Home arrow Archives arrow Events and Issues arrow Events & Issues 2010 arrow Countering Maoism:FACE HARSH REALITY, by Ashok Kapur IAS (Retd),23 August 2010
 
Home
News and Features
INFA Digest
Parliament Spotlight
Dossiers
Publications
Journalism Awards
Archives
RSS
 
 
 
 
 
 
Countering Maoism:FACE HARSH REALITY, by Ashok Kapur IAS (Retd),23 August 2010 Print E-mail

Events & Issues

New Delhi, 23 August 2010

Countering Maoism


FACE HARSH REALITY

 

By Ashok Kapur IAS (Retd)

 

Reality must be faced, howsoever harsh. Large swathes of the countryside, especially in the less developed States have slipped away from the control of the Government. These are now in the iron grip of extremists aka Naxalites, Maoists or terrorists. That it has happened right under the nose of the State highlights the serious nature of the challenge, not only before the Government but before civil society itself.

Undeniably, these elements are merciless in their methods of bringing about a “revolution” by attempting to “overthrow” a democratic Government. But the fact must be conceded that, looking to the scale and the spread of the insurgency, the leaders of these extremist groups have somehow managed to band together sections of the local populace. Media reports indicate that a majority of these extremists are tribals, arguably the most marginalized group in the country.

The experience of Governments worldwide shows that such groups are generally led by a few hard-core leaders who then band together sections of the disaffected populace. The majority are those who feel they are somehow exploited first by the civil society and then by their gang leaders. The ideological motivation of band leaders may be strong and unshakeable but the same may or may not hold true for a majority. It may have been strong for the majority in those insurgencies where the State was patently exploitative and repressive, like the Latin American dictatorships of the last century.

In a democratic State like ours, the leaders of the extremists may be hardened ideologues but the same may not hold true for the majority of the followers. They are often sucked into the bands either out of coercion or for the lure of easy money. To paint all of them with the same ideological brush may be a simplistic explanation which will hinder an effective solution to the admittedly difficult problem. A strategy has to be worked out that will wean away the majority from the insurgent group and bring it back into the mainstream, simultaneously isolating the hardcore leadership.

It would be relevant to note that a similar situation arose in the North-east during the seventies. Sections of the populace rose in virtual revolt against the established authority, demanding “independence” from the Indian Union. The Government’s initial response was the usual stereotype, treat it as a law and order problem, rush paramilitary forces to the troubled region to stamp out the “insurgency”. Several hundred people on both sides were killed. But there was no let-up in violence.

A policy of “bullet for bullet” simply did not work. It never does. Eventually, better sense prevailed and the Government changed the strategy and adopted a carrot and stick approach. The Union Government opened a dialogue with the various insurgent groups and they were eventually brought back into the political mainstream. Many of the former rebels contested elections and won. They became ministers and other Constitutional functionaries. It was a majestic triumph of the democratic process, yesterday’s rebel as today’s elected leader.

India’s experience with largely homegrown insurgency is no different from such movements in Latin America, Asia and Africa in the last century. There is no example in the world where an internal rebellion has either been ‘crushed’ or contained by the armed might of the omnipotent modern State, save the example of Sri Lanka at a shocking human cost that savaged thousands of its own populace.

In this context, the recent statement of Union Home Minister Chidambaram to go for massive recruitment of police personnel, both IPS and State police is significant. It needs to be borne in mind that the IPS is an all-India service recruited and trained by the Government of India. It will have to work within the overall framework of the Criminal Code of the nation. Under law, the police are required to function under the overall supervision of the civilian magistracy even after the separation of the executive from the judiciary. But the Home Minister’s announcement is silent on this critical aspect.

The second part of the reported statement similarly envisages a substantial augmentation of police forces of the affected States. It is similarly not known if the States have been advised to augment their ranks of civilian magistrates correspondingly. This needs to be done alongside. The projected increase in the overall police strength is enormous. The police force must be made accountable to the supervisory magistracy, even though it may be fighting an insurgency.

The police force out of necessity will have to be heavily-armed, to fight well-armed Maoist cadres. The enemy is faceless and invisible, relying on classical guerrilla tactics. Universal experience suggests that such campaigns are long-drawn and painstaking. These can render wearisome the best armed forces in the world, let alone an often poorly-led and insufficiently-trained police force. Prolonged exposure to tough working environment away from home and family tends to make a force trigger-happy. The civilian populace often gets trapped in the cross-fire.

An unaccountable force, without any check tends to become a monster that may defy control. It is a creeping malady that is already gnawing at the vitals of the body politic and leading the nation into a brutal police state. Recent events involving police officers at the highest level-IPS officers in Gujarat and Haryana would shame even a banana republic. It cannot be said that the two States are even remotely affected by any extremist activity. The police state is truly taking shape. Its stark contours are all too visible. After all, there are none so blind as those who would not see.

The corresponding augmentation of the civilian magistracy will serve a twin purpose. It will strengthen the Administration at the cutting edge level, particularly in the States affected by extremism. There is no example in the world where insurgency has been contained by the armed might of the modern State, howsoever formidable. It has invariably been a mix of carrot and stick policy. Our own experience has been similar, whether in the North-east or the continuing turmoil in J&K.

Votaries of the iron fist approach have only to refer to the First Police Commission report written largely by the police and for the police. It has come out with a shocking revelation that an inexperienced Chief Minister of a Northern State issued a carte blanche to the State police to “eliminate dacoity”, no questions asked. It was to prove lethal. Admittedly, thousands were eliminated by an “obedient” police force.  Admittedly again, it only aggravated the problem. The kith and kin of the hundreds of innocents eliminated took up arms against the Government of the day.

In sum, it has been rightly said that a police force may be able to eliminate Maoists, but it can never eliminate Maoism.---INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)

 

< Previous   Next >
 
   
     
 
 
  Mambo powered by Best-IT