Nandigram home-truths?

A front page editorial takes stock of 8216;Four years of US imperialism8217;s aggression on Iraq8217;. The assumption is that US imperialism is feeding on the growing influence of the Talilban as reason for its continuing presence in the country. 8220;The war that was launched ostensibly to eliminate the Taliban, we are told now that it had, in fact, consolidated the presence of the Taliban in Iraq,8221; says the editorial. It goes on to list the 8220;modern crimes8221; committed by the US in its efforts to turn the world into a unipolar one. One of them was hanging former vice president Ramadan earlier this month after the 8220;unjust hanging8221; of Saddam Hussein. The party believes the principles of governing trials had been violated in Iraq as the accused had not been tried according to Iraqi law but that of the occupation force. While US imperialism 8220;unscrupulously violated8221; internal laws and norms, the editorial repeats an earlier CPM accusation against the US: That the military occupation was aimed at seizing control of Iraq8217;s oil. As a result, the Iraqi people are being looted of their only resource that could have contributed to improving their lives and future, says the editorial.

8216;Dharmayudh8217;

Continuing with the series on the 1857 revolt, Left intellectual Nalini Taneja writes on 8216;The myth of early Savarkar8217;, and demolishes the view that the early Savarkar was a secular and nationalist revolutionary who turned later to become a Hindutva theoretician. She analyses Savarkar8217;s War of Independence, 1857 and concludes that there are 8220;clear continuities in his communalist, parochial and elitist stance8221; that was evident in his later writings on Hindutva. She believes he had little choice but to accept Hindu-Muslim unity in 1857 since it was impossible to write about the revolt without recognising the role of the Muslims. 8220;He recognises that Hindus and Muslims had to unite in 1857 if they had to present an effective challenge to the British,8221; she writes. According to her, Savarkar harboured an 8220;adolescent animosity8221; towards Muslims, reflected in an incident 8212;- Taneja refers to the 8216;Savarkar Samagra8217; 8212;- where as a 12-year-old he attacked a mosque along with his school friends. The conclusion, therefore, is that for Savarkar the inspiration came not from Hindu-Muslim unity as in 1857, but from the Hindu past and the 8220;invented struggles of Hindus against Muslims8221;. In short, she says Savarkar8217;s point is that 1857, a war for independence is actually a 8216;dharmayudh8217; holy war which Hindus and Muslims fight together, but for their own religions.

Compiled by Ananda Majumdar