You don`t say!
Darius Nakhoonwala
There was a man called Norman Vincent Peale who once wrote a book called "How to win friends" or something like that. The comrades from the CPM should read it, perhaps, because as the reactions to the strike they forced on the country show, they may benefit a bit from the advice.
Of course, the Lal Salaam brigade may dismiss the criticism by saying that the bourgeois press could not be expected to support the strike. Nevertheless, it is rare to find such unanimity in the tribe of leader writers. Barring the Hindu which expressed its disapproval by pursing its lips and maintaining a stony silence, all major newspapers were critical. The Business Standard fell into the weekend ditch and did not write and, moreover, ended up writing twice on the India-Iran in a space of 6 days.
The best edits came from The Telegraph. It wrote two. It made the entirely valid point that the strike, which was actually a bandh in West Bengal, was aimed at Mr Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee and his ision of a new Bengal. In that sense, it was an extension of the battle within the CPM. "On Thursday, his enemies struck big and hard, shutting down the state in the name of an industrial strike." But said the paper, "CITU may have actually overreached itself and thereby given the chief minister a stronger case to put it in its place. The new economic scenario and Mr Bhattacharjee`s own reforms agenda have made CITU`s old tactics largely irrelevant. Since manufacturing is no longer the main choice for new industries, the very idea of the working class too is undergoing dramatic changes. Even the traditional idea of trade unionism is fast losing relevance in the new industrial and economic context. But CITU seems to be unwilling — and unable — to grasp the new realities and change its old ways. The more it fails to change, the more marginalized it feels. The irony was that CITU ended up hurting Bengal and Mr Bhattacharjee more than the government in New Delhi."
In its second foray also, the paper was very clear about what the bandh meant for West Bengal. "Strikes imposed on West Bengal only complicate the task Mr Bhattacharjee has set for himself. It cannot be easy for him to convince investors that West Bengal is a good investment destination when the state is laid low by strikes called by the chief minister`s own party. What will the investors take as an indicator? The good words of the chief minister or the bad deeds of his party?"
The Hindustan Times summed it up with its heading, "Red Riding Hoods". It asked " In case anyone ever wondered why the Left parties never thought it fit to join the UPA government, here`s the answer: how could they have been in power and have attempted to bring the nation to its knees… The real question that needs to be posed to the Left parties is this: if they are so angry with the government that they are willing to literally thrash it outside Parliament, what on earth are they doing in Parliament?"
The Indian Express said the strike (bandh) was no more than a show of force by the Left. "If the Left is trying to establish itself as an opposition party, should it not first withdraw support to the UPA rather than strike to show its deep and wide disagreement with the government?" It also pointed out what so many have been saying, namely, that "the unions did not even attempt to make specific demands. In fact, the Left no longer needs to do that. It has already ensured that the UPA has given up its attempts at economic reform." It then added advice that is bound to be ignored. "Perhaps it is time the Left took what it has started to its logical end and pulled out its support to the UPA government at the Centre. That would be a more eloquent way to tell its constituents that it won`t compromise on its ideology. And, of course, more honest." The point was worth making.
The Deccan Herald said that " If the Left`s intention of calling a nation-wide strike was to express its unhappiness with the government`s economic policies, surely this could have been done more effectively through dialogue with the government. The Left parties have been engaged in dialogue with the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government to express their concerns over some of the ruling coalition`s policies. And this channel has worked well as the Left has been able to prevail on the government to a considerable extent… paralysing the economy and causing public inconvenience, to make its presence felt is simply indefensible."