Ghost of history
The Ghost of History has again rocked India. However, this is not volcanic explosion, rather storm in a teacup. The Mitrokhin Archives II, an account of KGB activities in India and other parts of the world has revealed very few surprises than what was known to the Indian intelligence community and the political executives.
Espionage activities pertain to the Fourth Tier of functioning of a Nation State. The other Three Tyres are: Strategic approach, Diplomatic relationship and Economic and Military interests. Other peripheral aspects are cherry toppings on the pie. Nation States indulge in unceasing espionage activities as extension to their strategic, diplomatic, economic and military pursuits. A Nation worth its name cannot but activate its intelligence agencies in prioritised target countries.
India has been a favourite playground for the MI6/ MI5, CIA, KGB, French Intelligence services, Chinese Special Services Bureau and the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI). India’s geopolitical location, strategic importance and unique non-aligned status had evoked penetrating interests in the two major warring Cold War-Lords; the USA and the USSR. In fact, the CIA and the KGB have operated with impunity and had achieved greater penetration than any other foreign intelligence agency operating in India.
Mitrokhin has opened the small snuffbox of a myopic spook. India-Russia relationship cannot be judged by the functioning of a spy agency. At the national level, right from the Nehru era, India’s relationship with the USSR was strategic in nature. Indira Gandhi was forced to reinforce that relationship because Pakistan behaved like a client state of the USA- headed power block. Her relationship with the Soviet stalwarts was not one of spy and spymaster. It was a strategic relationship that stood the test of time. The very suggestion that she had personally accepted money from the KGB handlers is abominable. It is a matter of history that Indira had sought strategic and tactical helps from the USSR and she had fortified her political position with some helps from the Communist Party aligned to the Soviet lobby. What’s wrong in it?
The USSR was the fountainhead of international communist movement. The communist ideologues of yester years had assumed that like Islam communism had also an Ummah, which transcended national boundaries. Exporting ideology along with material support was the universal policy of international communism. China was the first country to ‘nationalise’ the concept of communism confining its parameters inside its geopolitical boundary, though it had vainly supported certain groups in India and elsewhere.
The Indian communists, especially the CPM had ‘nationalised’ its ideological bearings soon after the 1964 split. The Naxal movement in West Bengal was a pro-Chinese explosion against the communists who were not inclined to lean on Beijing on support. The Naxalites killed more of CPM than Congress cadres in Bengal. The CPI continued its pro-Moscow policy but had also put on a ‘national pyjama.’ Therefore, watchers of history concluded that the communist movement in India had really taken a constitutional and mass-based route to socio-economic changes. Support to the India communist movement by the USSR is a part of history and should be viewed through historicity of the events and not through clandestine contacts between a spy agency and a few individuals.
Support rendered by the KGB to certain Indian communist leaders and party apparatuses was an integral part of that universal policy pursed by the Soviet Union. The Indian national Congress followed an indigenous ideology with liberal borrowings from western democracies and the communists thrived on minor indigenous ingredients and larger outside inputs. Congress’ relationship with the USSR was more strategic and communists’ relationship was ideological and material support, as they received very minor success in building a strong mass base. It is again a matter of history that the Soviet Union had materially supported most of its client countries and satellite ideological units like the ones in India. This global phenomena emerging out of COMINTERN policy of the Soviet Union should not be seen through the narrow telescope of a spy agency. This should be viewed in the light of historical development of the communist movement in India and Congress’ historical strategic relationship with the Cold War adversary of the USA.
It is very unfortunate that the extracts so far published have directed the needle of suspicion to Promod Dasgupta the father figure of communist movement in West Bengal. As a student I had the opportunity to know him. He used to live in the party office, his life style was like that of a faqir and he did not require more than rupees 4 per day for personal expenses. Such a committed ideologue cannot be a spy of any agency-Indian or foreign. I know for sure that he was not.
Some political parties are trying to smear themselves with ‘perfume of the Mitrokin dirt.’ This is a futile exercise. The whole aspect should not be viewed through the glass of a small-time spy. It should be judged in the spectrum of broader Indo-USSR strategic relationship. Espionage is a sleepless and ceaseless operation. This trade continues incessantly despite best smiling faces displayed by the top leaders in diplomatic conclaves. Espionage is the Fourth Tier of national activities and keeps on ticking like an atomic clock. It lives in history and no purpose will be served by digging up the ghost of history. Let’s look ahead for a better relationship with our traditional friend-the Russian people.
