Millennium Post

'Not right to understand bigger alliance with democratic secular forces only in light of election'

Kolkata: Though the CPI(M) Politburo and Central Committee have described the alliance with the Congress by the state leadership as "not in consonance with the party's Central Committee's decision," Surjya Kanta Mishra once again raised the issue and said it was unjustified to understand the bigger alliance of the party with democratic secular forces "only in the light of election."
Mishra's write up in the annual number of Deshhitaishi has once again brought back the issue which has been declared as "dead" by the Politburo. The party leadership is divided over making their comments on the write-up. The pro-Mishra group felt that the Politburo and Central Committee had criticised the Bengal line just because of CPI(M)'s debacle in the 2016 Assembly elections. "Had the party along with the Congress defeated Trinamool in 2016, the ideologists in the Politburo would have given full support to us. Just because Mishra and others could not succeed in beating Trinamool, the leaders in Delhi are criticising us." Political experts said these leaders had raised a pertinent issue and said if the Politburo was against the alliance from the start, they should have issued a statement before the election mentioning that it was not in consonance with the party's Central Committee decision. But the leaders in Delhi started believing that the alliance will come to power in Bengal and had issued the statement only after their dreams were shattered.
The group opposing Mishra said as in the past few months, he and his close associates have realised that in view of the present position of the Congress, it is difficult to assess its future plans — whether they will go for an alliance with the Trinamool or not in 2019 Lok Sabha elections. "Mishra is now trying to save his back and so he has tried to defend his mistake," they said. Mishra, in the article, has criticised the attitude of some of the comrades who slammed those party leaders whom they do not like on social media and said it was "wrong." He has also criticised them for saying that Muzaffar Ahmed had always said "party was more important than friends."
It shows that he has criticised Ritabrata Banerjee without taking his name. Again party leaders said as he is the state secretary he should have cited Ritabrata's example to explain his point as to how the comrades should not behave. However, he has admitted that inter-party movement is required for development.
Next Story
Share it