Letters

Sitaram Shastry

Sitaram Shastry died on 24 Oct 2012, when he walked into a running train between Adityapur and Gamaria stations near Jamshedpur. The incident occurred at a point where the train crosses a bridge over a river thirty feet below. His body was thrown off the bridge, and lay on the banks of the calmly flowing river. He was about 73 years old.

A week earlier, he had been diagnosed as having throat cancer. His daughter Kanti Prabha (Chinu) and her husband had come down to Jamshedpur from Delhi in order to take him back to Delhi for treatment. On the day they were supposed to fly out, he left home early in the morning and did not return. When contacted on his mobile phone, he replied that he would not return and that they should not search for him. Then he switched off his phone.

From 1968 onwards, till the day of his death, Sitaram was a full-time revolutionary/social activist. Till 1968 he had worked for the LIC in Jamshedpur and was a union leader. That year, like many other places in India, a lot of young people turned towards the path of social revolution. In Jamshedpur quite a few TELCO workers resigned, collected their PF, and joined the revolutionary movement. Those were heady times.

From the very beginning some of his special qualities were visible. The first and foremost quality was that he was extraordinarily courageous. He never feared anyone, never feared having a different opinion and lived his life on his own terms. He had great mobility - both in space and across society, connecting with a wide cross-section of people. He also had a great understanding of the region - Jharkhand - which only improved with his wide travels to every nook and corner of the region and his interaction with every section of the Jharkhand movement. Sitaram worked tirelessly for the Jharkhand movement, knew every Jharkhand leader and was respected by all of them. He brought them together again and again for the common cause.

Being a communist he had a great understanding of the working classes of the region. Later he developed a similar understanding of the Chhattisgarh region when he worked with Shankar Guha Neogi. But prior to that he worked in Dhanbad district, with A K Roy of BCKU (Bihar Colliery Kamgar Union). He helped organise the election campaign of A K Roy and later he edited the BCKU journal, 'Hirawal' (Vanguard) for the working class. Everywhere he had a tough time, because while money was forthcoming for trade union work and for the lawyers, there was no money for the journal or for his upkeep.

The Emergency was a tough period for all political workers and he moved to Bombay to help edit Blitz Hindi. He had a fantastic command over Hindi—he wrote the best simple Hindi for the working classes, and in later years translations became a steady source for his maintenance. He wrote a brilliant booklet entitled 'Mehnatkashon ko Kitaben Chhahiye' (The working class wants books).

In the early eighties, he edited Mitan for Neogi in Chhattisgarh. Everywhere he went he made good contacts with all the activists of the region, be they workers, peasants or, as happened in Chhattisgarh, with doctors, engineers and lawyers too.

Very often Sitaram came across as a difficult person. The main reason was that he was impatient and unhappy with social activists for not being active enough, not understanding the need to align with other movements like the Jnarkhand movement or with the youth coming out of the JP movement, and lastly not understanding the need to support each other, not living in communes. However he was respected and loved by a very large number of people. Hundreds of political workers and friends received his (and Nalini's, his wife) hospitality, help and advice. He will be missed by a large number of people.

Nalini held him whole through all the noise and turmoil of his life, despite all their domestic quarrels: She was also extremely generous under all kinds of stress that went inevitably with being married to Sitaram.

His friends and political associates feel saddened that he had to commit suicide. Those who saw his mutilated body near the river will carry this haunting image with them for a long time to come.

Given the situation he was faced with, that was probably the only valid option. Despite his protests, his family had persuaded him to go to Delhi for treatment. Weak and vulnerable as he was, he could not argue out his case for not going. But he was not prepared to face a situation where he was dependent on others, a life of hospitalisation and the painful reality of throat cancer. On the other hand the family also feels weak and vulnerable in such a situation, and it is difficult for any family where such choices are not openly discussed to be able to accept such choices of no treatment.

So he took the courageous decision of walking out of this world. It was characteristic of him and his decision fitted his personality. The sad thing is that he had to be alone in his last moments. It is a sad commentary on the progressive movement that it has not supported the movement for legalizing euthanasia, that people are not prepared to deal with situations like this, and were not available to help him for a honourable and dignified end.
T Vijayendra, Secundrabad

Banning Rdf
The ban imposed on Revolutionary Democratic Front (RDF) by the Andhra Pradesh government on 9 August 2012 under Andhra Pradesh Public Security Act 1992 is an arbitrary and authoritarian action by the government on a people's organization, which goes against the principles of justice, freedom of expression, freedom of association and of democratic dissent. Further the persistent use of ban as an instrument of policy is politically motivated as is proven in history. It has been proved time and again that whatever might be the purpose of evoking the policy of ban by the respective governments at various junctures it has hardly resulted in achieving the same. On the contrary it has only resulted in more and more atrocities on the vast sections of the people with the policy of ban giving blanket powers to the police and paramilitary thus resulting in increasing acts of impunity. In truth the imposition of a ban on RDF on a series of unsubstantiated charges is not only devoid of any ground, but a direct assault by the government on democratic rights. Under the convenient plea of countering Maoism, the state government has falsely implicated RDF as a frontal organization of CPI (Maoist)—another banned political entity—and has thereby continued with its policy of criminalizing and persecuting political dissent. This is in spite of the fact that upholding of and adhering to any ideology is not a crime but is a constitutionally guaranteed right of the citizens, which has been time and again pointed out by the Supreme Court of India.

The reasons for banning RDF in Andhra Pradesh as per the Government Order of 9 August 2012 include "Opposing and demanding stoppage of anti-extremist combing operations of the police and security forces in the left wing extremism affected area of the States", "Organising dharnas, rallies and other forms of agitations", "Opposing lawful actions of police and criminal justice system", and so on. Such 'charges' go against the very grain of right to political dissent which is constitutionally guaranteed. Such acts of the government which are arbitrary in intent and authoritarian in content can only violate and vitiate the space for political freedom and dissent of the vast sections of the people in a democracy and hence should be opposed.
Arunatara, Hyderabad

Russian guns for Us
The United States market is the biggest sales market for civilian guns in the world, partly because of comparatively lenient laws on gun ownership. The Izhevsk Machine Works in Izhevsk of Russia, manufacutres AK-47 Kalashnikov Rifles and other weapons for fighters around the world. Hunters and gun enthusiasts in the United States are purchasing tens of thousands of Kalashnikov Rifles and Shotguns. With the brisk demand, the Izhevsk factory has shifted focus from military  to civilian guns over the past two years. The US sales of the civilian version, brand name Saiga, increased by 50% in 2011. The historical importance of the weapon of choice in many global conflicts and reliability, makes the authentic Russian-made Kalashnikov appealing for US gun enthusiasts. The civilian versions of the gun cannot fire bursts of bullets with a single trigger pull, but it has many features of military guns.

In USA, the Izhmash guns cannot be under priced by Chinese competitors. Most imports of Chinese handguns and rifles are banned in USA, since 1994. About 70% of the Izhmash factory’s output is now civilian rifles, a rise of 20% two years ago. About 40% of the civilian arms are exported to USA. The US consumers are now buying about the same number of Kalashnikov-style weapons from Izhmash as the Russian Army and the Russian police. The gun sales revive a range of Russian military industries.
A Reader, Kolkata

Frontier
Vol. 45, No. 19, Nov 18-24, 2012

Your Comment if any