Click to play videoIs Naxalism India’s gravest security threat and what is the Centre doing to fight the rebels. Karan Thapar asked this to Union Home Minister Shivraj Patil on Devil’s Advocate.
Karan Thapar: Mr Patil, speaking to the Chief Ministers in December, the Prime Minister said not a day passes without an incident of Leftist extremism taking place some place or the other. How serious is the Naxal problem?
Shivraj Patil: Well, any bloodshed or any violence taking place in the country, we cannot be happy about it.
Karan Thapar: But is this serious?
Shivraj Patil: There are incidents taking place in Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Orissa, some places in Bihar, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh. But the two states which are worst affected are Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand, and the third state which is affected on a large scale is Orissa.
Karan Thapar: Is this the single biggest security challenge to the Indian state?
Shivraj Patil: I don’t think so.
Karan Thapar: You don’t think so?
Shivraj Patil: No.
Karan Thapar: I quoted the Prime Minister –
Shivraj Patil: Well, again I’d like to request you, don’t ask me to comment on my colleagues or my Prime Minister, or my leader. You ask for my opinion, I’ll give you my opinion.
Karan Thapar: All right, tell me then, why do you disagree with the statement that this is the single biggest security threat India faces?
Shivraj Patil: You know, what is it that we are trying to understand? Are we trying to understand how serious is this problem, what steps are going to be taken, in what manner are we going to control it–or are we going to create a situation in which everybody’s statement is being commented upon? What is it that we are trying to do?
Karan Thapar: I am trying to first to understand how serious it is.
Shivraj Patil: Yes, that’s why you ask me. If you take the statistics from 2003 to 2007, you will find that the statistics are not at all different. On the contrary, if you go to Andhra Pradesh, the improvement in Andhra Pradesh is to the tune of 70 per cent. So you see, if you go to Bihar, there is an improvement. If you go to the other states, there is an improvement whereas in Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand –I am not blaming the government, I am not blaming the Chief Minister over there–there, the situation has deteriorated.
Karan Thapar: Can I interrupt? You’re saying two things and I am just clarifying for the audience. First of all you are saying the statistics of 2002 onward do not justify Naxalism being considered the single, biggest threat.
Shivraj Patil: No, what I am saying is that if you consider whether the situation has deteriorated or improved, then you have to depend on the statistic that is available to you, and the statistic which is available to you goes to show that except for Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Orissa, the situation in other states has improved.
Karan Thapar: But let me quote to you one statistic put up by your own ministry in its recent annual report. It shows that between 2003 and 2006, the increase in the number of policemen killed by Naxals was 50 per cent. But the increase in the number of Naxals killed was only 25 per cent. And last year in 2007, the police death rate went up by 60 per cent but the Naxal death rate fell by 46 per cent. Many people look at that and say your success is low.
Shivraj Patil: These statistics, I don’t know where you are quoting from, whom you are quoting, I don’t think these are correct.
Karan Thapar: Ministry of Home Affairs. It’s on your website.
Shivraj Patil: I have given you the booklets in which the statistics is provided. If it were possible for me to show it on the TV also, the statistics and the graphs which are prepared, which will go to show that the situation with respect to Naxals has not deteriorated or has not improved. In some states, it has improved like anything, in some states, it has deteriorated. But the sum total is not different.
Karan Thapar: Okay. One other thing – your latest annual report says that in 2006, Naxal activity was reported only from 395 police stations, out of a nationwide 12,476 police stations, which is an improvement on the year before–of 460 police stations.
Side by side, Ajit Doval, a former director of the Intelligence Bureau has written articles saying that Naxal activity affects something like 40 per cent of the country’s landmass, 35 per cent of the country’s population. Your statistics are reassuring, but such people when they write articles, make people necessarily worried. Who do we go by?
Shivraj Patil: Well, you should go by what the government says and you should go by what we are telling on the floor of the House. You should go by the documents which we are giving in your hands. And if you go to these documents, you will that there is no change in statistic. If you say 10 states are affected, it is 30 per cent of the country affected.
If you say 180 districts are affected, you are saying that nearly 25 per cent of the country is affected. If you go by the statistics relating to the police stations affected, it comes down to three per cent. That means from 30 per cent, you are coming down to three per cent. And if you are giving this kind of statistics, are we not creating fear psychosis in the country?
Karan Thapar:So what you’re saying is it’s dependent on what statistics you choose and how you interpret them. Some people choose statistics that suggest fear and therefore misinterpret them. That’s what you’re saying? And therefore they create fear?
Shivraj Patil: I am not going to comment on anybody. I am going to give you my own views. I am going to give you the statistics. The difficulty is if we are here to understand the problem and understand the solution, and create a psychology in the country which is helpful, useful to control this kind of activity and reduce the fear psychosis, we will take one step.
If you want to create a political impact by adopting certain figures and not quoting certain other figures, then it is going to be different.
Karan Thapar: I’ll tell you why there is confusion in the country, Home Minister. You maintain a particular position, you are backing it up with your statistics. I am hearing you; the country is hearing you. The problem is that other members of the government, including the Prime Minister, have given opposite impression.
Shivraj Patil: No, not at all. If you have seen the statement made by the Prime Minister while speaking to the Chief Minister also, you would have found something different. You can’t pick one sentence here and one sentence there and ask a minister in the Cabinet of the Prime Minister to contradict his statement without contradicting it all. This is unethical.
Karan Thapar: I am not asking you to contradict the Prime Minister, that would be wrong of me to do. But the point is that the thought the Prime Minister has expressed, that this is the single biggest security challenge. He said it twice. He said it in December, he said it in 2004.
Shivraj Patil: I also said it – that if anybody dies, we should be worried. If there is bloodshed taking place we should be worried. And that is if he is cautioning the people to help the activity of the government and the entire society the violence of the entire society to control the violence and bloodshed and terrorism, he’s not wrong. But you can’t have his minister contradicting his statement taking out of context one sentence here, one sentence there.
Karan Thapar: Let me put this to you: You yourself agree that the two states where the problem is the worst are Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand. Your own Ministry’s figures say that 67 per cent of all incidents and 76 per cent of all casualties happen in those two states. It’s clearly the heart of the problem.
And yet, and yet, Ajay Sahni, the Director of the respected Institute of Conflict Management says–and I am quoting to you: “Chhattisgarh is the one state which is an example of utter incompetence!” He says if there is one example of a state failing to handle counter-terrorism, it’s Chhattisgarh.
Shivraj Patil: Well, again I’d like to say that Chhattisgarh may be ruled by a party which is not with the present government at the national level. And yet, it is not the duty of the Home Minister of India to make statements as he likes and demoralise the government, demoralise the police forces and also add fuel to the fire of fear.
About the terrorism in some part of the country or other, if it is bad, it is bad because of terrain. It is bad because of the non-availability of infrastructure. It is bad for many other reasons.
Karan Thapar: It is also bad because of the –
Shivraj Patil: I was exactly yesterday in Chhattisgarh, I had a long discussion with the Chief Minister and others also and I came to the conclusion that they are trying to do whatever is possible for them and we told them we will help them do whatever they want.
Karan Thapar: In December, speaking to the Chief Minister, the Prime Minister said we need to cripple the hold of Naxalite forces with all the measures at our command.
Shivraj Patil: Please, please instead of asking what one gentleman has said, what Prime Minister has said, why don’t you pinpoint the problem and let us discuss the problem rather than commenting on –
Karan Thapar: That’s what I am coming to.
Shivraj Patil: Now, if I comment on statements made by others, I am not doing justice to them, I am not doing justice to myself also.
Karan Thapar: No Mr Patil, I am not asking you to comment. I am simply using that statement to ask the question. Given the seriousness, given the dedication of this government to tackle it, why are you not invoking Article 355 to take over the control of the battle against Naxalism in Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand in particular?
Shivraj Patil: Do you even understand what is Article 355? Article 355 does not allow us to take over. Article 356 allows us to take over. Article 355 –
Karan Thapar: No, no, no, not take over. I’m not saying take over. It’s the duty of the Union to protect every state government against internal disturbance. Naxalism is an internal disturbance. Can’t you use that power?
Shivraj Patil: I can’t send my officers over there and say you can go to the district and take action over there. Anything I have to do there, I have to do it through the state government.
Karan Thapar: What about something – let us not quarrel over Article 355. What about setting up a special, dedicated anti-Naxal force at the federal level?
Shivraj Patil: You know, you shall have to understand that we – Government of India – is allowed to go to any place and use a federal force after imposing the president’s rule. You please understand this thing. Even if I have the force, I shall have to give that force to the state government to use and this is exactly what we have done.
Karan Thapar: I am asking you to change the law, create new laws.
Shivraj Patil: Please understand first of all. I have given from Governent of India, 37,000 men and officers to Naxal-affected states. I have given 17,000 men and officers to Chhattisgarh to control the Naxalites, but they are under the control of the state government, not the union government, which is not allowed.
If I have to amend the Constitution, and I have to send my forces, I will have to get it passed by two-thirds majority, and half of the state legislature. Only then it happens.
Karan Thapar: Absolutely, but you will have that majority. The BJP would support you.
Shivraj Patil: No, no, no, I don’t think BJP would support me. You ask the BJP government themselves, they have said no.
Karan Thapar: Have you attempted to speak to the BJP to ask them? Have you asked them about changing the Constitution?
Shivraj Patil: Many times, many times. This matter has been discussed on the floor of the House in meetings held by the Prime Minister and myself, with the Chief Minister of the state, not once but many times.
Karan Thapar: And the BJP has refused?
Shivraj Patil: I – some people in the BJP say yes, some people say no.
Karan Thapar: I get the impression that you would have liked to change the Constitution to give you more powers but you are not able to do so because the BJP will not let you do so.
Shivraj Patil: I am not blaming BJP also.
Karan Thapar: All the parties?
Shivraj Patil: Please understand, I don’t think that your intention is that I should quarrel with BJP, I should quarrel with Prime Minister or I should quarrel with Arjun Singhji, I should quarrel with Chief Minister. That is not your intention. Your intention is to understand the problem and the solution and I am willing to talk to you on this point.
Karan Thapar: Absolutely!
Shivraj Patil: Now please understand first. This matter was discussed on the floor of the House and the former Home Minister expressed his views, others expressed their views. I said that in certain circumstances, when it becomes absolutely necessary, it would be helpful for the Government of India to take action in certain areas rather than taking action in the entire state as such. But because of the Constitutional provision, it cannot be done. And I did say that this would be useful, but we are not going to consensus until and unless consensus develops.
Karan Thapar: Absolutely. But you said something very important, you said that in fact, the government –
Shivraj Patil: Not once, many times!
Karan Thapar: Let me just for the audience repeat it because it’s very important. You said that the government would like to give itself special powers by amending the Constitution to be able to take direct action in certain parts of certain states, but you don’t have that power and politics won’t let you amend the Constitution.
Shivraj Patil: No, no, I’m not. This is the difference between probably the person who is asking the question and the person who is replying. This is the difference between a person who can ask anything and a person who cannot reply to the questions in any manner.
Karan Thapar: Okay
Shivraj Patil: I am not blaming the Prime Minister or my colleagues –
Karan Thapar: Nor am I.
Shivraj Patil: I am not blaming the Chief Minister of Chhattisgarh, I am not blaming the BJP also, nor am I blaming the political set up as such, I am recognising the reality in which I will have to find the solution to the problem.
Karan Thapar: What are the steps you are taking to ensure that within, say, five years, Naxalism ceases to be a threat?
Shivraj Patil: One step we would like to take is to provide more funds for policing in the country. Second, to strengthen the police functionary and increase the police population ratio – make it fairer. Third is to train them to take action in matters like this. They would not only be for maintaining law and order and filing cases in courts.
They would also be fighting terrorists at places where it becomes necessary. Fourth is to give them better equipment and fifth is to strengthen the intelligence agencies. Government of India has intelligence agencies which are quite effective, but the state governments have to strengthen their agencies and then we shall have to have the media and the people also to understand the problems and obtain their cooperation, prepare the individuals.
Karan Thapar: All of this is on the law and order side. What steps are you taking to ensure that the causes that give rise to Naxalism–landlessness, poverty, hunger – those are being tackled?
Shivraj Patil: Yes, we have already taken steps. The tribals will be given land – a new law has been passed. Second, we will try to give funds to all the states to bring about economic development in the areas which are affected by terrorist activities.
We are also giving them funds to be provided to the people who can be give housing, education and medical facilities in that area. Employment guarantee scheme is one of the schemes –
Karan Thapar: Can I interrupt? The problem is you have all the right intentions but will the money get to the people who it’s needed for? Rajiv Gandhi famously said only fifteen paisa reaches –
Shivraj Patil: Again you are repeating, quoting Rajiv Gandhi and all those things. Please, don’t quote anybody, let us discuss the issues only.
Karan Thapar: Okay, will the money get to the people?
Shivraj Patil: Of course, and let us understand. When we have good schemes, you say the money is not reaching, when we don’t have the schemes, you say that the scheme is not there. Now, what do we do? We have repaired these schemes, funds are going to be given to the state government, and it is the state government which will have to use them. Union government does not have the collectors and the tehsildars with them.
Karan Thapar: Can you be certain the state governments will actually use the money the way you want them to?
Shivraj Patil: Yes, they will.
Karan Thapar: Politics won’t come in the way?
Shivraj Patil: Why should it?
Karan Thapar: It does, most of the time.
Shivraj Patil: Well, those people who don’t understand politics probably will do that but a good politician will not do that because if he helps anybody, he will help him in the election.
Karan Thapar: Tell me this, are you confident that in five years’ time, Naxalism will stop being a threat? Or there’s a good chance that in five years it will be worse than it is?
Shivraj Patil: I am not only talking about Naxalism, I am talking about terrorism in the world and in the country and I am telling you that I have full faith in the divine characters of human beings. 99 per cent people in the country are peace-loving, and I have faith in them, and I have faith in the police and the security agencies of the country which would be in a position to see that it does not increase and it is reduced and it is controlled.
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter and Google+)
displayed with permission. Use of the CNN name and/or logo on or as part of CNN-IBN does not derogate from the intellectual property rights of Cable News Network in respect of them.