Tackling Maoist violence

By

Randeep Wadehra

The attack that wiped out the Congress Party’s top leadership in Chhattisgarh on May 25 has brought the focus back on Maoist terrorism. Even as the overall big picture was showing receding of the Red Terror’s impact zones, the attack confirms that Maoists are still a formidable foe of the Indian State. Actually, there has been quite a lot of confusion among various government officials regarding the spread of Maoist influence. In 2005, the then MoS for Home Affairs, S. Jaiswal, had stated “126 districts in 12 states are affected by naxal violence/influence… Out of these 76 districts in 9 states are badly affected.” In 2006, the then Union Home Minister Shivraj Patil had claimed that “only 50 districts” were actually affected, whereas PM Manmohan Singh had placed the figure at “over 160” in his statement before the Standing Committee of Chief Ministers of Naxalite Affected States. One really wonders whether this casual approach is not a contributing factor to the problem’s resilience. It should not be difficult for our police and various intelligence agencies to accurately assess the extent and intensity of the Maoist problem. 

In fact, several questions arise regarding the causes behind the continuing terror activities by Maoists and solutions thereto. Obviously, the main reasons are economic. Adivasis form 8.4% of the Indian population. Even as the rest of the country is striding towards prosperity, Adivasis are being deprived of their traditional means of earning as well as opportunities for economic growth. Even as they are being displaced from their traditional abodes, no viable alternatives have been offered. This is truly tragic, because it depicts gross insensitivity and lack of imagination on the part of the various state and central governments in their dealing with the most marginalized section of the Indian society. More importantly, even as industrialization is essential for the country’s economic progress, it cannot be at the cost of alienating the already vulnerable segments of the Indian population.

It is true that the government aims at inclusive growth. However, this inclusivity cannot be one-dimensional. It has to take into account the quality of life factor. The Adivasis were living in quite comfort in their natural habitat. Even as they were being introduced to the modern ways of living, they had absolute rights over their ancestral lands, where their hearths and homes were situated, and where the majority of them found their means of livelihood. By taking away all that and handing over to miners and industrial houses, the government has destroyed the Advasis’ way of life, without providing any suitable compensations, and/or alternatives.  

What turns the situation more dangerous is the manner in which the system is loaded against Adivasis. The mainstream media has no time for them. The judicial process is too cumbersome, slow and uncertain. The electoral system has only created a creamy layer that is as adept at ruthlessly exploiting the common Adivasi as the more privileged mainstream sections. So, does this justify their violent response? The answer is obviously an unequivocal ‘no’. But, when we place their grievances in perspective, it becomes feasible to find solutions acceptable to the general Adivasi populace. Therefore, it would be fruitful to factor in their concerns vis-à-vis the Forest Rights Act, the Panchayat (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act aka PESA, and the Land Acquisition, Resettlement & Rehabilitation Bill, 2011. Democracy is not about only casting of votes but also about giving space to people’s voice in decision making and listening to the concerns of the most vulnerable among them.

Having said this, we cannot ignore the fact that not all Maoists are fighting an idealistic battle for justice. Originally, Naxalism – the homegrown militant version of Maoism – may have had genuine idealistic as well as ideological underpinnings, when the likes of Charu Majumdar set out the movement’s ideological template through the so-called ‘Historic Eight Documents’. Interestingly, mainstream cinema and literature, especially in Bengal, romanticized, if not idolized, naxalites. For example Gautam Ghosh’s Bengali film Kaalbela (released in 2009) is based on Samaresh Majumdar’s novel of 1980s. In fact, the 1970s Bengali Cinema showed distinct influence of naxalite narratives. Mahashweta Devi’s 1974 Hajar Churashir Maa is another pertinent example. But it was not Bengal alone. Some of the recent literary and cinematic works in Kannada, Odisha, English and Hindi show discernible naxalite influence.

But the original idealistic and ideological underpinnings have either been shed completely or turned into fig leafs to cover the more ambitious power game aimed at usurping power at the center. Even as the original driving force – West Bengal’s educated middle class youth – has distanced itself from the naxalite movement, a far more ruthless and coarse set of leaders has taken over. It has no qualms while using Adivasis as gun fodder. There is no way the present Maoist leaders can improve the lot of Adivasis. Therefore, they show them the moon in the form of “liberation” from the exploitative system and promise them a far better quality of life after the “revolution”. However, an increasing number of Adivasis are getting disenchanted with the Red Revolution’s demagogues. This is evidenced by the Maoists’ shrinking sphere of influence in their former strongholds comprising Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Odisha, while they have been wiped out in Karnataka.

The state and central governments have their tasks cut out. There is a need to protect the interests of Adivasis and ensure them a dignified place in the evolving Indian polity. This will require both legislative and executive measures. If a farmer in Western UP, Punjab or Haryana can be given crores in compensation for his acquired land, there is no reason why similar packages cannot be offered to Adivasis. Moreover, there is a need for more affirmative action for integrating them into the mainstream by ensuring that every Adivasi gets a fair chance to realize his/her potential in the academic as well as professional fields. This will require diligent monitoring at various levels.

Simultaneously, a far more hardnosed approach is needed in dealing with the violent elements comprising Maoists. If the paramilitary forces and the police are unable to cope with the armed Maoist gangs then there should be a rethink on the strategy. Indian Army commandos, who are trained in jungle warfare, could be used to neutralize the Maoist strongholds in Dandakaranya and elsewhere. Adivasis are our people, but Maoists are enemies of the Indian Republic, and should be annihilated. We have done it in Punjab, the Northeast and Jammu & Kashmir. So, why not to the Maoists – aptly described by PM Manmohan Singh as greatest threat to India?

Published in The FinancialWorld dated June 6, 2012