It is time for truce: JNU students have been the unflinching voice of moral dissent. But it is time to go back to the classrooms

Trying to carve out a mega framework to explain the national movement against British rule, historian Bipan Chandra came up with a pithy formulation: struggle-truce-struggle (s-t-s). Chandra proffered that Mahatma Gandhi, the initiator and leader of the three mass movements in India, understood that mass struggles lose their potency if prolonged beyond a point. Participants get worn out and the law of diminishing returns comes to the fore. It is essential, therefore, to end a movement at the right time and forge a truce. During such a period a movement reinvigorates and readies itself for another period of struggle, if need be.

Chandra’s construct, inspired by Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci’s seminal coinage “war of position” and “war of manoeuvre”, was both praised and panned by historians, depending on the school they belonged to. At JNU today, the context and the challenge is totally different but the formulation has a takeaway or two for those involved in the ongoing protests.

The agitation is over two months old and there are signs that fatigue is setting in. Last week four councillors in the student’s union wrote a pamphlet, once fundamental to JNU’s intra-student dialogue mechanism, on the “undemocratic” functioning of JNUSU. Our views are not being taken into count, they alleged. Politically unaffiliated students talk about confusing signals from JNUSU on the issue of registration. Within the Left student bodies too, there is divergence on how the movement should proceed.

That’s natural since Left Unity, which controls the student’s union is a coming together electorally of four Red groups: AISA, SFI, AISF and DSF. AISA, the student’s wing of the radical Left CPML, has been the dominant force on the campus for some years now. SFI, aligned to CPM, and AISF with CPI, are the more moderate parties. DSF is a breakaway group from SFI. But even when combined, the mass base of the moderate Left groups is less than AISA’s. A general body meeting of students would be the best way to find out the popular pulse. Resolution to continue or boycott classes should be put to vote and the majority decision must prevail.

Going back to the classes is not a defeat for JNUSU. They have been heard across India loud and clear. They have been the spark plugs for dissenting voices, the moral compass for many Indians, both young and old. It was student pressure that forced the withdrawal of the service and utility charges levied on the hostel fees hike. About 40% students in 2017-18 had Rs 12,000 per month or less family income. This category of students should be exempt from hikes. The rest should pay the increased room rent hike (from Rs 10 to Rs 300) which had remained the same since 1980s.

Both JNUSU and university authorities should realise few negotiations end with 100% success for either side. The administration needs to be more accommodative and sensitive than it has been so far. The 300 odd students who have been denied registration must be allowed to register without any pre-condition.

The recent violence has widened trust deficit between students and authorities. It doesn’t help when the administration uses plausible deniability to explain late intervention by Delhi police to stop the January 5 mayhem. There was violence on January 4 as well. Strict action could have prevented January 5. This, sadly, seems to be a case of trying to legitimise lumpenism by covert means.

Teachers were also beaten up during the violence. For someone who tweets so regularly, a post of sympathy by vice-chancellor M Jagadesh Kumar was in order. Teachers must be made to feel safe in campus. In this backdrop, seeking resignation of the VC is fine; but it should not be a pre-condition for the resumption of classes.

Students and VCs have seldom shared a warm relationship in JNU. Friction between the current VC and JNUSU goes back to 2016 in the “tukde tukde” times. But talking about installing tanks in the campus isn’t the best way to be liked by a Left-leaning university. JNU always had an anti-state disposition. NSUI was lampooned all along the 1970s and 1980s because it was governing party Congress’s student body.

For most of us, the central university is not a news report, it is an opinion. In recent years, a body of negative public opinion has been manufactured through forwarded video clips and social media remarks. Here’s an alternative view: Since the mid-1980s, JNU has produced a significant number of civil servants every year. A small talented bunch – many of them Marxists – go to the US or the UK for higher studies, often settle there. JNU produces bureaucrats, diplomats, academics, scientists, lecturers, schoolteachers, NGO professionals, language professionals, even actors. A miniscule minority become full-time activists and politicians. JNU is a Red fort. It is also a nation-builder.

Students and teachers aligned to the Left believe that the VC is bent on fundamentally altering the nature of the campus. JNU isn’t a mystery movie. Everybody knows the plot and the way it is unfolding. This is a battle of conflicting visions, of what JNU should be. But this is also a battle of public perception. One must reflect if persisting with the boycott of classes after over eight weeks is the best way forward at a time when over 70% students have already registered for the winter semester. It is time for truce.