Maoists vs Islamists

India's Maoist movement is expanding its operations as its People's War develops along ideological and pragmatic lines. Dr P V Ramana looks at the rise of the rebellion and the country's poorly co-ordinated counter-insurgency strategies.

While discussion of the threat posed to India by radical Islamist violence tends to dominate security assessments, the country's Maoist insurgency has been steadily expanding its areas of influence and building up its military capability. This expansion has been so great that in 2007 Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh described the Maoists as the "single biggest internal security challenge facing India".

The proscribed Communist Party of India-Maoist (CPI-Maoist) was founded on 21 September 2004, following the merging of the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) People's War, also known as the People's War Group, and the Maoist Communist Centre of India - two of India's most prominent insurgent groups.

Actaully, it wouldn’t surprise me if the Maoists and Islamists are secretly working together:

Excerpt taken from “WE ARE THE NEXT TARGET” (1994)

...

The goals and methods of Communism

Yet it seems almost incredible that any ideology could lead to well-coordinated deception on such a huge scale. Whenever the word “Communism” is mentioned, most people think of a philosophy, a political theory, an economic system, or perhaps a political party. But Communism is none of these. Before we can understand the Communist role in strategic deception and terrorist warfare, we must answer one critical question: What is Communism?

Karl Marx and V.I. Lenin are widely known as the founders of Communism. However, not everyone who professes the ideology of Marx and Lenin is a true Communist. Lenin himself defined Communism as an international organization, akin to the Mafia, whose members would constitute an elite corps of professional revolutionaries.[40] As he described it in 1902, “In form such a strong revolutionary organization in an autocratic country may also be described as a ‘conspiratorial’ organization... such an organization must have the utmost secrecy.”[41] Shortly after seizing control of Russia in 1917, Lenin revealed the secret of Communist success in a booklet, declaring that “The Bolsheviks could not have maintained themselves in power... unless the strictest, truly iron discipline prevailed in our Party.”[42] Naive believers in Marxist ideology are constantly purged from the Party, for the organization can rely only on those people blindly willing to obey orders.[43] Communism explicitly disavows all moral rules, and its members must constantly shift tactics, sometimes even carry out seemingly anti-Marxist actions, as its leadership adapts the revolution to changing circumstances.[44] Thus Communists possess the fanatic discipline needed to carry out deception on a scale beyond the imagination of most outsiders, including staging their own alleged “collapse.”

The ultimate goal has been stated openly by every major Communist leader since Karl Marx: a world government dominated by the Communists.[45] Lenin described how, to overthrow existing governments, the Communists organize parallel revolutions in each country. Most of the Communist Party structure must operate underground, invisible to the larger population, while it uses both legal and illegal methods, including deception and, in Lenin’s own words, “terrorism.”[46] Its secret members, operating under strict orders, infiltrate the highest levels of the target government and its military, as well as the labor unions and other popular movements, the communications media, and even the anti-Communist opposition itself.[47] From these positions, the Communists can orchestrate an apparently spontaneous, violent revolution, while paralyzing the efforts of the target government to respond effectively. The confused population, unaware of the well-organized forces behind the crisis, negotiates a series of compromises leading to further instability and finally to the victory of Communism.

As growing numbers of nations fall to the revolution, it becomes possible to reunite them under a Communist world regime.[48] This is being carried out in a two-stage process. The transition step to this “new world social order,” as American Communist William Z. Foster called it,[49] involves merging the newly captive nations into regional governments.[50] The Communists have explicitly worked toward creating a united Europe,[51] a united American hemisphere,[52] a pan-African regional entity,[53] and, for the Middle East, a pan-Arab regime.[54]

Marxism-Leninism, then, is not an ideology, but a strategy for achieving world revolution. Communists are the disciplined members of an international organization that uses Marxist-Leninist techniques. And terrorism is a key ingredient in the success of such revolution. To see how the entire strategy works, we now turn to an overview of Communist revolutions in action.

Wars of national liberation

Because open warfare against target governments would simply lead to defeat, the Communists always disguise their revolutions as civil wars. They camouflage their intentions by pretending to fight for the liberation of one class of people from another, using a divide-and-conquer technique against a nation’s social structure. This method is referred to as a “war of national liberation,” and it adapts its tactics to the unique circumstances of each country. Such a war can pit industrial workers against capitalists, as in Russia, Catholics against Protestants, as in Northern Ireland, blacks against whites, as in South Africa—or Arabs against Jews, as in Israel. The Communists do not openly identify themselves, acting instead as representatives of the supposedly “oppressed” class of people.

By painting their revolution as a spontaneous uprising of “oppressed masses,” the Communists hope to convince the target population that it faces an unwinnable war rooted in fundamental social tensions. If the government is also paralyzed and cannot stop the terrorism, public morale quickly drops and the weakening government loses popular support. Believing that the revolution must eventually win, the population abandons active opposition to the terrorists and instead sues for peace at any cost. The perception ultimately becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy as the government collapses altogether.

Any “war of national liberation” can be divided into seven steps:

Step 1) To establish themselves in the minds of the target population as a force to be reckoned with, the revolutionaries must first force a heavy-handed reaction by the government. Their tactics are based on a 1969 book by Brazilian Communist Carlos Marighella, the Mini-Manual for Urban Guerrillas, which has been translated and distributed to terrorists throughout the world. Marighella explained how to use such frightening violence that “the government has no alternative except to intensify repression. The police roundups, house searches, arrests of innocent people, make life in the city unbearable... The political situation is transformed into a military situation, in which the militarists appear more and more responsible for errors and violence... The urban guerrilla must become more aggressive and violent, resorting without letup to sabotage, terrorism, expropriations, assaults, kidnappings and executions, heightening the disastrous situation in which the government must act.”[55]

Step 2) Having provoked a harsh reaction by the target government, the Communists now flood the Western news media with stories of government atrocities, real or fabricated. The goal is to begin isolating the government from Western, primarily American, support. The revolutionaries label convicted terrorists as “political prisoners”; they invent elaborate stories of secret prisons and “death squads”; and they hide among civilians during fighting, causing the government to kill innocent people accidentally. Such heads of state as Chiang Kai-shek of China, Anastasio Somoza of Nicaragua, and the Shah of Iran have been portrayed as corrupt and repressive. The South African government has been painted as being violently racist, while the French colonial administration in Algeria and the British rule in Northern Ireland have been labeled as undemocratic. Similar publicity attacks have been used against South Korea, Vietnam, the Philippines, Rhodesia, El Salvador, Argentina, and dozens of other nations. The news media has always cooperated in these smear campaigns, never allowing the target regime a fair chance to respond to the charges.

Step 3) The Communists can now count on the U.S. State Department to pressure the target government to begin giving in to the revolutionaries, supposedly for the sake of “human rights.” The regime offers compromises, including political reforms, the release of captured terrorists, and military cease-fires, which allow the terrorists to regroup and seize territory. But the revolutionaries also increase their demands, taking advantage of the government’s weakened image.

Step 4) As the government loses prestige, the Communists escalate the revolutionary violence and general unrest. They organize mass demonstrations, which agitators turn into riots. Labor unions go on strike, building toward a general labor strike that cripples the entire economy. Marxist professors in the universities indoctrinate and recruit naive youth, who join the growing ranks of Communists and terrorists. And some Communist agents even infiltrate local religious organizations, masquerading as priests or other clergy so as to neutralize opposition and recruit more people into the revolution. This can be seen, for example, in the Liberation Theology movement in the Catholic and Protestant churches, which teaches that Jesus was a Marxist revolutionary. Liberation Theology is active today in many parts of Latin America, Africa, and the far East.

Step 5) Since the Communists are only a tiny minority of the population, they must create the illusion of popular support. By waging terrorist warfare against the very people they claim to be liberating, the revolutionaries can frighten the people into passive or even active support of the revolution. In China and Nicaragua, the Communists murdered peasant farmers in rural villages; in Algeria, they maimed and killed Arab muslims; in Northern Ireland, they have killed thousands of Catholics while “kneecapping” thousands more with guns and electric drills;[56] in South Africa, they have burned to death many hundreds of blacks with “necklaces”—tires soaked in gasoline, placed around the victim’s neck, and lit on fire.[57] The revolutionaries accuse the victims of “collaborating” with the government, sending a powerful message to the rest of the population not to resist.

Step 6) Now the Communists are ready to enter the final phase of their revolution. With the target government steadily losing control over the country, the revolutionaries step up general terrorist violence while simultaneously negotiating for a new government. To accomplish this, the Communists often must split their revolutionary movement into two wings: an extremely violent faction pretending to oppose any peace agreement, and a more political faction that projects an image of pragmatism. The two factions secretly coordinate their activities, carrying out a “good cop/bad cop” scenario. Frightened by the escalating terrorism of the revolutionaries, the government makes concessions to the seemingly moderate faction, hoping to discourage the forces of violence. As the Communists tighten the vise, the government bargains away its remaining strength.

Step 7) Finally, in the name of democracy and “human rights,” the U.S. State Department withdraws its support from the embattled regime, using diplomatic pressure to force out the old government entirely and replace it with another. The Communists have by this time maneuvered themselves into position to join the new coalition government. Because this new regime is weak and divided, the Communists quickly move to consolidate total power for themselves. Their naive liberal allies are executed, followed by systematic mass terror against the whole population. A Communist regime has been imposed.

These seven steps describe the pattern of a war of national liberation. This strategy has been used, with slight variations, against almost every nation now under Communism, and is well under way for many remaining non-Communist nations.[58] As we have seen, terrorism is a cornerstone of this strategy.

Also see:

Terrorists in Muslim Disguise
Inside Story: World Report
August 1994

http://www.worldthreats.com/russia_former_ussr/Terrorists%20In%20Muslim%20Diguise.htm

Now that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) is beginning to defeat Israel, it is pulling out one of its most powerful terrorist weapons to finish the surrender process. That weapon is commonly known as “Islamic fundamentalism.”

On Monday, July 18 [1994], a powerful car bomb exploded in downtown Buenos Aires, Argentina. The target, a seven-story Jewish community center, was completely destroyed, leaving nearly 100 dead and another 100 wounded.1

Eight days later, another car bomb was detonated—this time at the Israeli embassy in London, England. The embassy and other adjoining buildings suffered damage, and 14 people were injured.2

Authorities in Israel and elsewhere immediately blamed Muslim “extremists” for the terrorist attacks, and specifically named the group Hezballah (meaning “Party of G-d”). For the PLO, this was a convenient dodge allowing it to disclaim responsibility.

But more importantly, the PLO is now using these attacks as an excuse to accelerate the surrender of Israel. The logic is chillingly simple: according to news accounts of the second bombing, British authorities “presumed it to be an attempt to disrupt the peace process,” and “Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin of Israel... said Islamic extremists were seeking to disrupt the Arab-Israeli reconciliation process.”3 Thus peace on any terms must be made quickly with the PLO, lest the “extremists” succeed in stopping the “peace process.” The PLO provides the carrot, while “Muslim fundamentalists” provide the stick.

A myth has been engineered in the last several years regarding “Islamic fundamentalism.” According to this idea, the PLO and its main factions have become moderate, willing to recognize Israel and negotiate a compromise solution. However, radical Muslims, including Hezballah, Islamic Jihad, the Amal Militia, and Hamas, are said to oppose such compromises violently. Every time these extremists carry out another terrorist attack, Israel is pressured to make more concessions to the PLO.

In reality, this is a classic example of dialectical strategy at work. Writing in Commentary magazine, Jerusalem Post editor David Bar-Illan exposed the clever strategy: “[Israeli] government spokesmen prefer to pretend that the killers are not operatives of the ‘moderate’ Arafat, supporter of the peace talks, but ‘enemies of the peace process,’ such as Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and PLO radicals... The not unreasonable assumption behind this charade is that the public might resent continued talks with proxies of the ‘mainstream’ PLO in Washington while its gunmen are killing Israelis back home.”4

Just as the PLO does not represent palestinian or Arab interests, the “Islamic fundamentalists” are not religious in nature. Rather, all these organizations have been created, supported, and directed by the Communists, operating on orders emanating from Moscow.

The terrorist group Hezballah, and its official sponsor, the government of Iran, provide a case in point.

Because of media distortion, the Ayatollah Khomeini was seen in the west as a fanatic religious leader. But the Iraqi family of the Grand Ayatollah Muhsen Hakim-Tabataba’i, which in the 1960s and 1970s exercised leadership over the Shi’ite movement of Islam, opposed Khomeini so thoroughly that they worked closely with the Shah of Iran. Saddam Hussein, the Soviet-backed dictator of Iraq, murdered the family at his first opportunity, thereby eliminating Shi’ite opposition to Khomeini.5

Khomeini’s revolutionary movement was known as “Islamic Marxism,” a movement begun from within the Russian Bolshevik Party in 1916.6 During the 1970s, the Soviet Union mobilized its resources to organize a revolution in Iran, with Khomeini as its official leader. Khomeini’s brother was serving time in prison as a member of the Tudeh Party—the Communist Party of Iran; Khomeini’s intimate advisor, Sadegh Ghothzadeh, was an affiliate of the French and Italian Communist Parties. Soon the Soviets were broadcasting pro-Khomeini propaganda into Iran, while they began publishing a well-funded revolutionary magazine entitled Navid, meaning “Good News.” KGB agents working among the 4,000 Soviet personnel in Iran coordinated the protests and riots, and the Tudeh Party, acting on Soviet orders, openly backed the “Islamic” revolution and created a broad coalition of the Left to support Khomeini.7

Moscow also mobilized the PLO to back Khomeini. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, led by self-proclaimed Marxist Leninist George Habash, supplied training and weapons to the Feda’iyin-e Khalq, the Iranian Islamic-Marxist terrorist group that began the revolution to overthrow the Shah. Meanwhile, Yasser Arafat’s Fatah organization trained and armed the Mujahedin-e Khalq, another main pillar of Khomeini’s revolution, and it trained future members of the Revolutionary Guards of Iran, including the Minister of the Guards later appointed by Khomeini.8

Once Khomeini seized power in Iran, Arafat brought a large delegation of PLO officials into the country, where “he was formally given the Israeli consulate building and, raising the Palestinian flag over it, opened the first PLO office, also appointing a PLO ‘ambassador’ to Iran.”9 The Soviet Union and Communist China have since continued to arm Iran with weapons.

Khomeini immediately created Hezballah as an international terrorist wing of the PLO-trained Revolutionary Guards. Inside Iran, Hezbellah worked closely with Iranian Communist organizations in consolidating the regime’s power. The terrorist training camps in Iran have been supervised by Mostafa Chamran Savehi, a follower of Trotskyite Communism who, as a student in Berkeley, California during the 1960s, founded such Islamic-Marxist groups as Red Shi’ism and the Muslim Students’ Association of America. The instructors at the Iranian terrorist camps have been Communist experts from North Korea and Syria, as well as Iranians trained by the PLO and the Communist government of Iraq.10

The organizer of Hezballah in Pakistan and Lebanon, Abbas Zamani, was also trained by the PLO and has been identified as a probable agent of the KGB.11 In Lebanon, Hezballah’s terrorist mastermind has been Immad Mugniyeh. For years Mugniyeh was a leading member of Yasser Arafat’s Force 17, an arm of Fatah. When the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982 forced the PLO to leave, Arafat had Mugniyeh and other members of Force 17 switch over to Hezballah, allowing these terrorists to remain in Lebanon. Mugniyeh quickly became the effective head of Hezballah, and has coordinated Hezballah-PLO terrorism to this day. On Arafat’s orders, the PLO transfers weapons, money, and terrorist units to Hezballah, while Hezballah has provided intelligence and other logistical support to the PLO—including helping PLO units infiltrate into Lebanon.12

In short, the “Islamic fundamentalists” are not religious at all, but are Communist fronts adopting a Muslim mask.

The “schism” between the PLO and “Islamic fundamentalists” has been staged as a clever ploy to force Israel into surrender. Now that Israel is indeed yielding to its implacable Communist enemies, it is only natural that terrorist attacks on Israeli and Jewish targets are being accelerated worldwide. By blaming the attacks on “extremists” who allegedly oppose the “peace process,” the PLO can disavow the terror acts in which it participates, and can maintain an image of moderation for the West. In the face of this intensified pressure, Israel is likely to make concessions even faster than before. Watch for Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin to begin placing the remainder of the strategic West Bank, and even Jerusalem itself, on the bargaining table.

On the other hand, the financing and political pressure for the PLO takeover is coming almost entirely from the United States, and President Clinton is now accelerating the process. If Congress chose to stop the President, Israel could take back the West Bank and Gaza, and could soon destroy the PLO and its allies.

1 Parks, M., Los Angeles Times, “Rabin links Hezbollah to Argentine blast,” SF Chronicle, 7-20-94, p. A10. 2 “Israeli embassy in London bombed,” SF Chronicle, 7-27-94, pp. A1, A13. 3 Ibid. 4 Bar-Illan, D., “Israel’s New Pollyannas,” Commentary, Sept. 1993, p. 30. 5 Taheri, A., Holy Terror, Adler & Adler, Bethesda, MD, 1987, p. 163. 6 Ibid., p. 217. 7 Rees, J., “How Jimmy Carter betrayed the Shah,” The Review of the News, 2-21-79, pp. 31-48. 8 Alexander, Y. and Sinai, J., Terrorism: The PLO Connection, Crane Russak, New York, 1989, pp. 72-73. 9 Ibid., p. 73. 10 Taheri, Op cit., pp. 77-79, 88-105. 11 Ibid., p. 177; Laffin, J., Holy War: Islam Fights, Grafton Books, London, 1988, p. 79. 12 Livingstone, N.C. and Halevy, D., Inside the PLO, William Morrow & Co., New York, 1990, pp. 267-275

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.