Submit Your Work
Inspiring Stories
People Movements
Politics
Tuesday, February 9, 2021

Story of Rakesh Tikait: Farmer Leader Whose Tears were More Powerful Than the UP Government

This article is by
Vaishnavi Krishna Mohan
Vaishnavi Krishna Mohan
South Asia

Share this article
Download as PDF
Cite this Article

Article Contributor(s)

Vaishnavi Krishna Mohan

Article Title

Story of Rakesh Tikait: Farmer Leader Whose Tears were More Powerful Than the UP Government

Publisher

Global Views 360

Publication Date

February 9, 2021

URL

Rakesh Tikait addressing a crowd at farmer protests | Source: Facebook

Rakesh Tikait addressing a crowd at farmer protests | Source: Facebook

On the evening of 28th January, 2021‚ Rakesh Tikait—national spokesperson of the Bharatiya Kisan Union (BKU)—had an emotional outburst—while addressing the media. His outburst however became a major call back to the farmers across the Western Uttar Pradesh and was a turning point in the protest of the Centre’s new farm reform laws. But who is Rakesh Tikait? And how did he emerge as the new face of the protest? These are the questions which this article is going to answer.

51-year-old Rakesh Tikait hails from Sisauli village of Muzaffarnagar district, Uttar Pradesh. He is the second son of the elder farmer leader, late Mahendra Singh Tikait, who was the president of the Indian Farmers Union. Rakesh Tikait also has four brothers, the eldest one being Naresh Tikait—the national president of the BKU. Rakesh Tikait married Sunita Devi from Dadri village in Baghpat district in 1985. They have a son Charan Singh and two daughters, Seema and Jyoti. Tikait holds a Master of Arts degree from Meerut University.

Tikait joined the Delhi police force in 1985. He was a part of the police force until 1992—an year before which his father Mahendra Singh Tikait held a series of protests against the enhanced rate of fertilisers, hike in electricity rates, and regulation in supply of sugarcane to the sugar mills. He also pitched in for local farmers who were seeking higher compensation for land acquired on the outskirts of Lucknow for setting up a TELCO unit. The movement started fading due to pressure from the government. Hence, Rakesh decided to quit his job in 1993-94 and started taking part in the farmers’ fight with BKU. In the recent past, he has contested two elections, one on a Rashtriya Lok Dal ticket and another as an Independent, but was unsuccessful both times.

As the Tikait family hails from Sisauli, Muzaffarnagar, the family heads Baliyan Khap of 84 villages, giving it considerable influence within the Jat community of Western UP and Haryana.

Due to the Jat community's custom of passing on authority to the eldest son, Tikait’s elder brother Naresh Tikait took over the mantle of both the BKU and Baliyan Khap from Mahendra Singh Tikait. The BKU also has strong influence among the Malik and Deshwal Khaps. The Tikait brothers have been trying to live up to the towering standards that their father has set. Mahendra Singh Tikait was a well-knows figure among both Hindu and Muslim farmers of Western UP, who had shared economic interests.

He has led numerous massive demonstrations against the Centre and state government on farmers' issues and was the voice of farmers. In 1988, lakhs of farmers gathered at Boat Club in the heart of Delhi and placed their 35 point charter of demands, seeking various concessions for farmers including higher prices for sugarcane, cancellation of loans, lowering of water tax and waiver of electricity dues. The protest was Tikait’s biggest protest which eventually brought the Rajiv Gandhi government to its knees.

In 2007, Rakesh Tikait, for the first time contested independently from Khatauli, Muzaffarnagar. In 2014, Rakesh Tikait Joined the Rashtriya Lok Dal (RLD) and contested the 2014 Lok Sabha elections from Amroha. This came as a shock to many as Tikait had been critical of RLD and some argue a BJP supporter. A striking case in point being Mahapanchayat in Muzaffarnagar in 2013 that led to communal riots in west UP was in fact jointly addressed by leaders of BKU and BJP.

“I had to choose between RLD and others. I found RLD better. It is the party that has taken up the issue of farmers,” Tikait told the Times of India. However, Tikait failed in both his attempts.

Rakesh Tikait has constantly been the voice of farmers. In 2014, Tikait organized the Dunkal movement at the Red Fort in Delhi demanding the government to increase the price of millet in the interest of farmers of Rajasthan. Tikait’s demonstrations against the government landed him in Jaipur Jail. However, his protests were successful as the government eventually agreed to the farmers’ demand.  

The ongoing farmers protest lost support after the unfortunate events which took place at Red Fort on 26th of January. On this day, the Indian tricolor was allegedly disrespected, several farmers and policemen were victims of violence, the protest aggravated to an extent where a farmer even lost his life. The leaders and the decision makers of the movement did not realize that it is always difficult to control and discipline a rally. A rally on move is more vulnerable to anti-social elements and government linked saboteurs to blend with the crowd and create mayhem. This not only discredited the farmers’ movement but over 13 prominent leaders of the movement including Yogendra Yadav were detained by the police. On 28th of January, Tikait’s turned emotional as he said “ I saw the BJP MLA [allegedly identified by the farmers as Loni MLA Nand Kishore Gurjar] who had come here to attack our elders, my sardar brothers. I could not let that happen, they have all come here on my call, I am responsible for them. This is wrong, the people have chosen them, the people cannot be harmed. I had told the government that I would surrender, but it is my responsibility to make sure all my farmers are safe. I knew what could happen if the police took them if they left from here on their tractor’s trolleys. I knew when they reached Hapur and beyond, BJP and RSS workers would begin pelting stones on them. I cannot let that happen. The farmer was never scared, the farmer will never be scared. Those who incited violence on (January 26th) must be investigated by the government. Tell people the truth.” With a parched throat and welling eyes he said, “I will drink water when the farmers send it from their homes.” This emotional video went viral across Uttar Pradesh through WhatsApp and television telecast. Hundreds of people packed food and water and set off from Uttar Pradesh to reach Delhi. They all broke their fast after Tikait sipped the water that they brought. Tikait’s tears not only guarded the Ghazipur protest site from what seemed like a crackdown but he also reignited the spark and revived the dying protest.

Rakesh Tikait addressing press | Source: Twitter

Critics said that the government had committed a blunder by falsely assuming that the protest had lost its support and sympathy amongst the public after the unfortunate events of Jan 26th. The police did not face much difficulty vacating the camps at the Ghazipur border by late evening of 28th Jan. The government too perceived Tikait as a loose canon and an irresponsible leader. Furthermore, the police did not detain Tikait along with other leaders. At a point of time, he was the only leader left on the stage at the protest site in Ghazipur. Critics speculate that they did not detain him as he previously was a supporter of BJP and in fact voted for the party in the 2019 elections and hence the BJP thought they could still convince him to take a middle ground and further dilute the movement.  However, Tikait turned the tables on the administration. His address resonated across the entire Jat community of western UP, which till then had been passive in extending support to him. The Yogi government cannot afford to take any more chances as the “Jat land” has firmly supported BJP for the past six years, especially after the Muzaffarnagar riots of 2013. In addition to this, since the Yogi government came to power in 2017, they have increased the state advised price of Sugarcane by only Rs.10 per quintal. The state advised price for 2020-21 has not been announced yet although the crushing operations have begun at mills as early as November 2020. What is more is that the UP government owes the farmers over Rs.12,000 crore against the cane purchased in the current and the previous season. In UP, a greater source of farmer anger apart from the three reform laws and the SAP of sugarcane is for doubling electricity charges for both irrigation pumps and domestic use. The hike in diesel price by Rs.10/L in one year has further fueled their anger.

Now, a Kisan Mahapnachayat is also taking place in Muzaffarnagar. The same district where the Mahapanchayat was held after the riots in Muzaffarnagar. The latter Mahapanchayat played a crucial role in the 2017 elections.

The Indian Farmers Union has constantly been in talk with the government. Rakesh Tikait has once again been the voice of farmers. Now, the government has to decide whether the movement will end or not given that the Farmers are demanding a complete withdrawal of all three laws.

Support us to bring the world closer

To keep our content accessible we don't charge anything from our readers and rely on donations to continue working. Your support is critical in keeping Global Views 360 independent and helps us to present a well-rounded world view on different international issues for you. Every contribution, however big or small, is valuable for us to keep on delivering in future as well.

Support Us

Share this article

Read More

July 17, 2021 6:39 PM

How facebook helps the Authoritarian Regime in Vietnam

The ability of coercing American tech giants like Facebook into compliance is definitely a talking point to brag for the Vietnamese leaders. In October 2019, Facebook’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg stated that “Facebook stands for free expression. In a democracy, a private company shouldn’t have the power to censor politicians or the news.” However, Facebook’s double standard is no novelty. In August 2019, the Minister of Information and Communications, Nguyen Manh Hung took the parliamentary floor and stated that Facebook was restricting access to “increasing amounts” of content in Vietnam. Further, Hung stated that Facebook was complying with 70-75% of the Vietnamese government’s requests for post restrictions. In October 2020, this number went up to 95% for Facebook. Facebook acknowledged that the amount of content on which restrictions were imposed jumped by over 500% in the second half of 2018 alone.

Unlike China, Vietnam has adopted a relatively open attitude to western social media. Vietnamese politicians consider social media beneficial, perhaps it helps the promotion of their missions, personal agendas and even propagandas. In fact, Vietnam happens to have a military unit—called Force 47—with the purpose to correct “wrong views” on the internet. Whereas, there is no set set definition of the “wrong views,” people—if found guilty—can be jailed upto 20 years.

Furthermore, blocking western social media might not be in the self-interest of Vietnam, as doing so can hamper relations with the U.S.—with whom Vietnam desires to strengthen ties. The top communist strata of Vietnam for decades, have been single-minded on what they identify as “toxic information”. The definition of “toxic information” has only broadened over the years and has enabled the authorities to bend the term as per their whims. Vietnamese leaders have misused the threat of “toxic information” by branding content unfavorable to their regime with the term.

Facebook removed over 620 supposed fake accounts, over 2,200 links and several thousand posts which are deemed to be ‘anti-state’ from Vietnam in 2020. In a country without independent media, Vietnamese people are reliant on platforms like Facebook to read and discuss vital and controversial issues such as the dispute in Dong Tam. Dong tam is a village outside Vietnam’s capital, Hanoi, where residents were fighting the authorities’ plans to seize their farmlands in order to build a factory. 40-year-old Bui Van Thuan, a chemistry teacher and blogger, showed his solidarity to the fight and condemned the country’s leaders in one of his Facebook posts which stated “Your crimes will be engraved on my mind. I know you, the land robbers, will do everything, however cruel it is, to grab the people’s land.” On government’s insistence, Facebook blocked his account the very next day preventing over 60-million Vietnamese users from seeing his posts. A day later, Dong tam village was stormed by police with grenades and tear gas. A village leader and three officers were killed just as Thuan had anticipated. Thuan’s account remained suspended for three months after which Facebook informed him that the ban would be permanent. “We have confirmed that you are not eligible to use Facebook,” the message read in Vietnamese. Towards the end of murder trial held over the clash, a Facebook spokesperson said Thuan’s account was blocked due to an error and the timing of the lifting of restrictions was coincidental. The spokesperson denied censoring profiles as per the demands of the government. Thuan’s blacklisting illustrates how willingly Facebook submits to the authoritarian government’s censorship demands.

In April 2018, 16 activist groups and media organizations and 34 well-known Facebook users wrote an open letter to the CEO Mark Zuckerberg, accusing Facebook of assisting Vietnam to suppress dissenting voices. Force 47 or E47, a 10,000-member cyber unit was singled out in the letter. The letter called the unit “state-sponsored trolls” that spread misinformation about the Vietnamese pro-democracy activists.

Force 47 was deployed in 2016 by the state to maintain a “healthy” internet environment. The cyber unit took advantage of the very apparent loophole in Facebook’s community guidelines which automatically removes content if enough people lodge a complaint or report the post/account. The letter alleged that the government used Force 47 to target and suspend accounts or content.

According to a report by The Intercept, the modus operandi of E47 is that a member shares a target who is often a pro-democratic political dissident writer or activist. The information of the target who is nominated for censorship is accompanied with an image of the target with a red “X” marked over it. Anyone interested in victimizing the target needs to just report the account or post for violating Facebook’s pliant community standards regardless of whether the rules were actually broken. The E47 users are asked to rate the targeted page one out of five stars, falsely flag the post and report the page itself.  

Do Nguyen Mai Khoi, a singer and a pro-democracy activist, popularly known as “the Lady Gaga of Vietnam” has been tirelessly trying for over two years to get Facebook to care about the censorship in Vietnam. She has tried to get Facebook’s attention to the fact that groups like Force 47, a pro-government Facebook group of police, military, and other Communist party loyalists have actively been collaborating to suppress the voice of dissidents both offline and online. Her evidence has been substantial and her arguments carry ample clarity. Despite several interactions with Alex Warofka, a Facebook product policy manager for human rights, Mai khoi’s efforts have not been sincerely addressed. Instead, what they claimed was more infuriating. They said “We were not able to identify a sufficient level of community standards violations in order to remove that particular group (E47) or those particular actors.” Since E47 actors are under real names, photos and authentic identities, Facebook dismissed Mai Khoi’s evidence. “At a high level, we require both widespread coordination, as well as the use of inauthentic accounts and identity,” Warofka told Khoi.

Dipayan Ghosh, a former public policy advisor at Facebook and the co-director of the Digital Platforms & Democracy Project at Harvard’s Kennedy School stated:

“I think for Zuckerberg the calculus with Vietnam is clear: It’s to maintain service in a country that has a huge population and in which Facebook dominates the consumer internet market, or else a competitor may step in. The thought process for the company is not about maintaining service for free speech. It’s about maintaining service for the revenue.”

It wouldn’t be surprising to note that the inconsistency of Facebook’s ostensible community guidelines and policies extend beyond Vietnam. In 2016, during the time of political unrest in Turkey, access to Facebook and other social media were repeatedly restricted and further complied to the Turkish government’s request to restrict 1,823 pieces of content which the government deemed unlawful. In 2018, Facebook owned Instagram complied with demands of the Russian government to remove content related to opposition activist Alexei Navalny’s anti-corruption investigation therefore making it inaccessible for over 5 million users who watched and followed Navalny’s investigation. Facebook also routinely restricts posts that governments deem sensitive or off-limits in countries including Cuba, India, Israel, Morocco and Pakistan.

While the CEO of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, claims that the platform protects free expression, Facebook has been an active facilitator and flag-bearer of autocratic regimes. The social media giant’s apparent indifference and ignorance has failed its users terribly.

Read More