now this is being extended to include two main military allies of the United States - Japan and Australia. The trilateral security cooperation between USA, Australia and Japan is now being extended to a quadrilateral security cooperation. The naval exercises in the Bay of Bengal is the first step in this direction.

The Left parties are opposed to the growing military collaboration with the United States as it is against India's naval interests. It compromises our sovereignty and independent foreign policy. The UPA government cannot be allowed to ally with US imperialism and serve its goals in the military sphere.

In order to mobilize the people and develop a national protest movement against the naval exercises and the military collaboration with the United States, the Left parties have decided to conduct two jathas.

1. Both these jathas will begin on September 4 - one from Kolkata and the other from Chennai. All India leaders of the Left Parties will participate in the jathas. It has been decided that Com. Prakash Karat will lead the jatha from Chennai while Com. A.B. Bardhan will lead it from Kolkata. Com. Jyoti Basu will flag off the Kolkata jatha.

2. On September 4, rallies and demonstrations should be held all over the country to protest the naval exercise and to oppose the Indo-US nuclear agreement.

3. Since the naval exercise are being held in the Bay of Bengal off the coast of Visakhapatnam, both these jathas will traverse the coastal areas and reach Visakhapatnam for a massive rally to be held in the afternoon on September 8.

4. The Kolkata jatha will go through parts of West Bengal and Orissa coastline and enter Andhra Pradesh to reach Visakhapatnam by 8th morning. Similarly, the jatha from Chennai will enter Andhra Pradesh and cover the entire coastal belt and reach Visakhapatnam on the 8th Morning.

5. All through the two jatha routes, public meetings and receptions will be organized for the jathas. The slogans against the naval exercise and military collaboration with US imperialism will be taken to the people through an intensive campaign in the areas around which the jathas are going.

6. The state units of the Left parties of the four states of West Bengal, Orissa, Andhra Pradesh and Tamilnadu should plan out the jatha programme and the centres in which public meetings should be held and the centre where receptions can be given. Various mass organizations, cultural groups and prominent personalities can also be mobilized for the programme. Sufficient propaganda material in various languages should also be prepared.

The detailed route and arrangements to be made in the four states will be discussed and decided and it will be centrally coordinated.

[The joint circular was signed by Com. Prakash Karat (CPI(M)), Com. A.B. Bardhan (CPI), Com. Debabrata Biswas (All India Forward Bloc), Com. Abani Roy (RSP)]

Unorganised Sector Workers Meeting at Delhi

A massive meeting of the unorganised sector workers was held at Mazoodpur, near Vasant Kunj, New Delhi, on 30th July 2007. Hundreds of workers particularly the rag-pickers have participated in the meeting. The gathering and the meeting was organized by the Unorganised Sector Workers Union, The All India Forward Bloc and the Bal Vikas Dhara an organization working among the rag-pickers. The meeting elaborately discussed about the sorry plight of the rag-pickers of Delhi. A People's Adalat was also organized, which provided opportunities to many people to narrate their experience at work place. The harassment from police and the civil administration were the major issue discussed in the meeting.

Dr. Barun Mukherjee, M.P., inaugurated the meeting. While addressing the gathering Dr. Mukherjee explained about the need of social security measures for the workers in the unorganised sector. He further asked the organizers to make a detailed memorandum on the issues confronting the rag-pickers, house maids and other workers in the unorganised sector, so that he will be able to raise these issues in the Parliament. The people accepted his proposal with applause. Com. G. Devarajan, Secretary, All India Forward Bloc also addressed the gathering. He also promised all sorts of assistance to the workers and the poor people in their struggle we for survival. Com. Debendra Baral presided over the meeting. The local councilor of MCD and civil administrative officials also spoke.

AIFB Ernakulam District Convention Held at Angamali

The Ernakulam district convention of All India Forward Bloc was held successfully at Angamali on 18th and 19th August 2007. A well decorated mass rally was held on 18th at Angamali town in which hundreds of comrades from different parts of the district participated. The whole town was decorated with flex boards, banners, poster and photos of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose. The rally was a new experience to the people of Angamali.

A public meeting was held at the town. Com. Naren Dey, Agriculture Minister of West Bengal inaugurated the public meeting. While addressing the gathering Com. Dey narrated about the necessity to rebuild India in Netaji's way. He also came down heavily on the economic policy of the central government and narrated its negative impact on agriculture, small scale industry, education, health, employment, retail trade and foreign policy. He further explained about the necessity of mass struggle to save our country from the clutches of imperialism. The imperialist forces are strangulating our country on various spheres and our ruling clique is felicitating their efforts. A mass movement is necessary to protect the hard earned freedom of our country. He congratulated the leaders if Forward Bloc in Kerala for their relentless efforts to build up the party in Kerala as a true revolutionary working class left party.

Com. G. Devarajan, secretary of All India Forward Bloc, while addressing the meeting explained about the current political situation of the country. He said that the UPA government is not sincere to implement the Common Minimum Programme. They are following the footsteps of former BJP led NDA government. The government is making big statements about GDP growth and foreign exchange reserve etc. But the people are suffering from price rise, unemployment, ill health and the rural India is suffering from lack of infrastructure facilities. Multinational companies are making huge profit at the cost of our small scale industries and agriculture. In the name of Special Economic Zone (SEZ), the capitalist are enjoying all sorts of tax holidays and posing major threats to agriculture. The reforms driven neo-liberal globalization have benefited only the techno-savvy affluent class. While the fruits economic growth hardly ever reach the common man. The common man is dragging his life along while the rich continue to prosper. Com. Devarajan urged upon the patriotic and revolutionary people of Kerala to come forward and strengthen the Forward Bloc, the party founded by Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose.

Advocate Thankachan Varghese, National vice President of AIYL presided over the public meeting. In his presidential address, Com. Thankchan explained about the issues Confronting the people of Kerala in general and Ernakulam in particular. He said that the people of the state are frustrated with the politics of LDF and UDF. The state needs a true working class politics, which can be provided only by the All India Forward Bloc. He urged upon the youngsters of the state to come forward and propagate the ideals of Netaji and Bhagat Singh. Com. Velladurai Pandayan, state committee member of the party, Com. Kureepuzha Ajith, Geneal Secretary of AISB Kerala State Committee, Com. Eldos painadath,