V S Achuthanandan: A leader whom the CPM leadership feared
Beyond the expected passing of a man of over 100 years, V S Achuthanandan's departure extinguishes a guiding force, energy and leadership that had significant political and social impacts.
It weakens not only the CPM, Kerala society or the Leftist movement but also the democratic secular civil rights movements across India facing the severe repercussions of globalization.
'I live for the communist stance of fighting to lead society on the right path,' VS noted in his autobiography. He proved there are no breaks in that struggle by leading the LDF to victory in 2016, making Pinarayi Vijayan the CM.
It was P Krishna Pillai who saw the future communist organizer in Velikkakath Sankaran's 21-year-old son, VS Achuthanandan.
In 1944, he was appointed to organize the farmers and workers in Kuttanad. VS's anti-imperialist perspective, working-class consciousness and uncompromising fight against corruption were self-learned from various battlefields, including struggles for the right of lower castes to walk on public roads, protests for responsible governance and the historic Punnapra-Vayalar struggle against American model.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
No annual fees for life
UnionBank Credit Card
Apply Now
Undo
Twenty years later, in April 1964, VS took a stand against the party leadership's revisionist policies at the CPI National Council meeting in Delhi, amid the fire and smoke of ideological conflicts.
Understanding the essence of international and national political situations, VS, along with 32 leaders including Jyoti Basu, EMS and AKG, walked out against the faction within the party leadership that proposed forming a coalition govt with Nehru's govt.
He later became a member of the CPM's central committee and its politburo.
Years after calling the CPI leadership revisionist to their faces in Delhi, history saw VS pointing fingers at the party's state secretary, accusing him of being a revisionist. In the 2006 assembly elections, some in the leadership informed the politburo that if VS were made a candidate, the UDF would come to power.
However, VS informed the general secretary that he would not be a candidate, and another person was made the party candidate.
This led to protests by Keralites within the state and beyond, demanding VS contest the election. For the first time in the party's history in India, the central leadership reversed its decision. The Left front won with a two-third majority and VS became the CM.
The party decided not to give the home department to the CM. Vigilance, which investigates corruption, was taken away from the CM and given to Kodiyeri Balakrishnan.
Personal staff, including of the CM, were appointed according to the leadership's wishes, causing distress to VS.
The finance minister bypassed the chief minister in taking steps towards capital investments and loans in line with globalization policies. As a continuation of land reforms, the CM appointed a task force to remove encroachments and illegal resort industries in Munnar.
The party issued a press release stating that the second land reform was a programme of extremists.
VS retorted that those who issued the press release were revisionists. Intraparty conflict intensified over economic policies, with the secretary and the chief minister publicly criticizing each other.
VS and Vijayan were suspended from politburo. Only Vijayan was reinstated. VS publicly endorsed the prosecution proceedings against Vijayan in the Lavalin case, which the party opposed, despite the high court ordering a CBI investigation.
Eventually, the governor granted prosecution permission against Vijayan. VS had demanded that the party secretary facing allegations step down.
On May 4, 2012, RMP leader T P Chandrasekharan was brutally murdered. The party secretary once again labelled TP a traitor while VS saluted him as a brave revolutionary.
He visited TP's house and consoled his wife K K Rema. The party state secretariat passed a resolution against the founding leader.
At the end of it, the party said: 'Continuous disciplinary violations, publicly expressing views different from the party, not adhering to party decisions, and providing weapons to party enemies are putting the party in crisis.
VS is taking a different path from the party. It is difficult to see such a person as a part of the party leadership. We request a decision from the central committee that would protect the party from public disgrace,'' the resolution said, adding that VS should step down as opposition leader.
In the 2016 elections, the party fielded both VS and Vijayan. When both won, the central leadership made Vijayan the CM. Despite all this, VS did not leave the party. The CPM leadership did not have the courage to expel VS from the party.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
40 minutes ago
- Time of India
HC dismisses petition for dependent pension under freedom fighter scheme
Hyderabad: Telangana high court has dismissed a writ petition seeking grant of arrears and dependent pension under the Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980. The court ruled that no pension can be sanctioned after the death of a freedom fighter if it was not granted during their lifetime. Justice NV Shravan Kumar delivered the verdict while hearing a petition filed by the late freedom fighter More Rama Rao's daughter, More Vijaya Laxmi, from Warangal district. Vijaya Laxmi claimed that neither Rama Rao nor her mother, More Sushila, were granted freedom fighter's pension despite their applications. After their deaths, being unmarried and mentally ill, she applied for a family pension, which was still pending with the authorities. You Can Also Check: Hyderabad AQI | Weather in Hyderabad | Bank Holidays in Hyderabad | Public Holidays in Hyderabad According to Vijaya Laxmi, her father was a freedom fighter who fought for the merger of the Nizam State into the Indian Union and applied for a pension in 1984. Around 20 years later, he got a response from the authorities asking him to submit relevant documents in April 2003. Even before his application was processed, he died in October 2003. Following this, Vijaya Laxmi's mother Sushila applied for the family pension. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 2 & 3 BHK by the Lake, Off Old Madras Road Brigade Lakecrest Undo However, she also passed away in 2016 before her application was processed. Subsequently, Vijaya Laxmi, being the sole heir, applied for pension and submitted representations to the authorities on two occasions in Sept 2016. As the same was not considered, she approached the high court seeking relief. Justice NV Shravan Kumar noted that although Rao applied for the pension in 1984, it was never sanctioned during his lifetime. Subsequent applications by his wife and later the petitioner were not eligible under the revised scheme. The court also noted that Rao declared "no eligible dependents" in official records. Further, in view of the 2014 guidelines, the court ruled that "no lifetime arrears or dependent pension shall be sanctioned to the spouse or daughter after the death of the freedom fighter" if the pension was not already approved, and dismissed Vijaya Laxmi's petition.
Time of India
43 minutes ago
- Time of India
U.S EU Trade deal: Who wins after tariff agreement - Donald Trump or Europe?
U.S EU Trade deal agreement has finally been chalked. In the end, Europe found it lacked the leverage to pull Donald Trump 's America into a trade pact on its terms and so has signed up to a deal it can just about stomach - albeit one that is clearly skewed in the U.S.'s favour. As such, Sunday's agreement on a blanket 15 per cent tariff after a months-long stand-off is a reality check on the aspirations of the 27-country European Union to become an economic power able to stand up to the likes of the United States or China. U.S EU Trade Deal Face-saver for Europe? Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Finance Technology others Data Analytics Data Science PGDM MCA healthcare MBA Public Policy Product Management Leadership Healthcare Project Management Others Digital Marketing Design Thinking CXO Operations Management Management Cybersecurity Data Science Artificial Intelligence Degree Skills you'll gain: Duration: 9 Months IIM Calcutta SEPO - IIMC CFO India Starts on undefined Get Details Skills you'll gain: Duration: 7 Months S P Jain Institute of Management and Research CERT-SPJIMR Fintech & Blockchain India Starts on undefined Get Details EU has long portrayed itself as an export superpower and champion of rules-based commerce for the benefit both of its own soft power and the global economy as a whole. For sure, the new tariff that will now be applied is a lot more digestible than the 30% "reciprocal" tariff which Trump threatened to invoke in a few days. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Nazlat Alsman: Unsold Sofas Prices May Surprise You (Prices May Surprise You) Sofas | Search Ads Search Now Undo While it should ensure Europe avoids recession, it will likely keep its economy in the doldrums: it sits somewhere between two tariff scenarios the European Central Bank last month forecast would mean 0.5-0.9 per cent economic growth this year compared to just over 1% in a trade tension-free environment. But this is nonetheless a landing point that would have been scarcely imaginable only months ago in the pre-Trump 2.0 era, when the EU along with much of the world could count on U.S. tariffs averaging out at around 1.5%. Live Events Even when Britain agreed a baseline tariff of 10% with the United States back in May, EU officials were adamant they could do better and - convinced the bloc had the economic heft to square up to Trump - pushed for a "zero-for-zero" tariff pact. It took a few weeks of fruitless talks with their U.S. counterparts for the Europeans to accept that 10% was the best they could get and a few weeks more to take the same 15% baseline which the United States agreed with Japan last week. "The EU does not have more leverage than the U.S., and the Trump administration is not rushing things," said one senior official in a European capital who was being briefed on last week's negotiations as they closed in around the 15% level. That official and others pointed to the pressure from Europe's export-oriented businesses to clinch a deal and so ease the levels of uncertainty starting to hit businesses from Finland's Nokia to Swedish steelmaker SSAB . "We were dealt a bad hand. This deal is the best possible play under the circumstances," said one EU diplomat. "Recent months have clearly shown how damaging uncertainty in global trade is for European businesses." Big Win for Donald Trump? That imbalance - or what the trade negotiators have been calling "asymmetry" - is manifest in the final deal. Not only is it expected that the EU will now call off any retaliation and remain open to U.S. goods on existing terms, but it has also pledged $600 billion of investment in the United States. The time-frame for that remains undefined, as do other details of the accord for now. As talks unfolded, it became clear that the EU came to the conclusion it had more to lose from all-out confrontation. The retaliatory measures it threatened totalled some 93 billion euros - less than half its U.S. goods trade surplus of nearly 200 billion euros. True, a growing number of EU capitals were also ready to envisage wide-ranging anti-coercion measures that would have allowed the bloc to target the services trade in which the United States had a surplus of some $75 billion last year. But even then, there was no clear majority for targeting the U.S. digital services which European citizens enjoy and for which there are scant homegrown alternatives - from Netflix to Uber to Microsoft cloud services. It remains to be seen whether this will encourage European leaders to accelerate the economic reforms and diversification of trading allies to which they have long paid lip service but which have been held back by national divisions. Describing the deal as a painful compromise that was an "existential threat" for many of its members, Germany's BGA wholesale and export association said it was time for Europe to reduce its reliance on its biggest trading partner. "Let's look on the past months as a wake-up call," said BGA President Dirk Jandura. "Europe must now prepare itself strategically for the future - we need new trade deals with the biggest industrial powers of the world." FAQs Q1. Who is President of USA? A1. President of USA is Donald Trump. Q2. How much tariffs USA is levying on Europe? A2. US is levying 15 per cent tariffs on Europe.
India.com
an hour ago
- India.com
Even After U.S. Plea, Saudi Refused Defense Aid To Israel; Prince Salman Rejected Trump's Request Against Iran
Riyadh/Washington: A previously undisclosed standoff unfolded behind the scenes of the 12-day Iran-Israel war in June, as Saudi Arabia flatly refused a direct request from the United States to transfer its powerful American-made THAAD air defense systems to Israel, according to two senior U.S. defense officials cited by the Middle East Eye . At the height of the conflict, Iran had unleashed waves of advanced ballistic missiles, and Israel's stockpile of interceptor missiles, especially the high-altitude THAADs, was running dangerously low. Faced with the rapid depletion of its own interceptors like the Arrow and Patriot, the U.S. administration urgently reached out to Riyadh. But the response it got was immediate and firm. According to one official familiar with the internal deliberations, 'We were asking everyone to contribute. When that failed, we tried to negotiate. But this was not just about one country.' American officials tried to convince Saudi Arabia that Tehran was not only a threat to Israel; it posed a looming danger to Saudi national security as well. But the Saudis did not budge. Despite being fully capable of aiding Israel, the kingdom chose to prioritise its own defense. Saudi Arabia had already activated its THAAD systems in response to threats from Houthi rebels, with some units even deployed to guard the holy cities of Mecca and Medina. At one point during the war, Israeli defense officials were forced to let some incoming Iranian missiles fall on uninhabited areas as they rationed what little interceptor stock remained. U.S. think tanks had already flagged the issue in classified memos, highlighting Israel's supply of Arrow and Patriot systems was shrinking by the hour. Meanwhile, on July 3, nine days after a ceasefire between Iran and Israel, Saudi Arabia inaugurated a newly acquired THAAD battery from the United States, a move closely watched in Washington. Concerns were spiraling inside the Pentagon. The Guardian reported that the United States itself was down to just 25% of its Patriot interceptor reserves, and Pentagon planners were alarmed about whether America could even sustain its own global military posture if the Iran-Israel war escalated further. One American official told the Middle East Eye that internal projections showed a 'catastrophic depletion' of interceptors was imminent. In a desperate move, the United States tested its Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) from a Navy destroyer of the Arleigh Burke class to reinforce Israeli defenses. The Telegraph confirmed that Iran had already scored direct hits on five key Israeli military bases. The final twist came when The Wall Street Journal revealed that American officials had floated the idea of redirecting Saudi THAAD systems to Tel Aviv, but Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman rejected it outright. Washington then turned to the UAE with a similar request. Whether the Emirates complied remains unknown. No official confirmation has surfaced. The silence speaks volumes. As it stands, this behind-the-curtain episode exposes not only the limits of U.S. influence in the Gulf, but also the extent to which Saudi Arabia has begun charting its own course, even when it means defying its closest Western ally in the middle of a regional war.
