Naxal Movement

Naxalite is a generalised term representing the Maoists and militant groups operating in
a few areas of India since the mid-1960s. The word Naxalite has been derived from
Naxalbari, a small town in North Bengal that falls in Northeastern India. This area saw
major revolts of tribal people against the local landlords. The revolt cooled down for a
certain period. After that, however, this became the focus of communist-led movements
against the government. The Naxalites led these movements.

In India, the Naxal movement has been the most rebellious act, which has been long
ongoing since 1967. It all started when a group of tribes, labourers, and peasants held a
rebellious movement and raided a landlord’s granaries in a North Bengal village called
Naxalbari. Although this rebellion was suppressed by the police temporarily, the
Naxalites kept their movement alive under the leadership of Charu Majumdar, working
with Jangal Santhal and Kanu Sanyal. As a result, the people of nearby villages
supported this movement, and even the Chinese started to support the movement.

It was named the “Spring Thunder” by the Chinese media. The Naxalite movement was
Jammuvast and started spreading out to other parts of India, including the North East
and and Kashmir. With time, the rebels have enhanced themselves with modern
weapons, firepower, and, most importantly, support from a certain group of India. In
time, they also became capable of building high-end bombs. They also started weapon
manufacturing and production camps in leaps and bounds. The most recent attack by
these groups was the attack on the Indian security forces on the 3rd of April, 2021,
which took place on the Sukma-Bijapur border.

The Naxalites are considered to be the far-left communists who support Mao Zedong’s
political [Link], the Naxalite movement originated in West Bengal and had
later moved to the less developed rural areas in Southern and Eastern India, including in
the states of Chhattisgarh, Odisha, Andhra Pradesh, and Telangana.
Factors responsible for the cause of Naxalism

Naxalism was not just a movement that sparked in one day. Behind this movement,
many factors were responsible, some of which have been the problems for India which
were overlooked then. Let us look at some of these factors below:

Mismanagement of Forests:

Mismanagement of forests has been an issue that came into play since the British ruled
India. The British government introduced laws to monopolise forest resources, which
came into play for this. The situation worsened post-1990 when the Indian government
started the natural resources of the forests. This led to a spark that formed fire in the
hearts of the people living in the forests to contribute to the movement against the
Indian government.

Disorganised Tribal policies:

The detachment of the local tribes of the forests from the government was expected to
be resolved and eradicated post-independence from British rule. However, this was not
the case. The government failed to implement proper tribal policies. Instead, it
concentrated on projects which led to forests being burned or cut down hence
abandoning the tribes from their homes and making them resourceless. This led them
to join the Naxalites movement from even other states of India.

Intraregional and Interregional discrepancies:

The poor in India have always been the less privileged. In previous years the government
did not make any schemes or policies for the poor. So Naxalites became the voice of
the poor, and the people from the lower economic class thought the Naxalites would
solve their problems. Hence they started joining the Naxalism movement.
Absence of Land reforms and industrialisation:

At that time, there was a tremendous impact on the backward society people when they
saw half-hearted attempts by the government to bring in land reforms and policies. The
government had failed to set up agriculture organised in rural India. This led to a poor
economy in the rural parts of India. As a result, the employment rate for these people
almost neared zero at that time. People, as a result, formed a protest and joined the
Naxal movement to raise their voices against the government.

Forest cover in India:

Most parts of rural India are covered by forests, giving the Naxalites considerable
advantage to continue their movement. They form groups and make camps in the
forests, making them less vulnerable to the police and the government.

Indian Youth:

Failing to generate sufficient jobs for Indian youth just graduating from colleges and
universities has been one of the major causes of the rise in Naxalism. The idealism for
the Naxal movement has been inflicted on the youth who are fresh graduates. Hence
the increase in such numbers has been in leaps and bounds in the past few
[Link] the Naxalism movement has risen throughout the years and has turned
the lives of thousands of youth having a tremendous potential upside down, the
Government of India is still trying to mend terms with this militant group by introducing
reforms, and new agricultural policies, generating jobs for the youth, etc.

How did the government respond to it?

State governments:

States’ response to the Maoist insurgency has evolved over the years, influenced by the
intensity of the threat and political decisions at the state and [Link] the law and
order come under the state list, the critical counterinsurgency initiatives come under the
jurisdiction of the State governments.

The Centre is involved in supporting these efforts through joint strategies, providing
resources, intelligence, and coordination when necessary.

Central government:

The previous UPA government at the Centre had laid the foundation for India’s Counter-
Insurgency (COIN) strategy and the current government has accelerated the paces and
effectiveness of the COIN [Link] strategies have integrated the population-
centric and enemy-centric approaches, combining law and order mechanisms and
development instruments. Centre has largely led the COIN efforts from behind by
providing resources like security and financial support, paramilitary, intelligence, and
strategic direction. Overall, the COIN involves a mixture of population-centric and enemy
-centric approach to deal with insurgents in India with the aim to complement state
initiatives. It involves the following:

Law and order approach:

It plays a key role in the Centre’s counterinsurgency strategy.

It is seen in the deployment of about 532 companies of the central paramilitary forces in
the affected states.

In 2006, for the first time, the government had issued a security blueprint to tackle
Maoist extremism.

Police force modernisation:

The government had realised that the Maoist insurgents were highly successful due to
the lack of strong and effective policing.

To improve the quality of policing, in the mid-2000s, the Centre had implemented a
Police Modernization Scheme.

Centre had also provided enormous financial aid to the states for the modernisation and
up-gradation of police forces’ weaponry, communication, and infrastructure.
It was recently found that the improvement in police modernisation and intelligence
gathering had brought in success for the police’s anti-Maoists campaigns.

Enhancing intelligence networks:

Poor intelligence infrastructure at the state level was a major nuisance to the
counterinsurgency campaign.

The Centre, in consultation with states, took steps to enhance and upgrade the
capabilities of the intelligence agencies.

Conclusion

The concerted effort from both the Centre and Naxal-affected states is a rare example
of cooperative federalism. Comprehensive COIN strategy, encompassing both the
population-centric and enemy-centric approaches has significantly reduced the Naxal
footprint in many of the militant groups in the region. Yet, the Naxalites still remain a
formidable force that can nevertheless be considered a threat to India’s national
security. However, unlike in the 2000s, the Indian government is well prepared in
addressing this issue through a comprehensive strategy that is already in place.