Former
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh described Naxalism as the most significant threat
to internal security being faced by the country. This proposition is true as it
highlights India’s interior weaknesses, which make India vulnerable to external
threats. It affects several areas including the economy, security and
foreign affairs, its citizens and the rule of law:
Charu Majumdar, the pioneer of the Naxalite movement had said:
“China’s Chairman is our Chairman and China’s path is our path”. While India is
sensitized about the ongoing proxy war by Pakistan, there is very little or no
consciousness that Maoism or Naxalism is actually a proxy war by China being
waged against India for last five decades.
Security
dangers are aptly described by a former Pakistani Director General of the
Inter-Services Intelligence and his description of India’s foreign affairs. He
equated India being busy with internal security problems to having two extra
divisions in the Pakistani army for free.
1. Impact on security and foreign affairs: Links
with other terrorist organisations and foreign countries:
The CPI (Maoist) has frequently
expressed solidarity with the Jammu and Kashmir terrorist groups and North-East
insurgent groups. The CPI(Maoist) has also had close links with foreign
Maoist organisations like Turkey, Philippines, South Asian countries etc.
2. Impact on economy: More the Maoists concentrate in the poor and
marginalised regions of India, the more the economic development (which is
imperative to improving these regions) will be hampered. The Naxalite
activities are using up scarce resources on defence and internal security when
it should be spent on areas such as social development.
3. Impact on citizens and the rule of law: Not only has there been a great
loss of life since the conflict between the guerrillas and the military, but
addressing the problem through violence risks polarizing people further and
driving them to subservience.
Guerrilla
warfare is a threat not only to citizens’ lives but also to their property. Too
impatient and desperate to wait for government intervention, civilians such as
landlords are taking matters into their own hands.
As writer Navlakha noted , by
portraying the Maoists as a ‘menace’ and separating the movement from
socio-economic causes, it “allows the rich and poor divide to impose itself on
a formal democratic structure”. Navlakha gives the example of Bihar where Naxalite
groups are banned under the Prevention of Terrorist Activities Act, yet a
majority of the massacre were committed by landlord armies which were not
considered an act of terror under the law. Such treatment for the upper class
only serves to threaten the rule of law, state legitimacy and democracy as the
political norm.
Comments
Post a Comment