CPI(M)’s War-Time Betrayal

The Nationalism of the “Anti-Nationals”

by Shadman Ali Khan

A ceasefire appears to have been reached between India and Pakistan - a much-needed development, and, at this hour, the least any sane, progressive voice could have hoped for. Yet, worrying news of ceasefire violence emerges. In the face of war hysteria, a few anti-war voices from both sides challenged the escalation between two nuclear-armed states. Standing up to ruling-class chauvinism is never without risk - especially in today’s India, where Hindutva-style jingoism has become the defining moral compass, and refusing to comply means being branded “anti-national.”

But what happens when the so-called “anti-nationals” begin to align with precisely this kind of nationalism amidst the vulgarity of war?

The Communist Party of India (Marxist) - or, as the BJP might prefer to call it, the “anti-national” party - shamefully maintained official silence until the ceasefire. Not only that, the party also extended cryptic support to the war through its statement on ‘Operation Sindoor.’ After aligning with ruling-class interests and trampling the revolutionary legacy of internationalism and Lenin of Zimmerwald, a few well-known faces from the party suddenly discovered the slogan “DE-ESCALATE NOW” (in all caps, of course). And so, we were finally treated to a theatrical display of anti-war sentiment from our very own NATIONALIST “ANTI-NATIONALS.”

CPI(M) Press Release on Operation Sindoor, May 7 2025

Next, the party released a face-saving statement emphasizing how John Brittas, on behalf of the CPI(M), urged the government in the all-party meeting to “ensure the situation does not escalate.” If that indeed happened, then why was an explicit anti-war position entirely absent from the original statement? That statement did more than omit - it hideously endorsed the war. In times of war, the absence of a clear position from a communist party is not just silence; it is consent for the ruling class's adventurism.

But above all, this is anything but a deviation; it is a revelation of where the party stands. Copy-pasting the Congress line and wrapping it in red aesthetics may fool its devotees, but for those paying attention, the collapse is ideological - and at its final stage. The CPI(M) has chosen the path of “safe” resistance. It avoids confrontation with the nationalist common sense that underpins Hindutva fascist politics. It fears unpopularity more than it fears war. It prioritizes relevance over resistance.

Perhaps the party was waiting for the anti-war stance to become popular. But does that ever happen? History tells us otherwise. The anti-war cry is never popular. It wasn’t when Lenin opposed the war. It wasn’t when Rosa did. And it will not become popular in this age of jingoism and militarism - certainly not when the largest communist party in the country refuses to confront the ideological state apparatus that manufactures consent for war. Worst of all is when the “revolutionary” party ends up reproducing the same chauvinistic logic that will only be used to push it further into the corner.

This “sudden” betrayal by the CPI(M) left many of our comrades in Pakistan disheartened and shocked. But there is nothing sudden about it. The rot has been long in the making. The CPI(M) today cannot even bring itself to say clearly: No war with Pakistan. That sentence is too dangerous, too radical, too risky. So they settle for euphemisms. This is no longer the party of 1962, whose leaders risked persecution by choosing class solidarity over the logic of the nation-state. Today’s party issues weak-kneed statements while the ruling class sharpens its weapons - against dissent, against democracy, against the people.

The “hammer and sickle” aesthetics may lead comrades across the border to believe something revolutionary lives here. It doesn’t. The overemphasis on aesthetics is directly proportional to the hollowness of revolutionary politics, which is exposed in crucial and historical moments like this! And in this moment, today’s CPI(M), loaded with its “DENIALECTICAL-MATERIALISM,” stands closer to the very forces Lenin critiqued in Socialism and War:

“Opportunism and social-chauvinism have the same ideological-political content: collaboration of classes instead of class struggle, renunciation of revolutionary methods of struggle, helping one’s own government in its embarrassed situation instead of taking advantage of these embarrassments for revolution.”

Those of us outside the party machinery have no such compulsions. We must always say what this party refuses to say: No war but peace! That must be our call, no matter how unpopular it may be. The working class of the subcontinent needs land, bread, and peace - not war. This “paused” war serves only the ruling classes of both countries. It strengthens the BJP and its blood-and-soil nationalism here, and the military’s dominance over the state apparatus there. It is the people - the workers, the farmers, the unemployed youth - who will pay the price in blood and hunger.

There can be no illusions about it. Solidarity must be with the people - because if democracy is suspended tomorrow in India under the pretext of war, this party will still be safe. It might even issue another statement of “full support.” After all, according to the party’s latest political resolution, the BJP is not fascist - just has “neo-fascist tendencies.” Fair enough. Perhaps that’s why this support is merely a precursor to actual resistance, which, of course, is reserved for actual fascism - whenever it decides to emerge.

Until then, the slogan remains the same: Land. Bread. Peace. From the trenches of yesterday’s revolution to the struggles of today.

______________________________

Shadman Ali Khan is an independent scholar currently based in Kerala.