Sitaram Yechuri, Prakash Karat and Manmohan Singh

 Sitaram Yechury, a prominent leader of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) or CPI(M), has had a long and influential career in Indian politics. His proximity to former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government (2004-2014) can be attributed to several factors:

  1. Ideological Pragmatism: While Yechury is a committed Marxist, he is also known for his pragmatic approach to politics. During the UPA's tenure, the Left parties, including the CPI(M), provided external support to the government. This necessitated regular interactions between Left leaders and the Prime Minister. Yechury, being a key strategist and articulate spokesperson for the CPI(M), often engaged with Singh on policy matters, especially those related to economic and social issues.

  2. Policy Influence: The Left's support was crucial for the UPA government's survival during its first term (2004-2009). Yechury, as a senior leader, played a significant role in negotiations and discussions with the government. His closeness to Singh may have been a reflection of his efforts to influence policies in favor of the Left's agenda, such as opposing privatization and advocating for pro-poor measures.

  3. Personal Rapport: Yechury is known for his ability to build bridges across political ideologies. His intellectual depth and articulate communication style may have fostered a respectful working relationship with Manmohan Singh, who was also known for his scholarly demeanor and willingness to engage in dialogue.

Prakash Karat and Sitaram Yechury

Prakash Karat, another senior CPI(M) leader and former General Secretary of the party, had a different approach to politics compared to Yechury. Karat was seen as more ideologically rigid and less inclined toward compromise with the Congress-led UPA government. While there were no overt signs of envy between Karat and Yechury, their differing styles and strategies sometimes led to internal debates within the CPI(M).

Karat's role in withdrawing Left support to the UPA government in 2008 was significant. The immediate trigger for the withdrawal was the UPA government's decision to proceed with the India-US civilian nuclear deal, which the Left strongly opposed on the grounds that it compromised India's sovereignty and aligned the country too closely with US strategic interests. Karat, as the party's General Secretary at the time, was a key figure in pushing for the withdrawal of support, reflecting the CPI(M)'s broader ideological stance against the deal.

Role of Prakash Karat in Withdrawing Support

  1. Ideological Stance: Karat was a staunch opponent of the nuclear deal, viewing it as a betrayal of India's independent foreign policy and a move toward aligning with US imperialism. His leadership was instrumental in mobilizing the party's opposition to the deal.

  2. Party Decision-Making: The decision to withdraw support was not unilateral but was taken collectively by the CPI(M) Politburo and Central Committee. Karat, as the General Secretary, played a central role in articulating the party's position and ensuring that the decision was implemented.

  3. Political Strategy: Karat's approach was to maintain the CPI(M)'s ideological purity and distance the party from the Congress, which he viewed as pursuing neoliberal policies. This stance was in contrast to Yechury's more pragmatic approach, which sometimes favored limited cooperation with the Congress on specific issues.

In summary, Sitaram Yechury's closeness to Manmohan Singh was rooted in his pragmatic approach to politics and his role in policy negotiations, while Prakash Karat's role in withdrawing support to the UPA government was driven by ideological considerations and a desire to maintain the CPI(M)'s distinct political identity. While there may have been differences in their approaches, there is no substantial evidence to suggest personal envy between the two leaders. Both played crucial roles in shaping the CPI(M)'s strategy during the UPA years.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The 2G Spectrum, Commonwealth Games and Coal Allocation Scams

  2G spectrum scam, Commonwealth Games scam, and coal allocation scam.: Explain These Scams. Who are the main accused in these cases. Did these scams proved in the court of law. What did the court said at the end. Present a detailed report. The 2G Spectrum Scam, Commonwealth Games Scam, and Coal Allocation Scam are three major corruption scandals that rocked India in the late 2000s and early 2010s. These scams involved high-ranking officials, politicians, and business entities, and they highlighted significant issues in governance and transparency. Below is a detailed report on each scam, including the main accused, the status of court proceedings, and the final judgments. 1. 2G Spectrum Scam Overview: The 2G Spectrum Scam emerged in 2010 and involved the illegal allocation of 2G spectrum licenses to telecom companies at undervalued prices during the tenure of Telecom Minister A. Raja. The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) estimated a loss of ₹1.76 lakh crore (approximately $3...
Read more

On Withdrawal of Support to the UPA Government by Left Parties

 On 2 June 2008 the RSP Central Committee decided to pull out of the committee, arguing that unilateral actions of UPA had rendered the committee meaningless and that the policies of the UPA government were paving the path for growing BJP influence. On Withdrawal of Support to the UPA Government August 7, 2009 Press Statement  The Left parties have issued the following statement:  On Withdrawal of Support to the UPA Government The Left Parties have withdrawn support to the UPA Government. The UPA Government came into existence in 2004 with the support of the Left parties on the basis of its Common Minimum Programme. The aim was to fight the communal forces and undo the damage they had done to the secular polity of India in their years in office. This required a set of interlinked policies to bring relief to the people, to protect India’s integrity and to pursue an independent foreign policy. By going ahead with the deal at a time when there is the crushing burden of price...
Read more

Historical Blunder of Left parties in 2008

  What are the inner and outer reasons for the Left parties in India to withdraw the support to then UPA Government. What were the consequences? Who benefited politically out of this decision? Did the Left parties gained in the eventually Parliament elections? Who paved the way to the Hindu Communal forces to raise in political arena ? Comgress or Communists? The withdrawal of support by the Left parties to the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government in India in 2008 was a significant political event with both inner (ideological) and outer (strategic) reasons, as well as far-reaching consequences. Below is a detailed analysis of the situation: Inner Reasons (Ideological and Policy Differences): Nuclear Deal with the USA (123 Agreement): The primary reason for the Left's withdrawal of support was their opposition to the Indo-US Civil Nuclear Agreement, which they viewed as compromising India's sovereignty and aligning too closely with US strategic interests. The Left arg...
Read more