Q1. India’s recent counter-Naxal strategy reflects a move from a security-centric approach to a governance-led model. Evaluate the effectiveness and limitations of this multi-pronged strategy in addressing internal insurgency.
Analytical Focus for Answer (AFfA):
- Coordination between Centre and States despite federal constraints.
- Complementarity of security operations and development interventions.
- Role of infrastructure and institutional presence in restoring legitimacy.
- Risks of over-militarisation and uneven governance delivery.
Model Answer
Introduction
India’s experience with Left Wing Extremism demonstrates a gradual but decisive shift from a predominantly coercive security response towards a governance-led counterinsurgency framework. This recalibration recognises that while force is necessary to restore order, sustainable peace depends on the State’s capacity to deliver development, justice, and institutional credibility in conflict-affected regions.
Body
- Centre–State coordination: Intelligence-sharing, CAPF deployment, and financial assistance by the Centre have mitigated federal constraints despite law and order being a State subject.
- Targeted security operations: Improved terrain dominance and focused operations have reduced civilian casualties and contracted the geographical spread of Naxalism.
- Infrastructure-led legitimacy: Expansion of roads, telecom connectivity, and residential schools has translated physical access into sustained administrative presence.
- Human capital interventions: Skill centres, ITIs, and education initiatives have weakened recruitment by creating lawful livelihood opportunities.
- Governance gaps: Uneven service delivery and weak local institutions risk reversing gains if administrative reforms stagnate.
- Militarised development risk: Infrastructure expansion without community participation may revive grievances related to displacement and forest rights.
Conclusion
The governance-led counter-Naxal strategy has significantly weakened insurgency by combining security operations with legitimacy-building measures. However, its durability depends on deepening local accountability, rights-based governance, and administrative responsiveness. Without institutional consolidation, tactical successes may fail to translate into lasting peace.
Q2. “Extremism recedes where the State is perceived as just, visible, and accountable.” In the context of India’s experience with Naxalism, analyse how trust in institutions and rule of law shape the success of internal security outcomes.
Analytical Focus for Answer (AFfA):
- Relationship between institutional legitimacy and extremist appeal.
- Governance failures as enablers of violent ideologies.
- Moral versus coercive foundations of internal security.
- Long-term sustainability of peace through rule-based governance.
Model Answer
Introduction
India’s struggle with Naxalism underscores that internal security challenges are ultimately contests over legitimacy rather than territorial control alone. The erosion or restoration of public trust in State institutions decisively shapes whether extremist ideologies gain acceptance or lose relevance among affected populations.
Body
- Institutional legitimacy as a security variable: Predictable, fair, and accessible administration weakens extremist narratives portraying the State as exploitative or absent.
- Governance failures as enablers: Historical neglect, weak local institutions, and delayed justice allowed Maoist groups to establish coercive parallel authority structures.
- Visibility of the State: Roads, telecom connectivity, schools, and health services have converted remote regions from zones of absence into spaces of civic engagement.
- Rule of law and procedural justice: Improved policing standards, reduction in excesses, and legal safeguards have reversed fear-driven alienation.
- Democratic inclusion: Education and livelihood programmes reinforce citizenship by linking rights with responsibilities rather than patronage or force.
- Moral foundations of security: Constitutional principles of equality and dignity under Articles 14 and 21 promote compliance through consent rather than coercion.
- Sustainability challenge: Trust remains fragile where grievance redressal is slow or extractive development continues without community participation.
Conclusion
India’s experience demonstrates that durable internal security flows from institutional trust rather than permanent militarisation. When the State is perceived as lawful, responsive, and just, extremism loses its political appeal. The decline of Naxalism thus affirms that governance legitimacy is not merely a developmental objective but a core strategic pillar of internal security.