How the Left Front and Its Government Emerged

How the Left Front

and

Its Government Emerged

Biman Basu

THE Left Front of West Bengal grew and evolved by traversing an arduous path, through the people’s long and intense struggles. It had to surmount many challenges and vicissitudes before it could get consolidated on the basis of united resolve of the Left parties in the state.

PRODUCT OF EXPERIENCE

Since 1952, as a matter of fact, different Left and other anti-Congress parties off and on unleashed democratic movements through unity in action, in the interest of the common people and sometimes unitedly launched movements, which directly helped to pave the way for a proper understanding with the Left parties and the principles they were based upon. Thus the Bengal Left Front grew and established itself firmly by conducting and getting deeply involved in a struggle against the forces of authoritarianism and anti-people policies of the Congress governments. However, the task of charting the roadmap for democratic movements was not always easy. This was only on the eve of Lok Sabha elections in 1977 when the Left parties, through their own experiences, realised that they have to solidly unite on a common programme; it was then that they formed the Left Front. A decade ago, a United Front (UF) had been set up on the combined initiative of the Left parties and other anti-Congress parties. This was in the post-election situation way back in 1967 and before the elections in 1969.

Thus we can suitably sum up to say that the backdrop to evolution of the Bengal Left Front comprised a variegated and rich realistic developments. These included the experience of working in a United Front, the variety and different forms of functioning of its constituents in different time periods, and the bitter fruit of experience we all had to taste as a result of their taking positions contrary to one another.

These days one can often observe and experience across the country, and also at the central level, the sight of an assortment of alliances and fronts being formed by political parties just before the polls or in the post-poll situation without declaring a common programme at all. West Bengal too sometimes witnessed the growth of such ‘electoral’ alliances. For example, one recalls the formation of the ‘Save Bengal Front’ of some opposition outfits on the eve of the 13th Lok Sabha elections. Can one compare these ‘fronts’ with the Left Front of West Bengal?

BEFORE 1947 AND AFTER

To seek a proper answer to this question, one shall have to flip back pages of the history of struggles and movements in the not-too-recent-past of Bengal. Thus we find that during a special period in the 1930s, when the independence movement was raging, the Communist Party placed the theory of a united front against imperialism. It was way back in 1936. In the years that followed, unity was built up among the working people while, on the other hand, a united anti-imperialist programme was formulated in conjunction with other forces.

Among the joint programmes then implemented were the all-India post and telegraph strike, movements of the government employees and, above all, the programmes built up around the naval uprising at the Bombay seaport. Later, the historic Tebhaga movement unified the rural poor and created a point of inspiration for kisans in the then united Bengal. There was a big movement of students and youth as well. These struggles and movements stand as evidence of the splendid historic role played by the Communist Party in the pre-independence period.

Mass struggles took place and advanced along various routes after the country’s independence as well. In West Bengal, the Communist Party discharged its historic responsibility by playing a crucial role in the organisation of various mass movements. Thus, in 1953, when the already profit earning British-owned Calcutta Tramways Company hiked the tram fare (backed suitably by the then Congress raj) in order to further increase its profit margin, the Communist Party and other anti-Congress parties put up an angry resistance.

In 1954, when Dr B C Roy was the Congress chief minister, a massive food crisis overtook the state. There was a near-famine condition in Bengal. An anti-famine committee was then set up, and it organised statewide movements.

In 1954-55, in order to contribute to the struggle for Goa’s freedom from Portuguese occupation, a big march of satyagrahis to Goa was organised thanks to the united effort of all anti-Congress forces. In fact, the number of satyagrahis coming from far-off Bengal was much more than those coming from the states nearer to Goa.

Soon the committee against the Bengal-Bihar merger conducted a statewide movement against the merger proposal. At this time, the Lok Sabha byelections saw Professor Mohit Moitra, president of the anti-merger committee, receive the support of all anti-Congress political parties and defeat the Congress candidate, Ashok Sen, from Kolkata Northwest. In the tumultuous political atmosphere that was thus created, chief minister B C Roy had to withdraw the Bengal-Bihar merger proposal and victory celebrations were observed throughout Bengal.

BARBARIC KILLINGS

In 1954-56, the teachers of Bengal launched a movement to demand subsistence salaries. The salary then varied from Rs 62 to Rs 96 a month, and went up to a maximum of Rs 112. The teachers had no job security either. But the state government rejected the legitimate demands of these teachers and unleashed police repression against them. A massive anti-Congress struggle then grew up against the move. Further, a statewide students’ agitation grew up when the Phillips commission called for curtailment of higher education. A food movement was organised in 1958, as was a students’ agitation in the same year.

In 1959, the state suffered from a massive food shortage. Following a month-long campaign movement, a central rally was organised in what is now the Shahid Minar Maidan. The rally, held on August 31, spilled over into the Surendranath Park (formerly Curzon Park) and Rani Rashmoni Road. The massive rally had Jyoti Basu and other leaders of the democratic movements in the forefront. The administration was at a loss about what to do in the face of such a huge rally. There are indications that they initially thought about taking the rallyists into custody, but suddenly they decided to change the tactic. The rallyists kept raising militant slogans for more than half an hour but, just before the dusk settled in, the police arrested the leaders and then started a brutal lathicharge; 80 people were bludgeoned to death on the spot and hundreds left injured. This was one of the rarest examples of so many people being killed in such a short space of time, at the crest of a democratic movement that remained peaceful.

Students organised a strike on September 1. When the police fired upon their rally and killed some students, a protest day was observed in the form of a strike on September 2. A general strike was organised successfully on September 3. Over 130 courted martyrdom between August 31 and September 3.

Mass movements were organised during 1960-61 also. The student movement roared in protest against the setting up of an Indo-American Foundation for import of wheat under the PL 480 scheme. In this background, a united Left alliance contested against the Congress during the 1962 general elections. In 1962, when a Sino-Indian border clash occurred, we raised the demand for a solution of the problem through bilateral discussions. For this, a part of the Communist Party was dubbed as Chinese agents. A movement against the increase in tram fare took place in 1965. In the same year, when an Indo-Pak war broke out, we communists demanded a solution through peaceful talks, and now we were dubbed as the agents of Pakistan.

In February 1966, a student agitation demanded food, kerosene oil and exercise books. But the police opened fire against the students. A school student, Nurul Islam, was killed. A big movement of students now roared across West Bengal, followed by a still bigger mass movement. Several districts like Nadia, Hooghly, Burdwan, and 24 Parganas plus Kolkata became the volcanoes of protests. In March, a one-day strike against police oppression in Bengal evoked two-day or even three-day strikes in some of the districts. The massive discontent among the common people in the state created a negative atmosphere for the ruling Congress party, and it broke into two. Ajoy Mukherjee and some other leaders left the Congress to form the Bangla Congress.

1967 ELECTIONS: A TURNING POINT

We stood steadfast against all these attacks and never shied away from the issues that were in the interest of the working class, the peasants and the mass of other toilers.

It was in this background that the 1967 elections for the state assembly were held, with no complete understanding among the anti-Congress forces. Though there were two fronts in contest against the Congress, the latter got pushed into a minority position in the assembly. The two anti-Congress fronts --- the United Left Front (ULF) and the People’s United Left Front (PULF) --- now came together to create a United Front (UF) in the post-election scenario, and formed the state government. It is to be noted that, despite being the leader of the largest political party, Jyoti Basu did not become the chief minister. Instead, Ajoy Mukherjee of a minor group (the Bangla Congress) was allowed to sit in this chair.

But the Congress regime at the centre struck back and the UF government was dismissed within nine months. But the mid-term election of 1969 again made the Congress a minority party. UF candidates fought unitedly and a second UF government was set up. However, this government too was dismissed within 13 months. From 1970 onward, an atmosphere of terror was being created. A mid-term election was held in 1971. Siddhartha Shankar Ray, who at times opens his mouth to pontificate on this and who later became the chief minister, was then a central minister and looked after the Bengal related matters. He created an atmosphere of terror in the state in a planned manner. This has been referred to by a former US ambassador to India, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, in his book A Dangerous Place. He notes that the US supplied funds to prevent the rapid growth of communist influence in West Bengal. The book mentions that the US twice helped India with funds in such like situations: once to topple the first communist government in Kerala under E M S Namboodiripad, and then to curtail the communist strength in West Bengal. Maybe, in the days to come, we get to read how many more times had the US put in funds to influence the Indian politics.

However, what was unfortunate was that even after such wealth of experience no united front was set up for the mid-term elections of 1971. The CPI(M) forged an understanding with a few smaller parties and, in the elections that followed, anti-Congress forces together got a majority again. The CPI(M) emerged as the largest single party. Yet the governor ignored the parliamentary norms and did not invite the CPI(M) to form a government.

CPI (M) FACES THE SEMI-FASCIST TERROR

In the meantime, the CPI (M) had spread amongst the masses in all the 16 districts then existing. Its relations and contacts had grown with different sections of the people through various mass organisations who led the movements and struggles.

The 1972 election was marked by a massive rigging. Booth capturing, false voting, forced voting and manipulation during the counting of ballots took place on a large scale. All-out efforts were made that the CPI (M) was defeated everywhere during the assembly elections. However, these attempts did not succeed and we won several seats. Nevertheless, the CPI (M) boycotted the state assembly set up on the basis of these malpractices. Its winning MLAs did not take oath in protest, nor did they take their wages and other perquisites for five years. This was an example of the morality and principled stand of the CPI (M).

The Congress government that took office now was headed by Siddhartha Shankar Ray as the chief minister. Under him, every effort was made to isolate the CPI(M) from the people.

Not all the political parties, at that point in time, adopted a principled stand as the CPI(M) did. The CPI(M) was able to take a principled stand because it works towards forging a unity of the workers, peasants and other toilers to change the society, and exert itself in the interest of the working people; it is because it acknowledges and accepts Marxism-Leninism as a science and its guiding ideology. The party had had to tackle a variety of situational realities at various points of time in its daily functioning and in its effort to build up mass movements in the interests of the people.

The CPI (M) has had to adopt a different tactic while confronting the semi-fascist terror of the 1970s. We had to tackle such situations as institution of false cases against 80,000 of its supporters, ouster of over 20,000 families of its cadres from their hearth and home, and illegal occupation or forcible closure of about 350 trade union offices. As many as 927 teachers were not allowed to join work, and from the students was taken away the right to form student unions. On the other hand, we had to carry out such programmes as the demand for increase of wages for agricultural workers, and organising programmes including marches and a central programme in Kolkata against the imperialist aggression in Vietnam. On March 28, 1973, a historic movement was carried out as part of the anti-unemployment day. In this way, very many mass movements could be organised with success. At the national level, Mrs Indira Gandhi proclaimed Emergency in 1975, but we in West Bengal had already had a bitter taste of it from 1972 till 1977.

LEFT FRONT STUNS OTHERS

Once the Emergency was relaxed in January 1977, Lok Sabha elections were declared and took place in March. During this time, through their experience, several Left parties in West Bengal understood the new reality and formed a Left Front based on a common programme. The Left Front and the Janata Party, formed through the merger of a breakaway group of the Congress party with several other parties, contested the Lok Sabha elections with an understanding. The Congress lost these elections. A Janata Party government was set up in Delhi, with Morarji Desai as the prime minister.

The defeat of the Congress in Lok Sabha elections restored democracy in Bengal and gave a boost to the mass movements of various kinds. They started to struggle against the suffocating ambience that had been earlier created during the Congress regime. In the elections to the state assembly that were held soon afterwards, the Janata Party underestimated the Left Front, considered it as the junior constituent and adamantly demanded that it would fight 60 percent of the constituencies. Following a series of discussions between the leaders of the Janata Party and the Left Front, the Left Front finally placed the proposal that the Front would file candidates in 48 percent of the seats and the Janata Party in 52 percent. But the Janata Party would not accept anything below 56 percent of the seats, and the talks broke down. In the changed situation, the Left Front resolved to put up candidates in all the 294 assembly seats.

The Left Front manifesto contained 36 precise points. In a press conference, the then chairman of the Left Front, the late Comrade Promode Dasgupta, appealed to the people to defeat both the authoritarian Congress and the anti-unity Janata Party, making the Left Front victorious to establish democracy and democratic rights of the people. The two-stage elections, held on June 11 and 14, 1977, saw all the 59,000 booth areas assume the veneers of a festival. The Left Front won 243 seats. The first Left Front government was thus established, with Jyoti Basu as the chief minister.

After leading the Left Front government for consecutive five terms, Jyoti Basu voluntarily gave up the post of the chief minister and the sixth Left Front government saw Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee sworn in as his successor. Five years later, the seventh Left Front government assumed office after winning 235 seats, reducing the main opposition (Trinamul Congress) to 30 seats. The Left Front government is now in the process of celebrating the completion of 30 years of its pro-people and pro-poor existence.

Not recalling the myriad of successes of the Left Front in the last 30 years (which can wait for another occasion), I would like to stress emphatically and clearly that the West Bengal Left Front and its government have evolved through a lengthy process of vigorous movements. The continuing existence of the Left Front government is backed by precisely its mass initiatives and mass struggles.

Just as in the pre-1977 period, thousands of Left Front leaders and workers had to embrace a martyr’s death during the last 30 years of the Left Front governance as well. We are also aware that the forces of reaction shall continue their anti-Left depredations with ever new attacks. But the massive rallying of the people around the Left Front has always boosted our confidence. We have to take up the reactionary challenge, organise still bigger mass movements, and take the people along to make the pro-people presence of the Left Front government secure. The Left Front and its government are complementary to one another in writing a new chapter in the annals of the democratic movement in India.

From PEOPLE'S DEMOCRACY, 24TH JUNE, 2007

The Role Of The Left-led Governments And Our Understanding

By Prakash Karat

The CPI(M) and the Communist movement in India have the rich experience of working in state governments within a parliamentary democracy. It was in 1957 that the Communist Party was able to win a majority in the assembly elections in Kerala soon after the state was formed. The first communist ministry lasted twenty-nine months, before it was dismissed by the central government invoking Article 356 of the Constitution. After the formation of the CPI(M), as a result of the 1967 general elections, United Front governments were formed in Kerala and West Bengal. In Kerala, the CPI(M) headed the government and it lasted till 1969. In West Bengal, the first United Front government was formed with Ajoy Mukherjee of the Bangla Congress as the Chief Minister. This government fell and after the mid-term elections in 1969, the second United Front Government was formed which was toppled in 1970.

After this, the next phase of CPI(M) and Left-led governments were initiated in the post-Emergency period. Since 1977 when the first Left Front government was formed in West Bengal, the Left Front government has ruled for twenty-nine years, winning seven successive elections. In Tripura, the first Left Front government was formed after the elections in 1978 and the second Left Front government was formed in 1983. After ten years of Left Front rule, the assembly elections of 1988 were violently rigged with the help of the Central government. After five years of terror, the Left Front government was reelected in 1993 and for the last thirteen years Tripura has been run by a Left Front government. In Kerala, there have been repeated and alternative stints in office for the Left and Democratic Front which was formed in 1980. These were in 1980-1982, 1987-1991, 1996-2001 and the LDF was elected again to office in the 2006 assembly elections.

How does the Party view the participation and role in state governments? How does it fit in with the strategy for People’s Democratic Revolution set out in the Party Programme and the tactical line of building a Left and Democratic alternative.

Party Programme Direction

The Party programme sets out the goal of People’s Democracy to replace the existing bourgeois-landlord system. To proceed towards this aim it is necessary to build a People’s Democratic Front of the working class, the peasantry and other allies at the all India level through the development of a powerful movement. As an interim step towards developing the People’s Democratic Front, the Party has put forward the slogan of a Left and Democratic alternative. In the process of this struggle to build the Left and Democratic Front at the all India level, it is possible that the Party and the Left and democratic forces will become strong in some states to acquire legislative majority.

In such a situation, the Party programme sanctions the participation of the Party in such governments while keeping in mind that the states have very limited powers and it is the Centre which controls State power and all its instruments. The understanding of the Party on our participation in governments was contained in Para 112 of the Party Programme which was adopted in 1964. A communist Party programme deals with the character of the State, stage and class alliance for the revolution. Normally it does not deal with tactical questions. The necessity to incorporate a tactical issue that is of our participation in the state governments came up because such a possibility could arise. For instance, when the 7th Congress met to adopt the Party Programme, it was known that a mid-term assembly election was coming up in Kerala. There was a possibility that the CPI(M) would emerge as a big force in the elections. Therefore, it was necessary to clarify our approach to the formation and participation in state governments. The issue was not the question of CPI(M)’s participation in parliamentary elections and legislative forums. There was no confusion on the matter because the Party accepted the Leninist understanding of participation in parliamentary forums.

What did para 112 say? The formulation in this para was as follows:
“The Party will obviously have to work out various interim slogans in order to meet the requirements of a rapidly changing political situation. Even while keeping before the people the task of dislodging the present ruling classes and establishing a new democratic state and government based on the firm alliance of the working class and peasantry, the Party will utilise all the opportunities that present themselves of bringing into existence governments pledged to carry out a modest programme of giving immediate relief to the people. The formation of such governments will give great fillip to the revolutionary movement of the working people and thus help the process of building the democratic front. It, however, would not solve the economic and political problems of the nation in any fundamental manner. The party, therefore, will continue to educate the mass of the people on the need for replacing the present bourgeois-landlord state and government headed by the big bourgeoisie even while utilising all opportunities for forming such governments of a transitional character which give immediate relief to the people and thus strengthen the mass movement.”

While setting out the strategic goal of dislodging the present ruling classes and establishing a new People’s Democratic State and government, interim slogans and tactics have to be worked. This may require “bringing into existence governments pledged to carry out a modest programme of giving immediate relief to the people.” The formation of governments can provide a fillip to the revolutionary movement of the working people if they give relief to the people and strengthen the mass movements. At the same time there should be no illusion that they can solve the basic economic and political problems of the country in a fundamental manner. The formation of governments with CPI(M) participation should therefore help to develop the Left and democratic movement.

The provision in the Programme makes it clear that a state government run by the Party cannot fulfil the strategic goals. What the state governments can do is to advance the political-tactical line of the Party and in the context of our programmatic understanding work to strengthen the Left and democratic forces, so that a Left and democratic alternative emerges in the country.

Experience of First Communist Ministry

This implied that the state governments working within the existing bourgeois-landlord system can adopt limited policy measures. There should be no confusion that a Left-led state government can do away with the big bourgeoisie, or abolish landlordism or check foreign finance capital in a state. In 1957 itself, when the first EMS ministry was formed, this became clear.
The first EMS government could take the initiative to implement land reforms, democratise the educational system and adopt a pro-people police policy. These historic steps which had a far-reaching impact was possible because these were subjects which fell in the State’s sphere. But all these measures were not aimed at basic social transformation. In fact, the land reforms legislation only implemented what the Congress government had promised. Even these progressive measures incurred the wrath of the ruling classes and after 28 months, Article 356 of the Constitution was used by the Nehru government to dismiss the first Communist ministry.
A lot of questions were raised when the Kerala government signed an agreement with the Birla-owned Gwalior Rayons for setting up a wagon plant in the state. How can the Party which is opposed to the big bourgeoisie like Birlas and Tatas invite the Birlas to set-up a factory? Is this not a betrayal of its basic aim?

It is in this context that for the first time the distinction was drawn between strategy and tactics. EMS Namboodiripad had cited the Communist Manifesto to show how the Communists fight for “immediate aims” but in the movement for the present “they also represent and take care of the future of that movement”. Writing about the industrial policy of the first Communist ministry later, EMS stated:
“Given this reality, whether we should go in for new industries in Kerala as part of the Congress Central government’s industrialisation policy or should we try in isolation in Kerala to check the growth of monopoly capitalists – this was the question confronted by the Party.
“The possibility to start big industries in the public sector was almost nil in Kerala. Among the big industries in the public sector proposed during the Second Plan period, not a single one was going to be set-up in Kerala. There were numerous impediments to start new industries even in the private sector. Our opponents were already engaged in discouraging those private industrialists desirous to come here by projecting the labour relations here as being very bad. A climate of industrialisation could be created here only through a conscious effort to remove these barriers.
“Faced with this reality, the government made conscious efforts to attract industrialists from outside, who were ready to invest and to start industries here, as well as to encourage the like minded within the state…..”
The experience of running the first Communist government helped the CPI(M) to provide for the tactical direction in Para 112.

New Situation & Tasks:
Concretises Role of State Governments

It is in 1967 that the Party was called upon to give concrete shape to this tactical direction given in the Party programme. In the 1967 general elections, for the first time, the Congress lost its monopoly of power in the states when it was defeated in nine states. This came in the background of mounting economic difficulties leading to popular discontent and widespread mass struggles. Non-Congress governments were formed in nine states. The CPI(M) alongwith the CPI and other allies formed United Front governments in Kerala and West Bengal.
The Central Committee adopted a resolution “New Situation and Tasks” in April 1967 which elaborated the understanding of the Party regarding the United Front governments in which we were participating.

First, the resolution spelt out the character of the state governments and their limitations. Real State power is exercised by the central government.
“Above all, governmental power in the states has got to be understood in clear class terms and with all its limitations. The essence of state power, we know, lies in the army, police, bureaucracy, judiciary and jails, and all this machinery belongs to the bourgeois-landlord state. In class outlook, composition and in several other respects it is not an instrument that is suitable even for the implementation of a consistently democratic administration, let along any class policies decisively directed against the vested interests. A good and essential part of state power resides in the Union Centre and the Congress Central Government and whatever small share of power the state governments possess, under the provisions of the country’s Constitution, will have to be exercised within the confines of this overall central power. Naturally, under these circumstances, to speak of real political power for the state governments, that too, of non-Congress governments comprising of different opposition parties, is unreal and devoid of substance”.

The resolution explained the way the ministries should function keeping in mind the direction given in Para 112.
“Finally, there is one point to be constantly borne in mind by our comrades working in the UF Cabinet. We cannot forecast the actual lifespan of these Governments and all the possible vicissitudes they will have to undergo during the tenure of their ministries. We cannot also definitely say how much relief can be given to the people and what actual possibilities are opened up for these Governments to do so. Our ministries, without either entertaining undue illusions about giving relief in a big way, or courting despair that nothing can be done under the present set-up, should always bear in mind that they as the Party’s representatives, should strive to tender our bona fides to the people. Any failure on this score compromises the Party’s political line in the eyes of the people; adversely affects the independent mobilisation of the people; and their activities, and all this in turn, will not help us to resist and overcome the vacillations, wobblings and sometimes even possible backsliding of some democratic parties in the UFs and their respective Governments. In a word, the UF governments that we have now are to be treated and understood as instruments of struggle in the hands of our people, more than as Governments that actually possess adequate power, that can materially and substantially give relief to the people. In clear class terms, our Party’s participation in such Governments is one specific form of struggle to win more and more people, and more and more allies for the cause of People’s Democracy and at a later stage for Socialism.”

The 1967 resolution also characterized the various non-Congress state governments, which were formed into four categories. The first category comprised the United Front governments of Kerala and West Bengal where the Left Democratic forces were in a dominant position. In the second category came the DMK government of Tamilnadu which was a single party government. It represented a radical bourgeois platform and a consistent platform of states autonomy. The third category were the states where some Left and democratic forces were in coalition with rightist parties and the Jan Sangh (Bihar and Punjab). In the fourth category were state governments in Orissa, Uttar Pradesh and Haryana where right and reactionary parties like Jan Sangh and Swatantra were predominant. The CPI(M) decided not to join in the state governments of the third and fourth category. It nailed down the CPI’s opportunism in joining such state governments as in the Bihar, UP and Punjab. It is based on this resolution that the Party formulated the stand that the Party will join only those governments where we and the other Left and democratic forces can have a decisive say in policy making and its implementation.

Experience of the U.F. Governments

The 1967-70 U.F. governments were marked by intra-front strife. There were clashes and conflicts between the constituent parties. In West Bengal, between the Bangla Congress and the Party and later between the Party and the CPI, Forward Bloc and others. In Kerala, the main conflict was with the CPI who rallied other parties like the Muslim League and RSP with it. One of the major reasons for the downfall of these governments were these conflicts and in particular the CPI’s political line which veered to allying with the Congress after the split in the Congress Party in 1969. There were also differences on the approach to government, the pace of change etc. For instance in Kerala, the Party’s slogan of “administration and struggle” was opposed by the CPI which maintained that the two cannot go together. The Congress utilized all these differences and conflicts in both the states to topple the governments. In Kerala, a mini-front government with CPI leader Achutha Menon was formed. In West Bengal, CPI and other left parties deserted and fought the CPI(M) in the 1971 and 72 elections in the background of the rising terror directed against the Party.

The Party’s firm stance against the Central government’s policies, seeing the formation of the Left-led governments as part of the class struggle and the steady expansion of its mass base alarmed the anti-Marxist forces and the revisionists. But it was the correct united front tactics of the Party and its creative approach to the state governments that helped the Party to overcome the odds. Though the Party paid a heavy price for it. For nearly a decade, hundreds of our cadres were killed in West Bengal, Kerala and Tripura in a situation where Left unity was disrupted and the state machinery utilized to repress the Party. Finally in 1977 the Left forces (the CPI in 1980) came together which was acceptance of the correctness of our political line and united front approach.

The 1967-70 period of UF governments threw up a rich and varied experience for the Party on united front tactics and also how to participate and run governments. It made a big contribution to expanding the Party’s base in these states and to vanquish the erroneous political line of the CPI. This helped established the leadership role of the Party among the Left and democratic forces in these two states. After the interregnum of struggles and repression, the Left Front that emerged in West Bengal and Tripura were different as it comprised only the Left parties, there was greater cohesion and though different views are there, there is none of the conflicts and bitter clashes witnessed in the earlier period. This has been mainly due to the dominant position of the CPI M) within the Left Front. In Kerala, the situation was different. The Left Democratic Front contained bourgeois and democratic parties. Unlike in 1967, when C.C. resolutions noted that the CPI (M) was a stronger component in Kerala in the United Front than in West Bengal, the reverse happened. Over a period of time, the CPI (M) was reduced to fighting only fifty per cent of the seats that was not commensurate to our strength. In the LDF from 1980 onwards, we could not increase the number of seats fought or strengthen the Party’s role in the government. It is only in the 2006 assembly elections, that the Party has been able to contest over 60 percent of the seats and win 65 seats (out of 140), the highest number so far. This is essential if the left and democratic platform is to be advanced and the LDF government is take up issues and policies based on such a platform.

Gains Due to Participation in Governments

Based on the tactical direction given in the Party programme we have to assess the role of the Left-led state governments on the following basis:
1. Have they been able to expand the mass base of our Party in the concerned states utilising the governments to mobilise more and more people around the Left and Democratic platform?
2. Have we been able to render help (immediate relief) to the people.
3. Are we successful in making the people aware of the limitations of the state governments that they do not possess real power and the necessity to struggle for a change in the correlation of forces at the all India level?
4. Have we adhered to the line laid down by the Party programme and the Central Committee in the working of such state governments, or, have we reconciled ourselves to being a part and parcel of the bourgeois-landlord State?

On the first point, there is no doubt that the Party has steadily expanded its mass base in the three states where we have been running state governments. This would be clear if we examine what was the Party’s mass base, strength of the mass organisations and electoral base when we first formed the government in 1967 in West Bengal and Kerala and Tripura in 1977and the position now in the three states. As for the second point of helping the people and providing immediate relief, the Left-led governments of the three states stand apart for their implementation of land reform legislations. It is only these three states which have seriously undertaken land reforms within the existing laws. This is an important factor in expanding the mass base of the Party. From the outset, the Left-led state governments refused to let the police be used against the struggles of the working class, peasantry and other democratic sections. The Left-led governments have been marked by their firm stand against the communal forces, prevention of communal riots or effectively tackling them. As for the third point, the CPI(M) in these three states have consistently campaigned and mobilised the people in movements to explain the class character and attitude of the central government and make the people conscious of the limitations of the state government in the present set up. Fourthly, the state governments headed by us have striven to implement the tactical line and formulate policies which can help mobilise the people as distinct from the policies of the other bourgeois-run state governments. Even though the odds and difficulties have increased, there is a consistent effort to ensure that the differences between a Left-led government and other state governments are brought before the people.

One of the consistent themes of the Left-led governments has been to fight against the Congress Central government’s discriminatory attitude to the Left-run state governments. Connected to this is the struggle for more state rights and to restructure centre-state relations.

The CPI(M)’s line of thinking as propounded in para 112 of its Party programme, has borne fruit, leaving a strong imprint on India politics. It has increased the Party’s mass following in whichever state it has had the opportunity of playing a leading role in government along with the other left forces, the role played by our Party in these left-led governments, despite the numerous limitations imposed by the Centre run by ruling class parties and its constitutional prerogatives, has helped the CPI(M) to emerge as the leading Left party in the country.

New Situation & Challenges

The role of the CPI(M)-led state governments cannot be seen in isolation from the overall political situation and the tactical line adopted by the Party. Till the end of the eighties, the Party’s struggle to end the Congress monopoly in power, fight authoritarian trends, rally the democratic forces and fight back the anti-people policies were the backdrop in which the state governments functioned. The situation changed by the end of the 1980s. One party dominance of the Congress ended. Our Party’s tactical line and intervention played an important role in this, both in the struggle against authoritarianism and in rallying other secular bourgeois parties. The first change came about in the post-1977 period. After the successful struggle against one party authoritarianism, the ruling classes were no more united to fight the Marxists. The division in the ruling classes helped in our sustaining the Left Front government in West Bengal for a longer period. In the earlier phase, the governments formed from 1957 till 1967-70 lasted only on an average of not more than two years. The first communist ministry in Kerala lasted 29 months. Both the UF governments in West Bengal together had tenures of less than three years. The Kerala UF government lasted a little over two years. It was the success of our tactical line and the division of the ruling classes which enabled the governments of the post 1977 period to last for longer terms. Except for the 1988 episode of rigging in Tripura, the ruling classes have not been able to launch a counter offensive to dislodge the Left-led governments undemocratically. This is a reflection also of how the mass base of the Party has grown in the three states.
After the Left Front stabilizing and the durability of the government being ensured, the agenda of development with a pro-people orientation assumed importance. This has to accompanied by developing movements and struggles which can win new sections, expand the mass base of the Party and be part of the all-India movement to build a third alternative which can go forward to the left and democratic front. In the earlier phase, we talked in terms of using the state governments as “instruments of struggle” (New Situation and Tasks). Could that be the concept for running a government in the post 1977 phase?

After the adoption of the Party programme in 1964, the understanding that prevailed flowing from the international and national situation was as follows: 1. Internationally, socialism was considered the decisive force in shaping the correlation of forces 2. The national liberation movements were emerging victorious against imperialism 3. In the national situation, the economic crisis was seen to be developing into a political crisis 4. the formation of the UF governments were seen to be part of the rising tide of democratic forces 5. Call was given for a national democratic alternative to Congress rule.

In such a situation, the CC characterized the governments as instruments of struggle. After the end of the emergency and the 1977 elections, a new situation emerged. This was assessed in the Tenth Congress and a tactical line evolved.

It was no more relevant to view the Left led governments solely as instruments of struggle. It had to incorporate the aspect of running the government to meet the aspirations of the people, their developmental needs and mobilising them for alternative policies. This becomes all the more important in the context of the all India movement and the Left not being able to develop substantially in other parts of the country. The people of the three Left bastions cannot be told to wait indefinitely for their problems to be addressed till a change takes place at the all-India level. Given the fact that the emergence of a left and democratic alternative is a protracted affair, the governance, administration and development issues which affect the lives of people cannot be a secondary factor.

How to fulfill the commitments to the people and provide a government which is distinct from that of the bourgeois parties came to the fore.
In West Bengal, even before liberalisation, the issue of how to go about industrialisation came up. The issue of Haldia petro-chemical project being set-up in the joint sector came up in 1984-85. the state government decided to go in for a joint venture with the private sector. Questions were raised whether this was permissible. In the 12th Congress of the Party in December 1985, the matter was discussed. Comrade B. T. Ranadive summed up the discussions by stating that West Bengal under Left Front rule has been facing an “economic blockade” from the Centre. West Bengal was discriminated against on a class basis because it is run by a Left-led government. It is in the class interests of the working class to break this blockade. Industrialisation is necessary for West Bengal to generate employment. So the petro-chemical project with private sector participation is a tactical necessity. The Haldia project was the first major industrial venture initiated by the state government after it came into office in 1977.

After Liberalisation

The political situation by the end of the eighties changed. Throughout the 1990s there was a shift to the right with the rise of the BJP first as the major opposition party and later with its six years in office. The rise of the Hindutva communal forces had an adverse impact on the advance of the Left and democratic forces. The defence of secularism and isolating the communal forces also became a priority for the Left-led state governments. The second important change was the liberalisation and privatisation process which was initiated in 1991. The prominent features of these new liberalized policies were:

1. The deregulation of the economy and delicencing of industries by the Centre;
2. The curtailing of the public sector, its outright dismantling in certain areas and privatisation;
3. The opening up of India’s economy to foreign capital with special facilities for them;
4. The opening of the financial sector to foreign capital; and
5. The reduction in state intervention in the development of industries and the economy including the sphere of infrastructure and social sector expenditure.

The political resolutions of the Party Congresses from 1992 onwards have pointed out that these economic policies are not just the policies of the Congress(I) but of the Indian ruling classes. In fact, the BJP is also a vigorous advocate of neo-liberal policies.

The Central Committee resolution of 1994 On the Role of the West Bengal Left Front Government In The Context Of the New Economic Policies was the first document adopted by the Party to reappraise how the Left Front government can chalk out a path of development and formulate policies in a new situation where due to deregulation and delicencing it was no longer an issue of central discrimination but the state government having to solicit investments for industrial and infrastructural development. There was a change also in the Centre-State relations. The encroachment and limitations on the states came in new form through the Finance Commission’s terms of reference and for Central grants and loans for sectoral development conditionalities were attached whereby states had to undertake privatisation, downsizing etc.
It is in this context that it should be noted that the West Bengal government was the first government to come out with an alternative package when the Narasimha Rao government came to power in 1991. It should also be noted that subsequently in all the major strike struggles and movements launched by the Left parties and mass organisations it was the strength provided by the Left bastion of West Bengal and the strong contingents in Kerala and Tripura which enabled the CPI (M) to play a leading role in widening the resistance to the new economic policies and offering alternative policies. As the Central Committee resolution points out:
“It is the strength of the organised working class and the other sections of the toiling people in West Bengal, the total membership of the mass organisations led by the Party alone in West Bengal is over two crores, that has helped in the struggle against the economic policies. The existence of the Left Front government continuously from 1977 onwards has contributed in building up this organised strength and spearhead of the Left movement.
“However, to expect from the Left Front government that it alone can implement basic alternative policies in the face of this all India liberalisation and privatisation is to do violence to our own basic Party understanding and the programme. The Left Front government can only play a limited role in alternate policy implementation while it can play a big role in mobilizing the people against the centre’s policies. It is the Left Front government’s big achievement that it has been able to achieve a breakthrough in the areas where it has a greater degree of power – implementation of land reforms and stimulating agricultural production, decentralizing power to the panchayats and involving them in development work and to expand the democratic rights of the rural poor using the state machinery to neutralize the police and repressive measures against the working people’s struggles and to use the limited resources to stimulate small scale industrial development.”

Further, with the cutbacks in public investment and the social sector by the Centre, the state governments were squeezed of resources and unable to fulfill their commitments.
Taking stock of the new situation, the resolution stated: “Unlike in 1985, when the struggle was against the discrimination of the Centre, with its power of licensing and regulation of industry against West Bengal today with deregulation and delicencing it is upto the Left Front Government to initiate steps to attract capital investment in West Bengal. This can be done only by allowing greater investment of private capital in various sectors. This is the basis on which the Left Front government has to adjust its policies in West Bengal to meet the new situation brought about by the Centre’s policy of liberalisation. While doing so, the CPI(M) led government has to be conscious of not adopting any such terms or implementation which are only due to the unjustified pressure of foreign capital or big business. It should not go against available indigenous technology or lead to diversion of limited capital resources to inessential sectors……While orienting the policies and regulations in the state to facilitate greater private investment, the people should constantly be told that such industrialization and expansion of the private sector cannot solve the basic problems and class exploitation will continue and increase with the overall liberalisation policy of the Centre.”

Updated Programme Formulation

When the updating of the Party programme took place, the experience of running the state governments both in the earlier phase and in the post-1991 phase was taken into account. After the existence of the Left Front government in West Bengal for more than two decades and the long stints of such governments in Tripura and Kerala it was not sufficient to talk in terms of only providing “immediate” relief to the people. While the Left-led governments were successful in mobilizing more and more people around the platform of the Left and Democratic forces, the people expect these governments to also provide development. Creating employment, public education and health facilities, provision of basic services etc had to be on the agenda of the state governments. While the pressure of the central government and the ruling classes was for uncritical acceptance of the policies of liberalisation and privatisation, the Left-led governments had to take into account the existing realities and limitations of the state governments and work out policies and measures for economic and social development which would at the same time show that the Left-led governments have a pro-people approach and alternative policies which are part of our Left and Democratic platform. Para 112 of the earlier programme after revision in the updated programme as para 7.17 reads as follows:
“The Party will obviously have to work out various interim slogans in order to meet the requirements of a rapidly changing political situation. Even while keeping before the people the task of dislodging the present ruling classes and establishing a new democratic State and government based on the firm alliance of the working class and the peasantry, the Party will utilise the opportunities that present themselves of bringing into existence governments pledged to carry out a programme of providing relief to the people and strive to project and implement alternative policies within the existing limitations. The formation of such governments will strengthen the revolutionary movement of the working people and thus help the process of building the people's democratic front. It, however, would not solve the economic and political problems of the nation in any fundamental manner. The Party, therefore, will continue to educate the mass of the people on the need for replacing the present bourgeois-landlord State and government headed by the big bourgeoisie even while utilising opportunities for forming such governments in the states or the Centre, depending on the concrete situation, and thus strengthen the mass movement.” (Para 7.17)
Instead of the governments aiming to carry out a “modest programme of giving immediate relief to the people”, the updated programme provides for “governments pledged to carry out a programme of providing relief to the people and strive to project and implement alternative policies within the existing limitations.“ The governments cannot confine themselves to only providing immediate relief but something more substantial. It also should strive to implement within the existing limitations certain alternative policies. In fact even the implementation of land reforms is not just providing “immediate relief” but is part of the alternative platform of the Left and democratic forces.

The earlier formulation had described these governments as “governments of a transitional character”. The word “transitional” has been dropped since it may create confusion that these governments have a very limited period. But the word transitional has a more basic meaning that the governments formed are part of the attempt to bring about a transition to the Left and democratic alternative and the People’s Democratic Front. The third point in the updated para clarifies that this tactical approach to participation in government applies to both the states and the Central governments. Participation in the Central government will also be based on the framework set out in Para 7.17 and the factors influencing such a decision will depend on the concrete situation prevailing and whether such a step will help strengthen the revolutionary movement and help the process of building a People’s Democratic Front.

On Certain Policy Issues

It is flowing from this understanding that the Central Committee has been addressing issues and policy matters arising out of our running the three state governments. In the 18th Party Congress we adopted a document on Certain Policy Issues as part of the Political Organisational Report. In this section some of the policy questions before the state governments led by our Party were addressed and a direction given. These pertain to: 1. Taking loans and grants from foreign and multilateral agencies; 2. stand on public sector; 3. foreign direct investment.
There are certain other policy directives which have relevance to the Left-led state governments such as the demands/steps to be taken in the sphere of education and health system that are increasingly getting privatized and commercialized. The document spells out our stand on NGOs and Self Help Groups (SHGs) which also needs to find reflection in government policy.

On Loans & Grants

The document spells out the approach to be taken by our governments towards loans and grants from foreign countries/agencies. Under the neo-liberal policies state governments are faced with a fiscal crunch. Central transfers have come down, there are high interest rates on loans given to the Centre and the thrust is to compel states to promote privatisation in the social sector to meet the withdrawal of the state from its commitments. In such a situation, it will not be possible for the Left-led state governments to avoid taking loans and assistance from foreign and multilateral agencies, if they are to implement their developmental programmes and maintain their social sector commitments. As the document points out:


“These governments, therefore, may accept aid for developmental projects but the important criteria that needs to be adhered is that there should be no conditionalities which are against our basic interests and policies. In no case should we go in for loans which involve structural adjustment programmes. Such programmes entail conditionalities like privatisation of certain sectors, downsizing staff, cutting subsidies and fiscal conditionalities.

“The CPI(M)-led state governments have to function under constraints, including those imposed by imperialist-dictated policies at the Centre, which the Party fights to overcome. The Party’s fight against such policies, therefore, is simultaneously a defence of the interests of our state governments. Whenever our governments hard-pressed for funds but duty-bound to provide relief to the people are offered loans by imperialist agencies and western governments, the Party should consent to such loans only if it does not weaken its fight against the imperialist-dictated policies. In all cases, where the Party agrees to such loans from international agencies like World Bank, ADB, DFID, JBIC etc, it must take the people into confidence and explain to them the justification for taking such loans.

“Increasingly, in this phase of imperialist globalisation, a large number of western governments and agencies patronized by them fund developmental activities in third world countries. The question of accepting such funds will, once again, have to be based on a similar approach by evaluating the conditionalities that are attached. The thumb rule that must guide our governments as well as other institutions in deciding the acceptance of such funds must be based on an evaluation that this will provide some relief to the people and lead to economic improvement without compromising the state government’s autonomy in economic decision making. Our attitude towards accepting such funding must strictly be based on such an understanding.”

On FDI

On FDI, the document sets out broadly the criteria for acceptance of foreign capital investment which is applicable to our state governments too:

“Under such circumstances, the flow of foreign capital into our country, in the present conditions, must be regulated by stipulating the following conditions: a) such capital should augment the existing productive capacities in our economy; b) such foreign capital must upgrade the Indian economy technologically; and c) such capital must lead to employment generation.

“While foreign capital will seek to exploit our natural resources and labour to garner superprofits, the struggle for imposition of these conditions will, apart from making the resistance to the task of eroding national sovereignty more effective, render some benefit to the Indian economy and the people.

“Apart from these conditions, the entry of foreign capital into specific areas (like, for instance, with respect to agricultural sector, for example, land use regulations, trade tariffs, seeds, fertilizers etc) which can have negative consequences for our economic and political sovereignty must be opposed.”

Tasks Before the Party

The entire Party must imbibe the understanding of the role of the CPI(M)-led governments. Failure to do so leads to exaggerated expectations. At the present , when the three states are our advanced outposts in a national situation where the Party and the left have been unable to expand the base and advance towards building a left and democratic front, it is unrealistic to expect the Left-led state governments to initiate any basic changes. Especially since the advent of liberalization and neo-liberal policies, our governments have been defensively reacting to protect whatever gains that were made and to bring about some development and provide relief to the people. As the 18th Congress political resolution stated:

“Faced with the neo-liberal policies of the Centre, the Left-led governments have to struggle hard to pursue policies which ensure pro-people and balanced development. While promoting private investment, the Left Front governments defend the public sector in key areas, protect and, if possible, expand public expenditure in the social sector and project alternative policies to protect the poorer sections who are the worst affected by the policies pursued by the Central government. “

While running the government, the policies and steps we take must be seen in the light of the all India tactical line and policies that we are advocating. While working within the serious constraints, the Party and the leadership of the state governments must be conscious that any policy or measure taken will have its impact nationally and all over the country. We have to constantly discuss and formulate policy measures which will balance the needs of the government with that of projecting the alternative policies that we are advocating.

As Party programme directive said, the work of the state governments should give a fillip to the movement in the rest of India. The policies and steps taken by the Left-led governments had an impact nationally. It enhanced the image of the party and its capacity for intervention. The land reform implementation, the panchayat system, the safeguarding of democratic rights of the working people, social welfare measures, the defence of secularism and checking communal forces – all these have helped the Party in the other states to propagate the achievements of the Party led state governments. While making policies and implementing measures, the Party and leadership of the state governments must bear in mind that what they do have an impact on the Party and movement in the rest of the country. It is the responsibility of the State party and government leadership to bear in mind that apart from fulfilling the commitments made to the people, we also have to run the governments in a manner that will strengthen the left and democratic forces in the country. It is the responsibility of the Party all over the country to understand the situation in which these governments are functioning and to highlight the pro-people measures and alternative approaches that we are adopting in these states.

***From a booklet published by CPI(M) Central Committee

Left Front Government In West Bengal

By Jyoti Basu

(Published in

People’s Democracy,

April 03, 2005)

ON the occasion of the 18th Party Congress of the CPI (M), I would like to highlight some of the important activities of the Left Front government in West Bengal.

Let us have a look at the past. The Congress party ruled West Bengal for 27 years. Our Party and some other Left and democratic parties were in opposition. Before 1952, the Communist Party had only two representatives in the West Bengal legislative assembly. Gradually, the strength of our Party grew as the communist movement gained momentum. We stood by the people when they agitated against the government on several issues. The Communist Party championed the rights of peasants, workers, employees of government and non-government sectors, women, students, teachers, refugees from the erstwhile East Pakistan, SC, ST and other economically backward people, the poor and the oppressed.

The Congress government pursued anti-people policies and resorted to lathicharge and firing to suppress mass movements. The political opponents of the Congress government were subjected to oppression in various ways. Time and again, we suffered imprisonment without trial.

The conscious people of West Bengal appreciated the role of the Communist Party in strengthening democratic movements.

After the split of the former party, the CPI (M) addressed itself to the task of intensifying mass movements. In 1967 and 1969, the Congress party was defeated in state assembly elections and two United Front governments with the CPI (M) as the major partner were formed. In those two elections, our Party won the largest number of seats among non-Congress parties, yet we conceded the post of chief minister to the Bangla Congress leader, Ajoy Mukherjee. But those two UF governments could not function for more than 22 months because of internal dissensions and conspiracies hatched against them by some reactionary political forces and vested interests. In the elections to the state assembly in 1971, the CPI (M) became the single largest party. 

In 1972, the Congress party formed the government in West Bengal through the rigged elections to the state assembly. After the elections, West Bengal passed through a dark phase of its history. Democratic

rights of the people were severely curtailed and anarchy prevailed in all vital sectors of activity. Thousands of our comrades and supporters were injured and killed. Many others were put in jail without trial or on concocted charges. Our supporters and workers were evicted from their houses and driven out of their areas. Our offices were ransacked and destroyed. In fact, a one-party semi-fascist regime was forced on the people of West Bengal. In 1975, Indira Gandhi declared a state of Emergency in India. During that period the agony of the people became intense.

The significant change in the political scenario came with the defeat of the Congress party in the Lok Sabha elections in 1977. Subsequently, the elections to the West Bengal assembly were held. The unity among most of the Left parties became a reality. The CPI, however, joined the Left Front later.

In the state assembly elections in 1977, the Left Front won a massive victory and the Congress party was routed. The first Left Front government was formed on June 21, 1977. After taking the oath of office as chief minister, I said that our government would not be run from the Writers’ Buildings alone; it would maintain a close touch with the representative organisations of the people. We laid emphasis on alleviating the hardship of the people by implementing public welfare schemes and programmes. We asserted that better governance and adequate relief would be provided to the people. Our government took prompt steps to ensure democratic rights and civil liberty to all sections of the community.

Since 1977 the Left Front government has been elected for six consecutive terms and has been endeavouring earnestly to accelerate the pace of development in West Bengal. Through the implementation of land reform measures and the introduction of the three-tier Panchayati Raj system the Left Front government has been able to achieve a major breakthrough in agriculture and allied sectors. West Bengal has created a new record in the vesting and distribution of surplus land. So far 15 lakh bargadars (sharecroppers) have been recorded. The rights of agricultural workers have been ensured. The administration has been decentralised down to the village level. Till March, 2004, the production of foodgrains reached 159.54 lakh tonnes from 89.77 lakh tonnes in 1977. The significant rise in the agricultural production and the growing purchasing power of the people living in villages indicate the progress of West Bengal in the rural sector. The requisite social base has been created for the rapid industrialisation of the state.

In the 1970s and 1980s, the state’s industrial sector had been plagued by serious difficulties because of the central government’s licensing policy and the freight equalisation scheme for coal, iron and steel. We strongly protested against those two polices. The government of India ultimately made policy changes on those two issues under both external and internal pressures. In September 1994, the state government issued a statement reiterating its industrial policy. The statement emphasised, “we are all for new technology and investment in selective spheres where they help our economy and which are of mutual interest. The goal of self-reliance, however, is as needed today as earlier. We have the state sector, the private sector and also the joint sector. All these have a role to play”.

After the reiteration, the industrial investment in the state started increasing. Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd. (HPL) was commissioned in April 2000. It may be recalled that the state government had to wait for 11 years to obtain the letter of intent from the government of India. HPL and its downstream industries have been effectively functioning for the last five years. At present, the number of downstream units of Haldia is 684. These units employ about 31,770 persons. Mitsubishi Chemical Corporation PTA Plant at Haldia and other important industrial units have been operating with considerable success. It is worth mentioning that iron and steel, chemicals, leather and cement industries have been growing steadily in West Bengal. The recent spurt of industrial investment has raised new hopes among our people. I am sure that more modern industries will be set up in the state in the near future.

West Bengal has been making steady progress in sectors such as cottage and small-scale industries, fisheries, social forestry, education and culture. The percentage of literacy in the state increased from 57.70 in 1991 to 69.22 in 2001. New schools, colleges and universities have been set up. The West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences and the West Bengal University of Technology are recent additions to the field of higher education in the state. The number of engineering colleges in West Bengal has now increased to 52 from 10 in 1997. The state government run hospitals cater to the healthcare needs of more than 70 per cent of patients.

Steps are being taken to develop the infrastructure sector. Power situation in the state is now comfortable with the addition of installed capacity. So far as the rural electrification is concerned, the state government intends to bring all villages under electrification by 2006-2007. A number of bridges and flyovers have been built in the state. Efforts are going on to strengthen and expand the road network. New townships are coming up while facilities in the social sector are being augmented.

The construction of flyovers in Kolkata with Japanese cooperation in some of these projects, and the provision of other amenities has brought about a distinct improvement in the metropolis. Many other urban areas are also being provided with new facilities.

In West Bengal, the percentage of people living below the poverty line has now come down to 26 from 52 in 1978. Unemployment, which is very acute all over the country, is also a matter of major concern for us in West Bengal. For several years the Left Front government, despite its constraints, has been trying to tackle this problem by encouraging self-employment schemes and facilitating activities in the labour intensive medium and small-scale industries.

The sixth Left Front government has been placing emphasis on the rapid growth of information technology. At present, 210 IT units operate and employ about 24,000 IT professionals in the state. Many leading foreign and domestic companies such as IBM, Computer Associates, Wipro, TCS, Cognizant Technology and PWC have set up units in the state. The new town in Kolkata will be next IT hub after Bidhannagar (Salt Lake).

The expansion of the agri-business sector is a significant development. Five Agri Export Zones for five important crops have been set up. New food processing units are being established. Appropriate infrastructure is being developed.

It is a matter of comfort that some misgivings about the state government in certain quarters are being dispelled. So there are distinct possibilities of opening up further avenues of development. The state government is conscious that there is no room for complacence. It is constantly engaged in identifying its weakness and adopting corrective measures.

The people’s verdict went overwhelmingly in favour of the Left Front candidates in the successive elections to the urban local bodies and panchayats in the state. In the Lok Sabha elections, too, the front performed creditably in West Bengal.

West Bengal has been maintaining political stability and peace for the last 27 years. The democratic-minded people of the state with their strong commitment to national integration are determined to preserve communal harmony. I am confident that the Left Front government will continue to act according to its well-defined objectives and priorities.

Left Front Govt: Bastion of Left Democratic Forces

by Prakash Karat

Published in The Marxist
Volume: 18, No. 02
April-June 2002

The existence of the Left Front government in West Bengal for 25 years is a remarkable record. The achievements during this long tenure in government is chronicled in the subsequent articles appearing in this issue. The focus of this introductory piece is to place the Left Front government in the context of the CPI(M)’s understanding on participation in state governments and its relationship with the strategy and tactics of the Party. This article also assesses the impact of the Left Front government on national politics over the last two and a half decades. The significance of the quarter century rule of a Left government which is headed by a Communist Party in a state with a population of over 80 million (the fourth largest in India) cannot be underestimated.

I

The CPI(M) has been participating in state governments for more than three decades. Prior to that, the first Communist ministry headed by E.M.S. Namboodiripad was formed in Kerala after the united CPI won a majority in the assembly elections in 1957. Based on the programmatic understanding provided in para 112 of the Party Programme, which was adopted in 1964, the Central Committee of the Party spelt out its understanding on joining the state governments in 1967 after the general elections. In its Political Report on `New situation and the new tasks before the Party’, the scope and the potential role of the state governments in which the CPI(M) would be involved were elaborated.

The Party Programme had stated that : "Even while keeping before the people the task of dislodging the present ruling classes and establishing a new democratic state and government based on the firm alliance of the working class and the peasantry, the Party will utilise the opportunities that present themselves of bringing into existence governments pledged to carry out a programme of giving immediate relief to the people. The formation of such governments will give great fillip to the revolutionary movement of the working people and thus help the process of building the democratic front."

It is this tactical direction provided in the Programme which was fleshed out by the 1967 report keeping in mind the then prevailing political situation. For the first time, the Congress party suffered a serious blow after the 1967 general assembly elections when it lost in nine states. Non-Congress state governments came into office in all these states. Of these, in two states – Kerala and West Bengal – the CPI(M) decided to participate in the united front governments which were formed.

The CPI(M) decided to participate in the united front governments in Kerala and West Bengal since the Left and democratic forces were in a predominant position. The CPI(M) decided not to join other non-Congress governments. The consideration was, whether the CPI(M) and other Left and democratic forces were in a position to influence the policies and the course of such governments. The Party did not want to tail the bourgeois parties in the non-Congress alliances, if its independent strength was minimal and inadequate.

Defining the scope of these governments, the report stated: “In a word, the UF governments that we have now are to be treated and understood as instruments of struggle in the hands of our people, more than as governments that actually possess adequate power, that can materially and substantially give relief to the people. In clear class terms, our Party’s participation in such governments is one specific form of struggle to win more and more people, and more and more allies for the proletariat and its allies as the struggle for the cause of people’s democracy and at a later stage for socialism.”

It was based on this understanding that the CPI(M) worked in the united front governments of West Bengal and Kerala. The life of these governments were relatively short. In West Bengal, the 1967 government existed for nine months followed by the 1969 mid-term elections, which saw its return and its continuation till 1970 when it was dismissed by the Central government. In Kerala, the 1967 ministry lasted till October 1969.

In this period, the Party gathered rich experience in running governments and utilising the stints in government to foster struggles and expand the class based movements. The best example is the land struggle unleashed in the 1967-1970 period when Jyoti Basu was the Home Minister and Harekrishna Konar was the Land Reforms Minister in the united front government. The struggle by the peasants to occupy the benami lands and the surplus land above the ceiling law led to nearly six lakh acres being taken over from the landlords. The ruling classes were alarmed by this development.

The Congress party which had weakened on the all-India plane after the 1967 general election hit back with renewed vigour under the leadership of Indira Gandhi after the split in the Congress in 1969. In Kerala too, the policy of "administration and struggle" saw the sharpening of the conflict with landlords and vested interests and this was reflected within the united front when an anti-CPI(M) combination, which included the CPI, arose.

It took the tumultuous years of 1970s which saw big struggles including the historic railway strike, the advent of the emergency and the defeat of authoritarianism for the reforging of Left unity to begin.

The 1967 report had talked of the role of the non-Congress governments and, in particular, the "democratic non-Congress governments" which were set-up in West Bengal and Kerala. The victory of the Left Front in June 1977 in West Bengal brought about a government comprising only the Left parties. It was not merely a democratic or non-Congress government. Further, the Left Front won a two-thirds majority getting 228 out of the 294 seats in the Assembly. The CPI(M), on its own, won an absolute majority with 177 seats.

The defeat of authoritarianism in the wake of the Emergency, the favourable national and international situation and the strength of the CPI(M) and the Left Front in the Assembly with a solid majority made it possible, for the first time, for a Left-led government to function in a stable manner in the state. These factors were the basis for a Left-led state government, for the first time, completing its full term of five years despite the severe limitations imposed on the state government under the Constitution.

The implications of the longevity of the Left Front government began to be realised gradually. The perspective set out in the 1967 report proved to be fruitful in dealing with the situation in which the united front governments functioned. These were governments with no majority for the Left and which had to face the brunt of a hostile centre and a gang up of anti-Communist forces within the two states. The formulation stated that these governments "are to be treated and understood as instruments of struggle in the hands of our people, more than as governments that actually possess adequate power that can materially and substantially give relief to the people". It correctly stressed the limitations of a state government within the constitutional structure and the necessity to use these governments as instruments of struggle. But the understanding was that these governments would be short lived. So while providing some immediate relief to the people, all efforts should be made to mobilise the people, the emphasis was on utilising the governments as instruments of struggle for winning more and more people to the side of the Party and the people's democracy. Underlying this approach was also the overall framework of the Party's understanding in the late 1960s that the struggle for people's democracy will progress rapidly given the favourable correlation of forces internationally -- an understanding which also permeated the Programme of the Party adopted in 1964.

Experience of the Left Front government in West Bengal over the years necessitated a reappraisal of this approach. This was mainly for two reasons. Firstly, the Party had to arrive at a correct conclusion about the longevity of the Left Front government. Secondly, the changed context of the international and national situation which came into being in the nineties.

Right from the outset, the twin policies of implementation of land reforms and revitalising and institutionalising the three-tier panchayat system were the basis for the advance of the CPI(M) and its political influence among the rural masses. By the end of the first term of the Left Front government, 8 lakh acres of surplus land had been distributed to the landless. In 1978, the first elections to the three-tier panchayat system were held which led to the Left Front winning 38,468 seats out of the 66,000 seats for which elections were held. The CPI(M) alone won 34,445 seats which was over 60 per cent of the seats.

Successive terms of the Left Front governments expanded and consolidated in these two areas. It is this unique record of the CPI(M) in advancing the interests of the rural poor which gave it a sound and stable mass base. The post-1977 period also proved to be different from the earlier period. The divisions in the ruling classes which were reflected in the conflicts between the bourgeois-landlord parties resulted in the Emergency, but they continued even after 1977.

The success of the Left Front in 1977 was widely seen as a victory for the democratic forces in the anti-authoritarian struggle. It was not possible for the ruling classes to isolate the CPI(M) and the emerging united Left in the manner in which it was done in the 1969-70 period. A far cry from the days when Atal Behari Vajpayee, the leader of the Jan Sangh, speaking in the Lok Sabha in 1971 demanded harsher measures against the Marxists in West Bengal, including the use of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act.

Not that there was any respite for the Left Front government from hostile attacks. Here again, it was the Congress party, which took the lead in 1980s. After the return of Ms. Gandhi to power in 1980, repeated efforts were made to create difficulties for the functioning of the state governments. The Rajiv Gandhi government from 1984 to 1989 continued with this hostile approach. Even the clearance for a petrochemical project in Haldia took nearly a decade.

Fighting the Communists provided the impetus for the Congress, the major bourgeois-landlord party, to support a variety of divisive forces. At a time when the Congress was professedly fighting such forces which threatened national unity in Punjab, Assam and elsewhere, it had no hesitation in giving tacit support to the Gorkhaland agitation which saw large scale violence and the killing of over 100 cadres and activists of the CPI(M).

The international dimension of the hostile maneouvres against the Left Front government was exposed by the air dropping of arms in Purulia in 1994 which marked a new stage in the conspiracies against the Left Front government. One of the main actors in the conspiracy, Peter Bleach, who is now serving a sentence in jail, has confirmed that the arms were meant for use against the Communist government in West Bengal. The immediate recipients being the fascistic Anand Marg which has international connections.

If the Congress Central governments and its party units in West Bengal were spearheading the anti-Communist campaign in the earlier phase, the durability of the Left Front government invited attacks from another source in the recent years. This has emanated from Trinamool Congress-BJP combine -- a formation which came into existence after the BJP assumed power at the Centre in 1998. The BJP with its visceral anti-Communism found the Trinamool an ideal instrument to rally the landlords and neo-rich elements to mount this attack.

The 1999-2000 period witnessed intense attacks, planned and sponsored by this combine. In the space of a few months in a triangular area covering parts of Midnapore and Hooghly districts, armed gangs spread terror and drove away scores of CPI(M) activists and cleansed large areas of Communist influence. This attack too was foiled and rolled back. A heavy price was paid with 300 CPI(M) and Left Front workers being killed. The assembly elections of May 2001 signalled the defeat of this latest round of conspiracy against the Left Front government.

The development of a strong base for the Communist movement in West Bengal is the best example of the creative application of Marxism to Indian conditions. Under the present set-up, State power resides in the Centre and the state governments have limited powers under the Constitution. Though called a Union of states, in practice, all the major powers of the Indian State vest with the Centre.

The innovative approach to participation in the state governments worked out by the CPI(M) on the basis of the experience gained from the time of the first Communist ministry, and of the United Front governments in the late sixties was further developed with experience of the Left Front government in West Bengal. Belying the earlier expectation, the Left Front government has lasted for two and a half decades. The formulation in the Programme adopted in 1964 that such government should provide "immediate relief" to the people cannot hold good any more. It has to be extended in the light of the achievements and progress made in various spheres. That is why, in the Programme which was updated in the year 2000, the section on the Party's participation in government talks about carrying out "a programme of providing relief to the people and strive to project and implement alternative policies within the existing limitations". Projecting and implementing alternative policies within the existing limitations has assumed greater importance given the longevity of the Left Front government of West Bengal.

A new course for rural development building upon the land reforms implemented, became essential. New social relations and aspirations existed in the rural areas. Industrialisation and urban development acquired a priority in the current phase. The small scale industries sector had made good progress but it was necessary to go into new areas with advanced technology. The democratisation of society through the strengthening of local bodies and decentralisation had to be carried forward. The quality of public education and health system had to be improved. It was not possible to run the government with makeshift policies, when the whole framework of Central policies had changed.

The context in which a more long term approach had to be devised was also different. A big change had taken place between the first fifteen years of the Left Front government and the subsequent decade. The entire world situation changed with the disappearance of the Soviet Union and the change in the correlation of forces in favour of imperialism. The impact of the imperialist driven globalisation was directly felt in India. The policies of liberalisation, accepting the neo-liberal framework set out by the IMF and the World Bank brought about a new environment in which the Left Front government had to operate.

The unfolding of this new phase of liberalisation and coping with its pernicious onslaught had to be squarely met. The CPI(M)'s framework for running the state government consisted of two aspects:

Firstly, the limited powers given under the states list of the Constitution are to be used effectively in areas like land reforms, school education, panchayat system and partially the police and labour machinery. Policies in these areas would help to expand the mass base of the Party and rally wider sections around the Left and democratic platform.

Secondly, in those areas where real power exists only with the Centre and these are the key levers of State power like the bureaucracy, financial resources, judiciary and economic policy, the state governments functions under severe limitations. Here the struggle for alternative policies have to be conducted in West Bengal as part of the all-India movement. The Central framework of policies cannot be altered, or, transcended in West Bengal alone. At the same time, policies had to be devised to protect the people's interests and livelihood.

With the advent of the liberalisation and abandonment of the old State-sponsored path of capitalist development, the policies of the Left Front government and the tactics of the mass movement had also to change. In December 1994, the Central Committee adopted a resolution on the "Role of the West Bengal Left Front government in the context of the new economic policies". The resolution stated: "Unlike in 1985, when the struggle was against the discrimination of the Centre, with its power of licensing and regulation of industry against West Bengal today with deregulation and delicensing it is upto the Left Front government to initiate steps to attract capital investment in West Bengal. This can be done only by allowing greater investment of private capital in various sectors. This is the basis on which the Left Front government has to adjust its policies in West Bengal to meet the new situation brought about by the Centre's policy of liberalisation….

"The Left Front government's policies should be in defence of the public sector in core areas, retaining the state intervention in the infrastructure development and in social infrastructure like health and education while actively canvassing for fresh capital investment in the sectors such as electronics, petrochemicals and other specialised areas which cannot be developed with government funds. In every forum where official policies are debated, the Left Front government must clearly set out the alternative policies possible in the present situation and in the long term and this should be the basis for our Party's propaganda and mobilisation among the masses."

After nearly a decade of the policies of liberalisation, the sixth Left Front government was elected in May 2001 once again with the two-thirds majority. A cabinet with Buddhadeb Bhattacharya as the Chief Minister took office. It became necessary for the Party to chalk out a more systematic approach on how to deal with the situation wherein the state government has to work within the liberalisation framework of the Central government. The steps to dismantle the public sector, reduction of public investment, cutbacks of public expenditure on public services and the social sector were all creating serious difficulties for the state government. Further, the Centre was making it contingent on the state government to implement its policies for receiving funds. The adverse consequences were being felt by the state government with the deepening fiscal crisis and the limited capacity of the state government to intervene in economic matters.

It was in this context that the state conference of the West Bengal unit of the CPI(M) held in February 2002 discussed this issue thoroughly and adopted a resolution on "Left Front government and our tasks". Streamlining government's expenditure; securing investment for new industrial projects; provision of adequate facilities for small and marginal farmers to sustain agricultural production; innovative schemes for generating employment and improvement of health and education facilities constituted some of the directives.

The Party was also enjoined with certain responsibilities to mobilise the people for effective implementation of government schemes and ensuring proper coordination between the people and the administration. A set of demands to the Central government, to ensure that the commitments made to the people were fulfilled, constituted an important part of the resolution which will form the basis for popular mobilisation and rallying other states on common demands.
Noting the circumstances in which the Left-led governments have to function, the Political Resolution of the 17th Congress of the Party stated: "Both the West Bengal and Tripura governments have to work under the severe constraints imposed by the economic policies of the Centre and the withdrawal of the State from economic activities. We should explain to the people frankly the situation and devise measures which can effectively fulfill our commitments to them."

The record of the 25 years generates the confidence that this challenge too will be met successfully by the West Bengal government. The CPI(M) is committed to the basic postulates set out in the Programme regarding the state government that it leads: Such a government will stand with the people and provide whatever relief is possible within the existing limitations; it should formulate and implement policies in a manner which is different from that of the bourgeois-landlord state governments; it will continue to mobilise the people in the struggle to implement alternative policies.

The Left Front government of West Bengal by its policies and performance can aid the struggle against the BJP-led government's policies in a big way. The Left Front government's role will immensely strengthen the all-India struggle not only against the economic policies but also in building the Left and democratic front which is essential to bring about a change in the correlation of forces.

II

The vital importance of the Left Front rule for the Communist movement in India cannot be overemphasised. When the CPI(M)-led Front won the elections for the first time in 1977, the international situation was favourable for the progressive forces in general. The national liberation struggles were at a high pitch. Vietnam has been liberated and re-unified after an epochal struggle, two years earlier in 1977. The liberation struggles in southern Africa, in Angola and in Mozambique were advancing. The socialist bloc seemed capable of thwarting the maneouvres of imperialism. From that time to now, there has been a drastic change. The Left Front government went through this whole period and witnessed the transition to a more hostile environment in 1990s. In the last decade, when the Left has been under siege internationally, the Left Front fought three state assembly elections -- in 1991, 1996 and 2001 -- and won decisively. Similarly, the Left emerged victorious in two rounds of panchayat elections involving the entire rural population held in 1993 and 1998.

At the national level, the 25 years have seen seven successive governments at the Centre and nine Prime Ministers. When Jyoti Basu first became the Chief Minister, there was the Janata Party-led coalition government headed by Morarji Desai. It was followed by the return of the Indira Gandhi led Congress government, the Rajiv Gandhi government, the V.P. Singh led National Front government (an interim six-month Chandrashekhar regime), the Narasimha Rao led Congress government, the United Front governments under Deve Gowda and I.K. Gujral and finally, the BJP-led Vajpayee government since 1998.

When the country as a whole is faced with the offensive of the communal forces led by the RSS combine, West Bengal has maintained communal harmony. It is a state with a substantial Muslim minority population of 24 per cent. The Left Front government while firmly defending the rights of the minorities has also refused to compromise with fundamentalist forces for short-term gains.

It is the uninterrupted presence of a Left Front government in West Bengal that provided a constant base for the projection of a Left and democratic alternative at the national level. On every major issue -- political, economic and social -- which arose in this period, the intervention of the Left has been enhanced by the stance of the Left Front government.

The strength of the CPI(M) and the Left in West Bengal has boosted the Left profile in national politics. The bulk of the Left MPs in Parliament have come from West Bengal. The state has contributed 70 to 75 per cent of the Left members in both Houses of Parliament. It is the mainstay for the parliamentary representation of the Left.

The Left and democratic alternative policies include the implementation of land reform, decentralisation of powers at all levels, stepped up adequate State expenditure on education and health and expansion of these sectors, strengthening the public distribution system, stepped up public investment in agriculture and strengthening of the public sector in key sectors, regulating foreign finance capital flows and determining foreign direct investment according to the national priorities. In all these areas, the policies of the Left Front government working under limitations have added to the credibility of the Left's fight against the IMF-World Bank dictated path of development.

The Left Front government's firm stand in defence of secularism and refusal to compromise with the communal forces in contrast to the dubious record of various other state governments have provided teeth to the Left's consistent opposition to communal ideology and politics. In particular, the Left Front government has firmly dealt with the activities of the Hindutva forces whatever they sought to create communal tensions and threaten peace and harmony. West Bengal was able to show how communalism of various varieties can be kept in check if there is a government of firm political will to defend secularism. This is a significant achievement given the history of communal politics in the undivided Bengal before independence.

The consistent advocacy of the rights of States by the Left Front government of West Bengal has played a major role in putting the restructuring of Centre-State relations on to the national agenda. Chief Minister Jyoti Basu and his Finance Minister played an important role in the Srinagar conference on Centre-State relations held in 1983 which provided a sound basis for a federal structure. The convening, for the first time, of the Inter-States Council in 1989 by the V.P. Singh government was a concrete step in this continuing effort. The voice of the states for adequate devolution of financial resources, to halt the encroachment on states' rights was heard more effectively due to the able championing by the representatives of Left Front government in all national forums.

Time and again, it is the principled stance adopted by the Left Front government in defence of the rights of the working people which has checked the hand of the Central government when it sought to embark on legislation and policy decisions harmful to the working class and the common people. The Left Front of West Bengal has never seen itself as only the custodian of the rights of the working people of West Bengal, but of the entire country when it comes to all-India policy matters. On the rights of States, on protecting democratic rights of citizens, on decentralisation of powers upto the village level, on protecting the rights of minorities, on strengthening national sovereignty and self-reliance -- the Left Front government always spoken of on all these issues lending weight to the stand taken by the Left and democratic forces in the country.

West Bengal, under the Left Front government, also showed it is possible to take up social policies in the interests of the dalits and adivasis in such a manner as to render substantial gains to them without creating caste and social divisions. The steady advances made by the scheduled castes have not led to any upper caste backlash, nor are there atrocities against the socially oppressed sections. The polarisation created by the implementation of the Mandal Commission report and the caste based mobilisation common in other parts of the country have not affected the state. The steps taken to provide joint pattas to women and enlarge their participation in economic activities and local bodies are also noteworthy.

Another area in which the Left Front government has enhanced the prestige of the Communists and the Left forces is in the setting of high standards of integrity and probity in public life. All the ministers and the elected representatives of the Left in the state legislature as public servants have shown what needs to be done to be committed to public service. The salaries of the ministers in the West Bengal Cabinet are the lowest in the country (apart from Tripura). The salaries, allowances and perks of the legislators are the least in West Bengal. Incidentally, an MLA in Bihar receives two to three times the salary and allowances available to a West Bengal legislator. The ministers and legislators of the CPI(M) pay levy to the Party on their salaries which leaves them with incomes not much higher than that of other Party cadres. Whenever a few cases of misuse of funds by elected representatives in the panchayat system have come to light, the Party has taken firm action by removing such persons from the membership of the Party. There is no loot of public funds by the elected representatives of the Left as is normal among ruling parties in other states.

III

The key to the Left Front government's success cannot be only its policies and the performance. The record of the performance is modest in certain spheres. There is still a high degree of bureaucratic sloth which thwarts many worthwhile governmental and private initiatives. The secret of its longevity and the tenacity of the popular support for a state government severely hampered by the bourgeois-landlord system lies elsewhere. It is in the realm of people's consciousness.

No other state government has aroused such hostility in the dominant bourgeois media. The vicious campaign conducted through the years by the Ananda Bazar Patrika and similar newspapers displayed the naked class hostility under the cover of media criticism. The inflammatory campaign which involved a mix of lies and distortions was reminiscent of the way the El Mercurio and other right-wing papers in Chile conducted propaganda against the Allende government in 1972-1973.

It is a tribute to the organisation of the CPI(M) and the popular consciousness generated by the Party and the Left Front government that they could withstand the barrage of propaganda conducted by the dominant media in the state. West Bengal would be one of the few exceptions where the power of the modern bourgeois media was, to an extent, effectively neutralised. This by itself would merit a separate study.

Despite the most powerful and lethal anti-Communist propaganda, the people who remained loyal to the Left has been steady. In no assembly election has the Left polled less than 48 to 49 per cent of the vote. To be able to retain such a base through the ups and downs of the political situation in the country and the hostile international environment testifies to the political consciousness of the people.

The role of the Communist Party in creating this consciousness has been crucial. More than 30,000 Party cadres and activists are involved in running various aspects of the government administration and local bodies. Tens of thousands are in daily contact with the people, explaining the political situation, dealing with urgent problems of the people and leading them in different forms of struggle. This is a tribute to the Leninist principles of organisation, which have been so well mastered by the West Bengal unit of the CPI(M).

The critics from the Left often maintain that the existence of the Left Front government has actually acted as a dampner on class struggle in West Bengal. Nothing can be farther from the reality. The building up of a powerful peasant movement (the Kisan Sabha has a membership of one crore ten lakhs) is a result of ceaseless class struggles. The trade union movement in the state is the strongest contingent of the working class movement in the country. Every all-India action of different sections of the working class evokes the most widespread participation of the workers of the state.

The struggle to defend the Left Front government is itself a manifestation of the class struggle which has reached higher levels in the state than elsewhere. The 3,400 cadres and activists of the CPI(M) who were killed in the past 25 years under Left Front rule were part of this class struggle. The CPI(M) and the Left Front have not used the police and administrative machinery to suppress political opponents. Rather it is the reliance on political struggle and mass mobilisation which has enabled West Bengal to be free of the anti-democratic exercises so common in the states run by bourgeois parties. This again is not due to the CPI(M) and the Left parties alone, but stems from the higher level of democratic consciousness which has been created amongst the people.

The country as a whole has witnessed a rightward shift in the past one decade. The existence of a rightwing communal regime at the Centre and the recent events in Gujarat are pointers to the possibilities of an authoritarianism tinged with fascism. The existence of a Left Front government in West Bengal stands as an open challenge to these dark forces. That by itself makes the 25th anniversary of this popular government an occasion invested with great meaning.