16 August 2025
(Mains: Editorials Simplified)

NAXALISM – FROM REVOLUTIONARY ZEAL TO DECLINING IMPACT AND BEYOND

While global terror threats evolve with new technologies such as AI, India appears to be witnessing a decline in ideologically driven extremist movements like Maoist/Naxalite insurgency. Understanding this transformation requires placing Naxalism in historical, ideological, and socio-political contexts, alongside the state’s counter-strategies.

Historical Background and Evolution

• Origins:

  • Emerged in 1960s in Naxalbari, West Bengal, inspired by Marxist-Leninist-Maoist ideology, advocating for armed revolution against perceived structural injustices.

  • Drew inspiration from global revolutionary leaders like Mao Zedong, Ho Chi Minh, and Che Guevara.

• Initial Appeal:

  • Attracted youth, intellectuals, tribals, and marginalised groups by promising radical socio-economic change.

  • Termed as “Spring Thunder over India”, reflecting the belief in widespread revolutionary transformation.

• Decline and Fragmentation:

  • Movement degenerated into violent splinter groups, losing ideological coherence.

  • Concentrated mainly in forested belts of Central and Eastern India (the “Red Corridor”).

• Contemporary Phase:

  • State-led operations since the 2000s, combined with development interventions, have significantly weakened the movement.

  • Current official claims suggest that Naxalism is nearing its “final phase.”

Core Issues at Focus

• Persistence of Violence Despite Decline:

  • While overall intensity has reduced, sporadic attacks still occur in strongholds like Bastar.

  • Security forces face the challenge of balancing assertive action with protection of civilian rights.

• Socio-Economic Roots:

  • Land alienation, displacement due to mining and development projects, and inadequate delivery of welfare schemes continue to fuel grievances among tribals and marginalised communities.

• Ideology vs. Violence:

  • Original ideological commitment has largely given way to militarised violence and extortion, undermining popular legitimacy.

  • Misuse of terms like “urban naxals” risks conflating dissent with insurgency, leading to policy missteps.

• Leadership Crisis and Internal Splits:

  • Removal of key leaders and factionalism have reduced coherence, but small splinter groups remain operationally active.

• Global-Local Contrast:

  • Globally, terrorism is moving towards AI-enabled and bio-weapon threats, while in India, the traditional ideological insurgency seems to be in retreat.

  • Raises questions about future forms of domestic extremism – whether they may adopt new technologies or mutate into different grievances.

Way Forward

• Balanced Counter-Insurgency Approach:

  • Continue targeted security operations while ensuring adherence to human rights norms.

  • Avoid over-reliance on brute force to prevent alienating local populations.

• Deepening Developmental Interventions:

  • Accelerate delivery of health, education, and livelihood programmes in tribal regions.

  • Ensure local participation in decision-making, especially in land acquisition and forest rights.

• Addressing Root Causes:

  • Strengthen implementation of PESA Act (1996) and Forest Rights Act (2006) to empower tribal communities.

  • Tackle displacement due to industrial projects through fair rehabilitation and benefit-sharing mechanisms.

• Nuanced Classification of Dissent:

  • Differentiate between violent extremism and democratic dissent to prevent misuse of labels like “urban naxals.”

  • Encourage critical engagement with civil society actors to prevent intellectual alienation.

• Preparing for New Threats:

  • While traditional insurgency may decline, invest in anticipating future threats such as tech-enabled radicalisation or criminal-insurgent nexuses.

  • Enhance cyber surveillance and capacity-building in counter-AI/biotech misuse.

Conclusion

Given the Naxalism’s trajectory, India’s experience illustrates that while force is necessary, lasting peace requires addressing the structural roots of discontent. As global terror threats evolve with AI and bio-weapons, India’s challenge lies in consolidating gains against Naxalism while preparing for new, technologically enabled forms of extremism.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

DEMOGRAPHIC SHIFTS AND NATIONAL SECURITY

Demography has long been considered India’s strength, often termed a “demographic dividend”, yet recent debates highlight concerns about its uneven distribution and security implications. The announcement of a High-Powered Demography Mission reflects growing attention to the links between population dynamics, migration, and internal security.

Historical and Policy Background

• Population Growth Trajectory:

  • India’s Total Fertility Rate (TFR) has declined to replacement level (2.0), but inter-state variations remain stark.

  • Border states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, and Assam show higher fertility and migration pressures compared to southern and western states.

• Data Gaps:

  • The absence of a post-2011 Census has created a vacuum in updated demographic data.

  • Policymaking relies on fragmented sources like NFHS, SRS, and local surveys, limiting accuracy.

• Policy Announcements:

  • Earlier budgetary announcements of a demographic committee were not operationalised, underscoring the institutional delay in addressing these challenges.

  • Previous government committees like the National Population Policy (2000) emphasized population stabilization but did not explicitly focus on demographic security concerns.

Key Issues and Challenges

• Borderland Demography and Security:

  • Districts along Nepal and Bangladesh borders show shifting demographic balances, raising fears of illegal migration, resource competition, and cultural anxieties.

  • Localised changes in voter rolls and settlement patterns have been flagged by security agencies.

• Uneven Demographic Transition:

  • Southern and western states face challenges of population ageing and labour shortages, while parts of the Hindi heartland still experience high fertility.

  • This unevenness complicates resource distribution, representation in Parliament (post-2026 delimitation), and federal dynamics.

• Data Deficiency and Policy Blindness:

  • Delayed Census hampers evidence-based planning in welfare, infrastructure, and employment.

  • Incomplete demographic understanding risks over-politicisation of population debates rather than rational policymaking.

• National Security Dimension:

  • Unregulated migration may contribute to identity conflicts, radicalisation, and pressure on local resources.

  • Historical instances in the Northeast highlight how demographic changes can alter socio-political balances, affecting peace and stability.

• Governance and Administrative Capacity:

  • Lack of coordination among central and state agencies on population and migration management.

  • Weak implementation of border management and identity verification systems.

Required Policy Responses

• Revive and Modernise Data Architecture:

  • Expedite Census 2027 with digital enumeration tools for accuracy and timeliness.

  • Integrate NFHS, UIDAI, and migration data into a National Demography Dashboard.

• Strengthen Border Management:

  • Enhance surveillance, identity verification, and community-level participation in monitoring demographic shifts.

  • Strengthen cooperation with neighbouring countries for regulated migration.

• Address Inter-State Demographic Imbalances:

  • Create mechanisms for labour mobility from high-fertility to ageing states.

  • Encourage balanced federal resource distribution to prevent resentment among states with better demographic management.

• Socio-Economic Interventions:

  • Focus on women’s education, reproductive health, and skill development to accelerate demographic transition in lagging states.

  • Develop special welfare schemes for border villages to reduce vulnerability to demographic pressures.

• Ensure Balanced Discourse:

  • Avoid securitisation of all demographic shifts; distinguish between natural demographic transition, internal migration, and illegal migration.

  • Foster inclusive narratives to prevent stigmatisation of communities while addressing genuine concerns.

Conclusion

India’s demographic dynamics are at a critical juncture – balancing the promise of a demographic dividend with emerging concerns of demographic stress and security. While fears of demographic conspiracy must be addressed cautiously, genuine challenges like migration pressures, uneven fertility, and ageing require robust policy mechanisms.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………