The lead story in this week’s Organiser slams CPIM for ignoring “grave security concerns” to lobby for a Chinese firm, Hutchison Ports Holding, in the case of privatisation of ports. “It is surprising,” says the article, “that the biggest enemies of market economy, the communists, have suddenly discovered the virtues of openness, though only in one area of the economy. What is less surprising is CPM’s lobbying for HPH. For, the CPM has always promoted China’s interests, even during the Sino-Indian war.” The article also attacks the CPIM for its alleged double standards – speaking out against the privatisation of airports while lobbying for ports to be handed over to the Chinese. Referring to the Left’s stance that Delhi and Mumbai airports should not privatised because of security and strategic reasons, it says, “the communists’ expressing concern for national interest is like the editor of Hustler sermonising about the virtues of a chaste life.”

…And other sins

The editorial takes off from the lead article and lambasts the CPIM for an assortment of sins. According to the editorial, “It is unprecedented in the country’s democratic history that a political party interferes with the foreign policy and foreign direct investment issues. The Congress, the BJP or smaller regional formations have never pressurised their governments to support a particular country or a firm as blatantly as the CPM is doing today.” That apart, the editorial also lashes out at the CPIM for seeking presidential pardon for Mohammad Afzal; for “hassling the Prime Minister” to bend before Pervez Musharraf at Havana; for asking India to canvass for Venezuela for a UNSC seat; and for promoting SEZs in West Bengal but opposing them in Congress and BJP-ruled states. The edit concludes: “Political hypocrisy cannot be more immodest. Treason has never been so couched in dialectical secular mask. Ideological double-speak never had such currency as now under the UPA regime.” Phew!

US and NAM

Amid all the Left-bashing, veteran columnist M.V. Kamath’s article comes as a surprise. Kamath not only echoes the Left’s trenchant criticism of the US but also attacks New Delhi for kowtowing to Uncle Sam. Mocking Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s claim that India would revitalise the NAM, he says, “There is no NAM today and to think that it exists is to delude ourselves. India has neither the courage nor the desire to stand up to the US…” He goes on to cite Iran as an example. “The US is threatening to bomb Iran out of existence, but Delhi seems to have lost its voice. It argues that it does not like to have another nuclear-armed state in its vicinity, which is a poor argument. Iran is not sending terrorists to India. Pakistan does – and Pakistan is a nuclear state and proudly so. Iran’s neighbour, Israel is another nuclear state …So, if Pakistan and Israel can be nuclear states, why should not Iran wish to be one? And if Britian and France can have nuclear weapons, why shouldn’t Iran have them too? It is pure racism.”

Hindu war on terror

In a full-page article on how to combat terrorism in India, Dr Subramaniam Swamy scoffs at those who advocate a measured or sober response and advocates “massive retaliation” instead. Insisting that the ISI is financing anti-Indian organisations of every hue, Swamy suggests a series of counter measures: India must bomb terrorist-training camps in Pakistan and Bangladesh and be prepared for war as a result; it should fulfill “our pre-1947 commitment to NWFP and openly help the Baluchis and Sindhis to meet their legitimate aspirations”; and should demand territory from Bangladesh for “all those illegal Bangladeshis settled in India” and the “northern one-third of Bangladesh cutting across from Khulna to Sylhet could then be annexed if Bangladesh goes to war with us.” But first and foremost, “any policy to combat terrorism requires that each and every Hindu become committed to being virat Hindu, or otherwise be regarded a ‘tankhiya’ by Hindu society.” To be a virat Hindu, one must have a “Hindu mindset” and never yield to terrorism and counter every terrorist act through massive retaliation, insists the Parivar’s new ideologue.

—Compiled by Manini Chatterjee