Custom Search

Patna,(BiharTimes): The release of three hostages three days after the execution of Lucas Tete and eight days after the abduction of all four, has something to do with the bickering within the rank and file of the Maoists, claims the intelligence sources.

If the media reports quoting them are to be believed the killing of Tete, an adivasi Christian, has sparked off a row between the tribal and non-tribal leadership of the Maoists.

The other three kept as hostage were Abhay Yadav (a Yadav), Ehsan Khan (a Muslim) and Rupesh Kumar Sinha (a Kayastha).
According to a Hindustan Times report quoting intelligence sources “the killing of the tribal cop has set off a wave of revulsion in the Maoists’ liberated zones as far away as Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal, Orissa and Jharkhand. While mainstream tribal leaders in Jharkhand have condemned the killing of Tete, the tribal leadership within the Maoist echelons led by zonal commander Birbal Murmu has now laid the blame on Arvind Yadav, another zonal commander.”
The report said that Murmu wanted “all other hostages eliminated to stave off tribal fury against the rank and file of the Maoists. He has also blamed Arvind Yadav, who led the ambush, which led to the killing of seven policemen and abduction of four, with shielding Abhay Yadav. If one hostage had to be killed, why were the others not eliminated as well: That’s the issue between the two influential Maoist groups.”
The newspaper report claims that “Maoists are now finding it difficult to eliminate the Yadav in custody because it is from this caste that their top leaders in the Magadh and Kaimur areas come from. Then, killing a Muslim is as dangerous as killing a Yadav. It is from the Muslim community that many leaders in the Maoist ranks and its front organisations come from.”
The Hindustan Times report quoting an intelligence officer on condition of anonymity said “Violence against entrenched political castes and communities such as Yadavs and Muslims is something the Maoist leadership will not find easy to condone.”
“Politically, it could trigger a chain reaction that could isolate the Maoists from base support of the very people, who had hid, fed and transported them,” the officer further said.
The manner in which Maoists’ spokesman announced on Thursday that Abhay Yadav has been executed––when he was not––and the subsequent recovery of the body of Lucas Tete raises further suspicion. Tete was not only a tribal but a Christian, who form a very small minority in India.
However, Maoists’ watchers accept this intelligence version with a pinch of salt as Maoists normally do not make differentiation on the caste and tribal, non-tribal basis. True Yadavs, Koeris, Harijans and Extreme Backward Castes have a sizeable presence in Bihar––besides a large number of tribals elsewhere––yet there is no denying the fact that Maoists have executed a number of Yadavs in the past. In at least one such punishment in Konch district in Gaya sometimes back they cut the nose and ears of a local Yadav farmer following the ruling of their Kangaroo court.
Even during the August 29 Lakhisarai operation one of the policemen killed was Bhulan Yadav, an officer-in-charge. Interestingly, the lone casualty suffered by the Maoists is also of a Yadav.
Many political observers question the veracity of the report that there are many Muslims in the Maoists rank and file. In contrast their number is very few. In fact Khans of Gaya, Palamu, Chatra and Hazaribagh were very much in the forefront of the anti-Naxal Sunlight Sena in late 1980s and whole of 1990s. They are still taking on the Maoists onslaught in Imamganj-Dumaria belt of Gaya and adjoing areas of Chatra and Palamu in Jharkhand.
However, the Maoists botch-up of Thursday––they killed Tete in place of Abhay Yadav as announced––suggests that something somewhere is wrong within their rank and file.

Comment

comments...