Sitaram Yechury’s praise for Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi’s speech in the Lok Sabha that “rattled” Prime Minister Narendra Modi could easily be mistaken for Opposition solidarity to battle the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party. But when seen in the context of other developments, it assumes significance over and beyond just being a casual remark of appreciation. A week or so before Mr Yechury said that, both he and Mr Gandhi — along with other leaders — went to Jawaharlal Nehru University to show their support to the students. And now comes an understanding between the two parties in West Bengal, where both have been sworn enemies for decades.
In Bengal and more so in Kerala, the Communist Party of India (Marxist) and the Congress are political rivals, often fighting for the same space. In the rest of the country, barring in a few pockets, the CPM counts for very little. Yet, in Parliament the two have rarely come together until recently, when both find themselves on the same side against the dominant political force, the BJP.
Yet, such is the long history of antipathy towards each other that even while they ponder over electoral arrangements, they remain coy about openly declaring any intention to cohabit. Take West Bengal for instance. They both want to fight Trinamul Congress leader Mamata Banerjee, who at this moment looks unbeatable. It would make sense to form some sort of front or have an informal arrangement so that there are minimal triangular contests.
The Left in Bengal says it is a “tactical understanding” and little more. “The sickle and hammer can’t become one with the hand”, a CPM leader is quoted as saying. The Congress is a bit more accommodating, offering to support Left candidates. Even Mr Yechury, assuming he wants to, will not be able to override the reluctance of his West Bengal unit to coming too close to the Congress.
Why this coyness? When it is becoming clear that a national front is the need of the hour and a formalised arrangement in West Bengal will go a long way on putting up a strong anti-Trinamul front, why shouldn’t both join hands and declare their relationship? More so since it is obvious that Mr Yechury will be fully supportive.
Local imperatives, one might argue, prevent such intimacy. But that only explains part of the conundrum. To fully unravel this problem, one has to look at history, more specifically, the history of the CPM. Ever since it emerged as the more potent political force after the split in the Communist Party in 1964, the CPM has consistently moved away from the Congress.
At the time, the Congress was the only political force on the national stage, the Jana Sangh counted for nothing and regional parties were not born. The Communist Party of India was strong but gradually, not the least because of lack of leadership, began fading away. Many of the younger leaders, such as Jyoti Basu, P. Sundarayya, Harkishan Singh Surjeet, etc., moved to the CPM. The atmosphere at the time was very hostile to the CPM, many of its cadre were arrested in Bengal and Kerala by the Congress.
Being anti-Congress at the time made sense. The Congress regarded the rising CPM as an enemy. But anti-Congressism gradually became an ideological position of the CPM, which guided many of its actions. The CPM stood on the side of the Janata Party against the Congress in 1977 — understandable, since the much-hated Indira Gandhi had to be defeated. But, the CPM also came out in support of V.P. Singh in 1989, when the latter fought the Congress.
Singh’s Janata Dal got just 143 seats but managed to form a minority government with the help of the BJP on the right and the CPM on the Left. For the CPM mandarins of the time, the communalist BJP was more acceptable than the secular Congress!
In Uttar Pradesh, the CPM continued to latch on to Samajwadi Party leader Mulayam Singh Yadav, fondly estimating him to be some kind of secular, progressive leader long after it became clear that he wasn’t. Since the Indian Left has never really taken cognisance of — or really understood — the caste factor, it could not understand the rise of Mayawati, who ought to have been the natural ally for a party that claims to represent the poorest of the poor. These are more than episodic historical blunders of the kind that prevented the CPM from agreeing to let Jyoti Basu become the Prime Minister in 1995.
Finally, the CPM agreed to support the Manmohan Singh government in 2004. This was the Left Front’s apogee, with 59 seats in Parliament, the highest ever. The CPM’s attitude towards its own ally during those years of United Progressive Alliance deserves a book of its own; suffice it to say that it couldn’t get out of its mentality of fighting with the Congress all the time.
Mr Yechury, who is now the general secretary, has a more nuanced understanding of the situation compared to some of his more hidebound predecessors. He understands that 2016 is not the same as the 1960s or 1970s. He is more amenable not just towards the Congress but is also more open to participating in fronts that are driven by the political needs of the hour.
He will have a tough task convincing all his colleagues, but eventually, he will steer the party towards a pragmatic line. Neither side may rush into each other’s arms, but the old hostility will be diluted, even made irrelevant. There is no other option.
Ms Banerjee has decimated the CPM in West Bengal and will continue her assault on it. There is no guarantee it will emerge victorious in Kerala. On the national level, the CPM — and the Left in general — has little to offer. This does not suggest that there is no need for a good, strong Left party. However, if the CPM wishes to be that, it has to shed most of its old ideological baggage and move forward. Or will the comrades make one more historical blunder?
