India, the cradle of four major religions — Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism — has long stood for peace and compassion. From the teachings of non-violence to the moral triumph of Mahatma Gandhi’s freedom movement, India’s identity has been shaped by restraint, tolerance, and dialogue over bloodshed. Yet, within this same land, the Naxalite movement continues to pursue its goals through the barrel of a gun.
This contradiction should give us pause. In a world already riven by global conflicts, cyber warfare, and growing geopolitical tension, India cannot afford an internal insurgency that drains its moral and material strength. When internal violence festers, the costs of maintaining peace multiply — not just in financial terms, but in human confidence and national cohesion.
Naxalism, often wrapped in the rhetoric of justice for the marginalised, has been parasitic at its core, feeding off democratic freedoms while undermining them. The government bears the responsibility to provide a secure environment in which citizens can enjoy liberty, but this is continually tested by those who reject dialogue and embrace violence. Every ambush, every attack on a village or railway track, chips away at public trust and pushes communities back into fear and suspicion.
To confront this challenge effectively, India must first be clear about what sustains it. For too long, the dominant narrative has been that Naxalism is a byproduct of poverty and underdevelopment. But this explanation, while convenient, doesn’t withstand scrutiny.
If deprivation alone were the cause, why would Naxalites routinely destroy schools, railway tracks, and telecom towers — the very infrastructure meant to lift people out of poverty? Between 2010 and 2024, incidents targeting economic infrastructure fell dramatically from 365 to just 25, reflecting both the effectiveness of state operations and the growing realisation among locals that violence sabotages their own progress. Each act of destruction resets development, worsens unemployment, and locks regions into cycles of stagnation.
Empirical evidence also contradicts the poverty narrative. Studies by the National Bureau of Economic Research and the University of North Carolina reveal that economic indicators like poverty or unemployment are weak predictors of terrorism or political violence. Instead, ideology, state capacity, and identity-based grievances are far more influential. In the Indian context, research published in the Economic and Political Weekly finds that even forest cover, a proxy for state inaccessibility, correlates more strongly with Maoist activity than economic backwardness.
The geographic pattern of Naxalism further exposes the poverty myth. The insurgency had primarily taken root in the so-called “Red Corridor” across central and eastern India — Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, parts of Odisha, and Bihar — while other states with comparable or even worse poverty levels have remained largely immune. The Multidimensional Poverty Index shows that districts with similar deprivation levels in other states have not succumbed to extremist influence. This suggests that something deeper is at work, including local governance deficits, historical neglect, poor law enforcement, and political manipulation. Where the state is visible, accountable, and responsive, extremism finds no audience.
Recognising this reality, the Indian government has in recent years recalibrated its strategy to create a Naxal-Mukt Bharat — a Naxal-free India. Although law and order are state subjects, the Centre has adopted a collaborative approach, recognising that insurgency does not respect administrative boundaries. It has acted as a facilitator — coordinating intelligence, providing logistical and financial assistance, and deploying Central Armed Police Forces and the India Reserve Battalions in affected areas.
Beyond security operations, the government’s focus has shifted to undermining the ideological and social roots of Naxalism. Initiatives like Skill Development Centres, Industrial Training Institutes (ITIs), and Eklavya Model Residential Schools are equipping local youth with employable skills and quality education. These measures not only create alternatives to militancy, but also restore faith in the state’s capacity to deliver tangible benefits. Infrastructure development has also become a cornerstone of counterinsurgency. Expanding road networks, strengthening telecommunication infrastructure, and ensuring last-mile connectivity through new towers have extended the reach of governance into previously isolated regions. These inroads have done more than connect villages, they have symbolised the return of the state’s presence and legitimacy.
The outcomes of this multi-pronged approach have been encouraging. The number of civilians killed by Left Wing Extremists has dropped from an annual average of 480 during 2004–2013 to just 152 between 2014 and 2024. The footprint of Naxalism has also contracted dramatically: From 126 affected districts in 2014 to just 18 in 2024, with only six now categorised as “severely affected”.
These statistics, while heartening, should not lull us into complacency. Naxalism may be weakening militarily, but the conditions that once allowed it to thrive — poor governance, local grievances, and administrative apathy — require continued vigilance. To permanently eradicate Left Wing Extremism, one must move beyond the comfortable rhetoric of poverty and underdevelopment. At its core, this is a governance challenge. Where people trust the state to deliver justice, extremists lose relevance. Where institutions are fair, transparent, and accountable, ideology loses its grip. The battle against Naxalism, therefore, is not only about reclaiming land but also about reclaiming faith in the rule of law.
India’s civilisational strength lies in its moral resilience. The decline of Naxalism demonstrates that progress anchored in justice and inclusion is the most potent antidote to extremism. But peace cannot be imposed; it must be built through trust, good governance, and opportunity. As India marches toward becoming a $5 trillion economy, ensuring internal harmony is as vital as external security. The promise of a Naxal-Mukt Bharat is not just a security goal, it is a moral one. It reaffirms the idea that in India, transformation comes not through terror, but through trust.
Ravi is member, EAC-PM and Joshi is consultant, EAC-PM
