Hyderabad: A video released by surrendered Maoist Takkalapalli Vasudeva Rao alias Rupesh/Ashanna with 210 surrendered cadres in the background on Saturday, October 25, rejecting the ‘covert’ and ‘betrayer’ allegation made against him by the Maoists and civil rights activists has become a hot topic in the revolutionary circles of Telangana.
In the 39-minute video released by Vasudeva Rao, he claimed that the decision to withdraw the armed struggle was taken by the Communist Party of India (Maoist) general secretary Nambala Keshava Rao in March itself, the stand which he didn’t waver from even hours before his death.
He went on to say that all the central committee leaders were well aware of that letter, and if at all there was any review needed, it had to be on that letter, instead of his call to the cadres to lay down their arms.
Vasudeva Rao said that the decision was taken by the central committee members, which all the special zonal committee (SZC) members were aware of, but an unconventional process was initiated by Keshava Rao alias BR Dada, to take the feedback on the ceasefire decision ground-up, bypassing the central committee and SZC.
He spoke about the situation on the ground in Bastar amid sustained counter-insurgency operations by the security forces resulting in heavy casualties on the Maoists’ side which included the top leaders, which necessitated the decision to lay down the arms and surrender.
He also said that there has been a gap between the cadres of the southern Bastar region with regard to the decisions taken by the party leadership in the north and west Bastar regions, and that in the absence of any meetings held by the central committee and polit-bureau members in the recent times, decisive steps couldn’t be taken.
Vasudeva Rao specifically criticised Gaddam Laxman, president of the Civil Liberties Committee (CLC) in Telangana, stating that the latter, and those sitting in Hyderabad, were ignorant of what was happening inside the party.
“Gaddam Laxman is saying that those who survived the encounter that killed BR Dada will continue the struggle, but they are all here sitting behind me here,” he claimed, adding that there were those who escaped with injuries while facing the bullets in such encounters.
He also denied any communication with surrendered central committee member Mallojula Venugopal Rao in the recent times, and that his decision to surrender was sole his own, taken to protect the cadres, and to keep the movement alive.
“There are those accusing us of surrendering without any prior information. But there was no scope for any discussions, as the letters sent by me or even BR Dada were not discussed in the last special zonal committee meeting held in Dandakaranya,” he said.
He said that he, along with the surrendered cadres will continue to work with the people in their struggles by exerting pressure on the Centre, and that their future course of action couldn’t be revealed immediately due to the prevailing situation.
However, Vasudeva Rao’s claims and reasons cut no ice with those in the revolutionary movement, either in Bastar, or in the mainstream society.
Many wondered whether Vasudeva Rao was even a central committee member as being claimed by him, and if he even attended the central committee meetings
In support of Gaddam Laxman, CLC general secretary N Narayan Rao, in an interview with a TV channel, questioned why Vasudeva Rao made the cadres lay down their arms before the state, when the arsenal were not his private property, but belonged to the Maoist party.
On Vasudeva Rao’s claim of civil liberties activists being ignorant about what was happening in the party, Narayan Rao reminded the former that there were CLC leaders like K Purushotham, Dr Ramanatham, Japa Lakshma Reddy and others, who were killed in their line of struggle for the people.
On Vasudeva Rao’s claim about the letter written by BR Dada on withdrawing the armed struggle which he said the central committee members were aware of, former Maoists questioned why he didn’t release it to the media to prove that the letter was true.
Former Maoists also found fault with Vasudeva Rao and Mallojula Venugopal Rao accepting the bounty on their head from the state, which conflicts with their ideology and their claim of continuing their work for the people. For instance, Venugopal Rao would get Rs 6 crore, which was the bounty on his head.
They also felt that Vasudeva Rao was trying to confuse the people by mixing ‘withdrawal of armed struggle’ with ‘stopping the armed activities,’ which are two different things.
“The decision to temporarily halt armed activities which means not resorting to activities like ambushes and landmine blasts is one thing. But withdrawing the armed struggle has far-reaching implications. If Vasudeva Rao or Venugopal Rao wanted to surrender, they could have handed over their arms to the People’s Liberation Guerrilla Army (PLGA) as directed by the central committee. Still they decided to lay down their arms before the state, because that was one of the main conditions put forward by the state for their surrender,” a former Maoist told Siasat.com, observing that Vasudeva Rao was only trying to save his skin.
Follow on Twitter | Posted by Vivek Bhoomi | 
