India's Failing Counterinsurgency Campaign

A rare visit to a Maoist rebel camp deep in the jungle shows why New Delhi's clumsy attempts to stamp out its most dangerous internal revolt have been so disastrous.

BY ANUJ CHOPRA | MAY 14, 2010

Tapping his fingernails on a tiny stainless steel lunch box, Comrade Vijay, a mustachioed rebel commander, made a startling assertion: There was enough bomb material inside to blow up a jeep. With 90 pounds of such explosives, he claimed, his comrades in the Indian Maoist rebel army had blown up land-mine-resistant armored vehicles the Indian government imported from South Africa. Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) are the "main strength" of the rebels, he told me, as he sat under a makeshift tarpaulin tent, rifle at his side.

Last October, on assignment for Abu Dhabi's National newspaper, I hiked more than 40 miles through the damp, malarial jungles of Bastar in central India, the deadliest theater of the country's decades-long Maoist insurgency, winding through mineral-rich hills and a spate of rebel-controlled villages to Comrade Vijay's hideout in a patch of forest clearing atop a hill. I had traveled all that way to ask the rebel commander whether there was any chance of a truce between his forces and the Indian government -- a possibility he and his men vehemently denied. As we spoke, Vijay's fellow comrades -- about 20 communist guerrillas, mostly teenaged boys and girls in olive green commando fatigues -- milled around the clearing, antiquated Enfield rifles slung on their shoulders, many of them snatched in raids on police stations.

Just after my trip, the Indian government launched Operation Green Hunt, a 100,000-troop-strong counteroffensive designed to stamp out the Maoist insurgents (also called Naxalites) who are active in nearly a third of India's landmass. So far, the operation has not gone according to plan. Just last month, in a patch of jungle not far from where I met Comrade Vijay, a mob of rebels attacked a police convoy at dawn. The rebels opened fire indiscriminately, lobbed grenades, and set off IEDs, killing 76 policemen and hacking off the limbs of any who survived the initial blast. It was the deadliest Maoist attack in recent memory.

But the challenges of Operation Green Hunt should have been a surprise to no one -- and after interviewing the Naxalites, I can't say they were a surprise to me. Focused purely on conventional military techniques and brute force, without much thought to the social problems that originally fed the Naxalites and the close relationship they've built with local populations, the Indian government's initiative is unlikely to succeed over the long term.

Four hours into my trek to the rebel camp, as I rolled up my trousers to cross a shallow stream that twisted between boulders through the jungle, I noticed a boy, about 6 or 7 years old, barefoot and barely clad, standing on the other side of the creek and watching us with a stony gaze. My guides greeted him in Gondi, the local dialect. He knew them and trusted them, but he couldn't take his eyes off me, the conspicuous outsider. A minute later, when I turned around, he had disappeared. Six miles ahead, we were waylaid by a clutch of armed rebels, who were well aware that I was coming.

The Maoists got their start in 1967 as a peasant revolution against rich, exploitative landlords, and the movement has germinated in rural areas stalked by poverty, misery, and disease ever since. In 2004, when the rebels were present in nine states, India's Home Ministry put the movement at an estimated 9,300 hard-core underground members. Since then, they have spread into 22 of India's 35 states and territories, and their numbers have increased by several thousand, prompting the Indian government to declare them the country's biggest internal enemy. Currently, some estimate that the movement is made up of 40,000 permanent members and 100,000 additional militia members.

Over the years, Naxalites have developed a symbiotic relationship with the indigenous tribal people, adivasis, or "tribals," living in remote parts of India, who find common cause with the Maoists in accusing multinational companies and the Indian government of trying to usurp their mineral-rich lands. To date, more than 40 million tribals have been displaced by dams, industries, and power projects since independence in 1947. As I saw myself, the tribals are used as human couriers, serving as a rudimentary intelligence and communications network in areas of the jungle where cell phones don't work. Comrade Vijay was wrong: It's not IEDs that are the rebels' greatest strength -- it's their relationship with the tribals.

For the tribals, Naxalism, with its emphasis on Mao Zedong's doctrine of armed peasant revolution, doesn't seem out of date. Naxalism has taken root in villages that have been completely ignored by the government. In the rebel-controlled villages, as in most tribal Indian villages, life hasn't changed for decades. There is no electricity, schools, or hospitals. People die of snake bites and treatable diseases like malaria and tetanus. Villages are full of naked, chronically malnourished children with distended bellies. Gaunt men clad in dirty loincloths toil in scorched farms, while women in frayed saris look after the goat and cow barns outside mud-and-clay huts, worried about the next meal. Many tribals survive on leaves and berries.

DESHAKALYAN CHOWDHURY/AFP/Getty Images

 SUBJECTS: INDIA, SOUTH ASIA
 

Anuj Chopra is a foreign correspondent for the National.

NORBOOSE

9:40 AM ET

May 15, 2010

The fundamental problem...

...is that when you have a a bunch of desperately poor people, and someone says "Its not your fault its THEIR Fault!" (The Bourgeoisie, the Jews, the liberals, the capitalists, big government, big business, the Church, the foreigners, and so on) And then they say, "You deserve more, THEY have more! Lets take their stuff! Then it will be our stuff! All you need to do is support me!" This appeal is nearly impossible to dissuade. You might be able to appeal to the local leaders and thinkers by showing how the Marxist economic system is inherently prone to oppression. (If anyone wishes to argue this point, I will, but I dont want to write that much if I dont have to.) The only acceptable solution, especially when youre dealing within your own borders, is to remove that desperate poverty. That obviously must be combined with a miliatary effort against the insurgent groups.

A strong, potentially superpower, India would be immeasurably beneficial to America, and probably the world in general. (Once again, I will happily debate this point with anyone who raises reasonable objections) As long as India is only modernized in a few select areas, and has domestic insurgent groups powerful enough to hold on to territory, this will not happen. I would say that since a second democratic superpower would be so invaluble to us, the US should provide any assistance that India needs,(Other than ones that would get us directly involved in violent internal conflicts) in an amount at least equal to all our other foreign aid put together. I believe we could neutralize anti-foreign sentiment by clearly demonstrating that we want a powerful India, not a dependent one, both by publically stating so, and directing aid specifically towards things that would be universally popular in India ( Building infrastructure, modernizing certain industries, assistance in producing skilled workers), not by signing big checks to whatever party has the majority.

 

NORBOOSE

6:36 PM ET

May 17, 2010

You Oversimplify What I said

Do you think I would defend the British? If the Euros hadnt had their stupid, little short-lived empires, the world would be much better. But, the past is the past, and it seems to me that for at least the last two decades, the problem of blaming the old colonial empires for every last problem has become a bigger problem than the ones actually caused by the old colonial empires.

I dont support unrestrained capitalism, I support strong regulation. I wish the US would move towards a more regulated system. However, when we juxtapose the excesses of capitalism with the atrocities of hard-socialism and communism, there is no comparison. In "The Grapes of Wrath," corrupt local sheriffs beat up some farm workers, and accidently clubbed one to death. And that was in a book written to portray our system as harshly as possible. In the Soviet Union, Nazy Germany, Mao's China, Imperial Japan, or any other hard-socialist or communist country, the miliatary just shows up and machine-guns everyone. You cant pretend that capitalism is even close to the inherent flaws of marxism.

The tribals have been ignored by the system, not really exploited by it. As always, large organizations are evil by the moral standards of individuals. India has largely ignored the tribals, because the tribals' development offers no concrete benefit to India in the near future. Can you imagine the political suicide of an Indian legislator trying to pass a bill that essentially gives a bunch of his constituients' money to a group of angry backwards people? The US government would probably do no better in a similar situation, nor would any government ever. The tribals plight is painful, but that doesnt change the fact that the cruelties of the Indian government are far more restrained than those of the Naxalites. As always, it is a comparison of alternatives. And Ill pick the flawed Indian government any day.

 

JNALLEN

3:01 PM ET

May 15, 2010

Fair and Unbalanced

I love how you assert that "It should be possible to separate the tribals from the Naxalites because the Naxalites don't actually care about protecting the tribals -- they just care about capturing power."

And your source is a single series of interview questions. It seems that the populations of the "liberated villages" disagree. It is impossible for a rebel movement to exist effectively without support from the locals, and they are clearly thriving.

Furthermore, you assert that the rebels "extort" taxes, yet you also admit that they provide stability at least (even though you call them "kangaroo courts" with little evidence). What other services do they provide? What about the Indian government? They must have "extorted" taxes before hand but the locals clearly think they are getting the better deal if they actively support the rebels continued presence. I applaud you taking to task your own government, but might I remind you that the plight of these people is far from the comfortable, middle class existence that your education and current social standing suggests you were privy to growing up. They are sympathetic to the rebels because they appear to care more than the Indian government. Maybe a little more relative understanding will help you maintain your journalistic integrity and prevent you from making such broad assertions from your relatively limited experience. Remember, the most damning piece of evidence is that these people have put up with and supported the rebels while at the same time shunning the government, a brave decision not made easily!

 

ASHOK2718

6:34 PM ET

May 17, 2010

Dont speak if you dont know

There is no tax in India on agricultural income or income below Rs 160,000 which I don't think these tribals will ever have, not certainly the way they are behaving now. So there is no question of govt. "imposing" or "extorting" taxes. Anyone can take up arms and become a terrorist or bandit, the other way that is earning your living is obviously hard and cumbersome. These comrades are nothing but power hungry people who would never have gotten elected democratically. Liberals like you say without knowing that obviously there must be oppression if they are "rebelling". So I ask you people when terrorists come to blow up your place were their genuine grievances or were they plain old locos ? Please spare us your double standards.

 

AVOCADO

1:51 PM ET

May 17, 2010

Truth matters

Why is it so difficult for people to understand that any time and anywhere there is a rebel uprising, it is always against great injustice against them. That doesn't come across clearly in this article. And why is it that people always distort the facts by saying extortion, when often it's the people who support and sustain groups like these because they care more about them than the governments who fight to eliminate them? Restore their rights and dignity, there wouldn't be any problem.

 

SUNWUKONG8

2:24 PM ET

May 18, 2010

That's not true at all

Case and point, Lord's Resistance Army. It's just some nut that built a cult of personality that armed themselves. The Mexican drug cartels can be viewed as a rebellion, they are just out for greed. The Colombian cartels enjoyed wide popular support because they glamorized drug trafficking and provided social services (e.g. a zoo), not because they were some how justified. Rebellions can happen for many reasons, most of them indeed are a response to oppression, but definitely not all.

 

IAN

3:01 PM ET

May 17, 2010

Why shouldn't India try this new Op

It worked in Sri lanka recently. No matter that the aftermath is rather horrid, at least to the outside world. To southern Sri Lanka, under terrorist attack for 40 years, who cares what happened in the final fight. India is thinking exactly the same way. However, the sheer size of both the land and its peoples make this infinitely harder to accomplish under the same ideas, leading to the drawn out, bloody insurgency you predict.

Until the Indian government can show that it actually wants to help the "tribals", like you said, the Maoist rebellion will continue no matter how many troops are thrown at it. unless they go ethnic cleansing on the rebellion, in which case, all bets are off.

 

SANDY EUBANKS

1:47 AM ET

June 13, 2010

Operation Green Hunt

The most common claim is that India is “the world’s largest democracy.” However, it is a reality that the vast majority of the 1.2 billion people who live in India have no control over their lives. Living and working conditions have not changed for the better from colonial times to the present. According to a 2008 study by the US Agency for International Development, three-quarters of the people live on less than $2 per day. India is a vast, diverse, and extremely oppressive society. dental insurance plans It is often said that India’s elected government has ended the oppressive caste system, which assigned everyone to a specific caste and types of work for life. While the government says it is solving the problem by reserving a certain percentage of jobs and places in schools for dalits (untouchables) and other lower castes, today caste oppression continues to define social reality for Indians, especially in the rural areas. Complementing the military suppression in the Lalgarh region and other states through OGH, the Centre, West Bengal’s “communist” government, and other states have made it a crime (a political crime, that is) punishable by long prison sentences to be a member of the Communist Party of India (Maoist). compare dental plans The Centre and many states have also passed laws such as the draconian Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act of 2008, which anyone accused of contact with the Maoists can be kept in jail for 180 days without trial and without bail. When held, trials are held before a secret court with the identities of witnesses also kept secret. Such fascist laws have been a common feature of “Indian democracy” throughout the post-independence period.

 

SHADES OF GREY

7:16 PM ET

May 17, 2010

The article is outdated already

As it stands today, the Indian government has allocated 935 million (Rs.) towards development in areas plagued by the Naxals. This is over and above the usual amount alloted to those areas for development.

Operation Green hunt is supposed to commence in parallel with the developmental activities (not after the military "solution" is applied).
Also, India is not deploying the army or paramilitary forces. The policing side of the operation will still be carried out mostly by State police. This also includes "militia" recruited from the tribal population itself.

 

NASH77

8:26 PM ET

May 17, 2010

It only worked in SL thanks

It only worked in SL thanks to the tacit support of the Indian government. If anything another insurgency will in all likelihood rear its head again in Sri Lanka.

The Indian state, like Pakistan, is facing serious pressure, in the NE from multiple groups, the Western front with Kashmir. Looks like India is being stretched from all sides... balkanization might occur.

 

SHADES OF GREY

3:48 PM ET

May 18, 2010

Overreaction?

@NASH77

The Naxal movement is hardly the biggest internal threat to India after independence in 1947. There have been far worse (E.g. The Punjab problem and Operation Blue Star). The movements in the NE have been chugging along (in an on and off fashion) for a long time now. Some of the NE movements are in talks, some are in a stalemate situation, some have lost momentum, etc.

Balkanization has not occurred throughout the 30-40 years that such movements have been existing for. That statement is seriously a big stretch.

Pakistan on the other hand is a completely different story.

 

SHADES OF GREY

3:53 PM ET

May 18, 2010

Agreed (@SAM FROM CALIFORNIA)

I harbour no illusions that money from the development projects will not be siphoned off. The thing is, if even 20% of that money reaches the tribals, that will create much more infrastructure than what they have today.

 

LAL QILA

4:47 PM ET

May 18, 2010

India is not a nation, it is an amalgam of brutal occupations

India is not a nation, it is an amalgam of brutal occupations, from Kashmir to Goa, plus the 600 Princely States gobbled up by the Hindoo fundamentalists. Even Sikkim, Nepal, Ceylon, Burma and East Pakistan were butchered by this Hindoo fundamentalist monster.

It's best to chop up the Hindoo monster into manageble states along historical lines.

Any suggestions how the 600 Independent Princely States will be demarcated?

 

NASH77

8:15 PM ET

May 18, 2010

"Balkanization has not

"Balkanization has not occurred throughout the 30-40 years that such movements have been existing for. That statement is seriously a big stretch."

Simply because balkanization hasn't already occurred doesn't mean it won't occur. I suspect once a middle class is sizeable, and literacy rates increase, ethnolinguistic nationalism will rear its head in India and balkanization will ensue. The borders of the resultant nation-states will parallel the current borders of the states of India.

Furthermore I think balkanization is the only way for South Asia to finally clamp down on rampant poverty.

"Pakistan on the other hand is a completely different story"

Nope, I think Pakistan too will be balkanized

 

SHADES OF GREY

11:36 PM ET

May 18, 2010

Balkanization

@NASH
"Simply because balkanization hasn't already occurred doesn't mean it won't occur. I suspect once a middle class is sizeable, and literacy rates increase, ethnolinguistic nationalism will rear its head in India and balkanization will ensue."

My point was that the chances of balkanization were higher say 30-40 years ago than right now. Doesn't mean it cannot occur but the probability right now is remote. India has already faced ethnolinguistic problems (E.g. The Tamil language issue for one). Those have actually died down (within India, not Sri Lanka), well before India's economy started booming.

It might be possible if/when India attains the living standards of US/Europe and ethnolinguistic nationalism rears it head but certainly not right now.

Not sure about the rest of South Asia but the primary issue stopping India from clamping down on poverty right now is corruption, not large administrative areas.

 

NASH77

4:53 PM ET

May 19, 2010

"Those have actually died

"Those have actually died down (within India, not Sri Lanka), well before India's economy started booming."

I would say rather than die down, they have been dormant.

"It might be possible if/when India attains the living standards of US/Europe and ethnolinguistic nationalism rears it head but certainly not right now."

India doesn't need to attain the living standards of US/Europe for ethnonationalism to come to the fore. In Europe modernization/development occurred in synergy along with the carving of Europe along ethnolinguistic lines, albeit not totally in line with the smaller, weaker nations. In fact even today the Flemish, and the Scots have started espousing, however tame, ethnonationalism. Europe is only peaceful today because most of the states satisfy the aspirations of the strong and big nations of the region.

Prior to the British entry onto the affairs of the subcontinent, there was only the flux of empires rising and falling, like much of the world before rise of western Europe. South Asia consists of states that aren't congruent with the nations of the region. Incongruency will only be resolved by the balkanization of India. In fact Sri Lanka faced Tamil nationalism only after the Tamil community had for the most part a high literacy rate, a sizeable middle class, along with the demographic sweetspot for an insurgency. A similar set of attributes can be said of the Punjabi/Sikhs of India.

For more of where I'm coming from check out Jerry Muller's Us and Them at http://www.tfasinternational.org/iipes/academics/mullercm.pdf

"Not sure about the rest of South Asia but the primary issue stopping India from clamping down on poverty right now is corruption, not large administrative areas."

All developing countries have corruption, even the Chinese have corruption. India's problem lies in horrible government policies, that are the systemic symptom of a state that is large and more importantly too heterogeneous to be realistically governed. In fact certain states within India, such as Gujarat, would have better odds of industrializing faster had the state governments total control over all the tax revenues raised from within the state. In a hypothetical balkanized India, the moment one state stumbles upon suitable economic policies the rest of the states will quickly follow through, and the region will prosper. One only need to look to the states of East Asia and the role model the Japanese served to the rest of East and SouthEast Asia.

 

SARK

11:04 PM ET

May 17, 2010

Mark Twain said it best

I like how the greatest of American writers put it:

"I am always on the side of the revolutionists, because there never was a revolution unless there were some oppressive and intolerable conditions against which to revolute."

This is, of course, assuming that it's a true bottom-up revolution (which this has all the appearances of being) and not a 'revolution' in the 1953 Iran sense.

 

TOOLBAG

12:07 PM ET

May 18, 2010

Revolution

Revolutions are not always about oppression. More often than not they are about those who want power and use the plight of the poor and destitute to justify it. More often than not when the revolution is over the leaders of it go right on oppressing those that fought for them. The romanticization of revolution is dangerous and is used to manipulate those who truly need help.

 

SUNWUKONG8

2:35 PM ET

May 18, 2010

Mao's Revolution

Mao himself was a megalomaniac. He didn't care about the plight of the people, the country, or communism, all he cared about was power. In most cases, injustices are used to rationalize and justify revolutions after the fact, not the other way around.

 

LAL QILA

11:52 AM ET

May 18, 2010

Hindooism is fundamentally an unfair and unequal religion

Hindooism is fundamentally an unfair and unequal religion as it keeps 80% of the followers of this pathetic religion completely disenfranchised.

This Hindoo on Hindoo revolt and violence is a natural result of such revulsion.

Hindooism is not going to change; the Hindoos are not going to become Muslims or Christians en masse, so this Hindoo on Hindoo revolt and violence will continue till the bitter end.

Meanwhile American multi-trillion dollar investments in the form of exporting of American jobs to India along with manufacturing plants will be totally exposed to these ravages and are likely to burn up like a Chinese lantern on fire in the goodness of time.

 

SHADES OF GREY

3:35 PM ET

May 18, 2010

Such an unbiased opinion is refreshing

Oh, in case you did not get it, that was heavy sarcasm.

No need to drag religion into it. Go grind your axe somewhere else.

 

LAL QILA

7:31 AM ET

May 19, 2010

Difficulty with realities eh?

Are 80% of Indians not disenfranchised?

Is Hindoo on Hindoo violence not the consequent result?

Aren't trillions of dollars invested by America in this savage country of India not hugely exposed?

Do the American simpletons not know to not put all their eggs in one basket?

 

SHADES OF GREY

2:45 PM ET

May 19, 2010

(@LAL) Nope, I just have problems with trolls

You seem to be having problems with reality. I doubt you even read the article before you started trolling.

P.S. If its relevant, say it. Religion is a red herring as far as the Maoist issue is concerned.

 

LAL QILA

9:14 PM ET

May 19, 2010

This is amazing

Firstly, kindly desist from ad hominem attacks. I don't call you a troll and you don't call me any such names.

Secondly, you can't call Hindoo religion as a red herring and try to get away with it. Every problem in Hindoo India has its roots in Hindooism and its consequent problems.

Why does Hindoo India hate Pakistan, because Pakistan is NOT Hindoo.

Why do the yearly pogroms, lovingly called communal violence by the Indians, against the Muslims take place in Hindoo India; because Muslims are NOT Hindoos.

Why does one find mass graves of Muslims in Kashmir killed by the Hindoo army, because the Kashmiri Muslims are NOT Hindoo.

Why are 80% of the population of Hindoo India kept disenfranchised, in the name of the Hindoo racist caste system, because that is exactly the Hindoo way.

Kindly tell me one major problem of Hindoo India that has nothing to do with Hindooism.

 

SHADES OF GREY

11:53 PM ET

May 19, 2010

You keep proving the point I made about trolling

It would have been ad hominem if it was baseless. None of your comments are relevant to the topic on hand. All it is is an anti-Hindu rant. Hence, the trolling comment.

Read more about the origin of the Naxal movement, and the motivations behind it. This article itself is a good start.

You can now continue with your Anti-Hindu rant. Cheers.

 

LAL QILA

9:45 AM ET

May 21, 2010

DR. KUCHBHI, this is not a religious issue, I agree, however

DR. KUCHBHI, this is not a religious issue, I agree, however every large problem facing Hindoo India is because of Hindooism and its very retrograde and anachronistic ways.

Hindooism is the root cause of all large problems facing Hindoo India since times immemorial till the end of time itself.

Remove Hindooism from India and thus remove all Hindoo problems with it.

 

SHADES OF GREY

1:31 PM ET

May 21, 2010

@Red Fort

That view is about as pedestrian as saying remove Islam from the world and terrorism will be over. Or saying remove religion from the world and half of our problems will be solved. Never mind that some of the notable mass-murderers of this century have been atheists.

If you ever bother to read the Bible/Vedas/Quran you will find retrogade and indeed sometimes ridiculuos practices in all of them. I can bet that half of what you attribute to religion has nothing to do with religion and more to do with society.