India has achieved independence from foreign rule, but it is yet to achieve independence from internal problems. India’s diversity (geographic, ethnic, religious, linguistic, caste based, cultural) has brought uniqueness to both its character and its problems. India is facing problems of insurgency and separatism in North-east, Jammu & Kashmir and in the naxalite affected areas spread almost over one fourth of geographic area of the country. The country has poor record in fighting these challenges. Also, growing disparity amongst people and the widening Digital Divide in the age of information and technological revolution may open new arenas of discontent, dissent and protest. However, not all these problems arise from historical events or practices. In fact some of the problems have been aggravated due to neglect, delay, misunderstanding, underestimation and lack of sensitivity.
Insurgency movements are violent protests which involve proxy war (mostly) against the establishment in order to overthrow the authority or meet a political demand or seek an overhaul of the present system. Lack of socio-economic development, discrimination amongst regions in development, misuse of government machinery, failure to meet the aspirations of the people, denial of rights, coercion and use of force are some of the reasons cited for starting an insurgency. However, one important aspect is the army and police excesses against innocent civilians caused during military action against these insurgencies. These excesses further alienate the people from the ruling establishment and give rise to trust deficit which hampers even sincere efforts for reconciliation. Secondly, the politicisation of sensitive issues and their use by political parties to serve electoral motives results in further confusion, misinformation and unnecessary delay. Telangana protest (not an insurgency so far) is seeking political attention since long time. Several people have died while demanding a separate Telangana. Though it is not right to agree to any demand just because there are some people supporting it, the issue can be handled more sensitively and within a set timeframe so that people’s trust does not wither away. Democracy supports discussions, debates, deliberations, but democracy does not mean indecision or unnecessary delays. We need not wait for the disease to become life-threatening before going for a cure/diagnosis. Sensitive handling of one issue will help send positive signals to other insurgents too that they need not adopt violent methods to make themselves heard.
The impacts of insurgency in any area are devastating. The normal processes are disrupted. People feel terrorized and there is halt in progress. Economic activity, investment and trade decline. The region affected by insurgency also lags behind in human resource development. Unemployment, under-employment and poverty join in to form a vicious circle of problems-one reinforcing the other. Resources are diverted for destructive and wasteful purposes and life becomes unpredictable. However, violent movements have failed to attain sustainable progress for the people. Nowhere in the present world have we found example of an insurgent movement ultimately resulting in such a shift of political authority or statehood that the region starts marching on path of progress. Violent movements by their very nature are not sustainable. They do start with a sense of goal emanating out of certain grievances but they lack a vision of how to achieve the larger goals of prosperity and happiness of the people concerned. Documents from Maoists have revealed that Maoist movement in India seeks to overthrow Indian state by 2050. But the same document does not discuss or elaborate on what would be the future form of governance structure. It does not speak about the institutions that they wish to set up to promote what they perceive as public welfare. It also does not speak about national security and how will the Indian state secure itself once it falls in the hands of Maoist cadres. Merely by redistributing land Maoist cannot solve the problems of 120 crore people. And what about the information revolution that is changing the world every moment. The Maoists seem to be living in a static world where similar events will produce similar outcomes without fail. In most violent movements, gaining political power becomes more important rather than fighting the original causes of discontent. The struggle for leadership results in in-fighting amongst the insurgent cadres on how to keep the pitch of the movement high and also how to keep the people of the region under their influence and control. Hence, at times these insurgent cadres kill torture and trouble the very people for whom they are fighting. This is the stage when any insurgent movement loses its spirit. Its cadres indulging in power struggle, its masses alienated both from government and their leaders and its future more uncertain than ever – the insurgent movements over long periods of time create turbulence. Short sighted goals are preached as panacea to all the problems of people and since conventionally, it is difficult to overthrow state authority, they indulge in long term proxy wars, trying to debilitate the state and terrorize the public in anticipation that such actions will compel the state to come for a negotiation or a solution. This is what being witnessed in Maoist movement in India and even in the separatist movement in J & K and North-east. There have emerged several leaders, each of them seeking support of the people and suggesting his own version of possible goal and solution.
The other side of the coin is definitely the state apparatus, how it perceives the insurgency problem and wishes to tackle it. Any insurgent movement does not originate all of a sudden. There is some sense of logic and grievance attached to it otherwise no one will be willing to give up his/her life or take away innocent lives. There are protests at the initial stage and it’s only when the people find all doors closed that they feel tempted to raise a violent movement. To make the deaf hear, a bomb has to be blown. India’s revolutionary movement also had similar connotations. We must remember that Bhagat Singh etc were also indulged in planning, damaging or even overthrowing the British state. If we can see their side of the logic, if we can appreciate the sense of sacrifice that these great revolutionaries had in launching violent attacks, then why can’t we try to see the logic of all such movements taking place in our country. Of course there are also certain insurgent movements which are crafted with ulterior motives and just to destabilise and destroy the Indian state – like the Bhindrawale violent movement in Punjab, or the Pakistan supported terrorism in J & K. Such movements have to be dealt with strongly. However, no one stops us from adopting a more sensitive and vigilante approach at the very beginning of any organised violence. ‘Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty’ – it has to be realised and our own capabilities of intelligence have to be firmed up so that the slightest hint of emergence of any such movement can be traced and dealt with at the very initial stage.
But there may also be some genuine grievances of the people or region and this fact cannot be overlooked or understated. The resource constraints have resulted in somewhat asymmetric development of our country. Coastal areas are much more prosperous than landlocked ones. The far off places have received less attention of the government. Hence, the government cannot shirk away from the responsibility of ensuring balanced and equitable distribution of financial resources of the country. It cannot wait for some parts of the country to get developed and then move on to other parts. The basic necessities have to reach even the farthest corners of the country. There should be an enabling environment for all the people anywhere in India so that each one of them can realize their potential. Here, we are talking about the misgovernance that has plagued Indian administrative scene. Corruption does not allow the benefits of government schemes to percolate to the poor. 2G, CWG, etc may not directly affect a poor person but the non-payment or inadequate payment of MGNREGA wages does affect a person’s daily life directly. Then, there are people who have been denied adequate compensation after being displaced to give way for large greenfield projects. There are sections of people who have not been rehabilitated well and promises of pucca houses, sanitation and water supply have been broken. There are people who have been thrown away from their traditional lands so that mines can be developed but given no benefits out of the sale of mined resources. There are people who suffer caste based discrimination not just from the higher castes but also in government offices including police stations. These are the frustrated and depressed people which are being targeted to form the Maoist cadres. Now these are the grievances which are purely resolvable and genuine. The government can help bring stability in the country merely by ensuring that the governance systems work efficiently and effectively. Our health care and education systems are in bad condition. Given a chance, no one would want to send his children to a government school and no one would wish to get treated at a government hospital. These are stark realities which the present administration cannot ignore while trying to handle insurgency movements. It has to ask how much it has delivered after more than sixty years of independence. There are countries with lesser resources than India but which have done reasonably well due to good governance and transparency.
Hence, it will be counterproductive and destructive to look towards insurgency movements as merely law and order problems. Advocating military solutions to such problems will only make them worse. There are political, historical, cultural and socio-economic causes associated with insurgencies. A military solution will be like a pain killer which reduces the symptom temporarily but does not do anything to cure the disease. Similar approach has backfired in Afghanistan, Iraq and also in other Arab countries which are seeing voices of dissent against the dictatorial misgovernance. There are examples to prove that giving stakeholdership in development process, giving genuine political and socio-economic rights, and adopting a community led approach had helped in reducing discontent and regaining public support. Another rectification needed in handling violent movements is to avoid delays from the government side. It shows disinterest and leads to trust deficit. The problem of Manipur economic blockade has been going on for a long time now but little efforts are made to solve it once and for all.
A sensitive government will look at the protests seriously. It will try to find out the reasons of such protests and will take immediate action to resolve them. Showing respect and sensitivity itself smoothens many rough patches and prevents misconceptions to develop. Transparency is the tool to simplify many complexities. Doubts in the government circles regarding issues need not be kept hidden. They have to be made public to initiate public debate and also generate a democratic environment for solution of problems. In the recent Anna Hazare movement the government remained secretive about its plans and views which further angered the public. Sometimes, not expressing the right view also results in public loss. Hence, government should be expressive about its viewpoints and should consider people and media as its friends. Then there is also the need for people’s participation in governance and reducing the dependence on government for every small thing. At times, there are local solutions available with the community which are both economical and less time taking than the government proposed solutions. But it is found that the community is not enough educated to take up such problems and resolve them for themselves.
Lastly, military dimension of controlling insurgencies cannot be ignored. Military, police action cannot solve the problem but they are definitely required to prevent and minimise the spread of casualties and destruction. Military help will have to be taken to bring the violent protesters on the negotiation table. The government can negotiate only when violence is stopped. Though Armed forces need not be involved in internal conflicts, their capabilities can be utilized in tracing, tracking and neutralizing the threats posed. To that extent, use of police and military cannot be under-estimated. However, solution will come only when it is acceptable to both sides and results in meeting aspirations of the people within the framework of Indian constitution.
Conclusively, India is a highly diverse country with various people having varied interests. It is passing through a transitory stage of development. Hence, conflicts of interests will always be there. However, streamlining governance issues, ending parallel agencies and overlapping schemes, giving what people need and not what government has to offer, fighting corruption and being sensitive and transparent can help reduce some conflicts. Having far-sighted view of problems and using force to only facilitate dialogue can go a long way in finding solution to India’s numerous problems. The external dimension of some of our problems can be looked into only when the internal dimension is in our control/reach. Being a democracy and being what India is ‘unique’, there are no easy solutions, but there are always ‘better ways’ to move forward. In Gandhiji’s words - ‘Ends cannot justify the means’ – right and just means will invariably lead to right ends. This is what India should try to aim at – following right and just means.
