New Delhi: Has Rakesh Tikait become a national leader for farmers? The question assumes significance for the simple reason that within one year of the farmers' movement led by him the popular government was forced to roll back one of its important laws since it came to power. This question is also being asked because of thousands of office bearers of farmer organizations in the country, none has been able to grab as many headlines as Tikait did.
Govt Vs Tikait
Tikait remained in the headlines for 358 days. The Modi government, which promised of doubling farmers' income by 2022, promoted agricultural laws. Due to its wide acceptance, after passing three farm laws in both houses of Parliament, the Modi government was in a way convinced that it had taken a landmark step to change the traditional systems of agriculture in the country.
But the peasant movement has changed this narrative. Had it not been so, then perhaps PM Modi himself would not have been forced to repeal the farm laws. This despite the fact that the PM during his address to the nation this week has left no stone unturned in advocating agricultural laws, in the end also accepted that "the truth like the light of a lamp" could not convince a section of the farmers.
After the central government's decision to withdraw the agriculture laws, the stature of Tikait has soared many times. Is he the new voice for farmers in the country? Can Tikait be viewed on par with his father Mahendra Singh Tikait or Chaudhary Charan Singh? Analysts who observed the movement closely have different opinions.
According to Arvind Kumar Singh, analyst and former editor, Rajya Sabha TV, "there is no doubt that after the withdrawal of the bill, Rakesh Tikait has emerged as the biggest leader of the farmers. He has handled the movement in difficult times. Just imagine the circumstances that were created after the 26 January Red Fort violence".
"Which movement would have survived in this country after the circumstances? If the farmers of western Uttar Pradesh did not stand with Tikait at that time, then the government was fully prepared to end movement," he commented.
Read more: Know the key leaders of the farmers' movement
Professor Niranjan Kumar of Delhi University has a different take on the question. "It cannot be said yet whether the movement was successful, as they do not represent the farmers of the whole country, says Professor Kumar, adding, "He should have talked about the farmers of the entire country, but at times it seems that he is being motivated by a specific agenda.
"When we are analyzing the action of the Central government, the stand of Tikait and his associates should also be seen. When the Center has suspended laws, the Supreme Court is also playing a role in this. The agitators should have come to the table and talked," he pointed out.
"He had a kind of obstinate attitude, which you cannot call the success of the movement. The manner in which the international agencies were involved in the movement, should also be underlined," Kumar opined.
What next?
What will be the next move of Rakesh Tikait after the withdrawal of agricultural laws? Will he be able to solve the problems of farmers including MSP, which has been dragging for the past 70 years? "The strength of the Bharatiya Kisan Union has been demonstrated beyond doubt. It is not just another farmers' movement," said political commentator Arvind Singh.
"Even though farmers from Punjab, Haryana were actively involved, it was Tikait, who led this movement. Tikait's father Chaudhary Mahendra Singh Tikait also had the image of a national leader, but after this movement the image of the former has equalled the latter. I think the country is looking forward to a bigger role of Tikait," he noted.
However, professor Kumar refuses to concede with the question of Tikait becoming a national leader. "Everyone knows Tikait has political ambitions. He had entered electoral politics, lost badly. He is still in touch with many political parties. Before becoming a farmer leader of the country, he should think that apart from Punjab, Haryana and UP, why farmers of other states are not considering him as their leader? Why did the agitation not take place in other states?" the professor asked.
"His motive was more to topple the government. There are many decisions, for example, economic liberalization in 1991 was not embraced by anyone at that time. Swadeshi movements also took place, but look today if liberalization had not happened, today our large population would have faced starvation," he said adding, "that's why some decisions are taken for keeping the future in mind. Agricultural laws are like that."
Read more: Who said What after Centre's repeal of farm laws
Masterstroke?
When ETV Bharat asked whether the Modi government's move should be considered a masterstroke. Arvind Kumar Singh categorically denied, adding, but it is definitely a late step in the right direction. Had it not been withdrawn before the Punjab and UP elections, there would have been a big political loss. Apart from this, the incident of Lakhimpur Kheri also forced the government to bow down to the demands of the farmers. This is an attempt to reduce the anger of the farmers.
Professor Kumar terms the government's withdrawal as a step taken keeping people's sentiments in mind. In a democracy, the government has to bow before many things, especially when work is done according to an agenda. "What will be the political consequences of this, I do not know, but implementing the farmer law properly is a big opportunity in itself," he said.
