INTERVIEW | ‘Basavaraju killing a success, but gun can’t kill ideology’

The killing of a top Maoist should not be seen as a death blow to the outfit, which has an extensive structure, says Ashok Prasad, former Special Secretary of Internal Security.
INTERVIEW | ‘Basavaraju killing a success, but gun can’t kill ideology’
Updated on
3 min read

The recent successes of security forces in their anti-LWE (Left-Wing Extremism) operations endorse the integrated policy of the government of the day, says Ashok Prasad, former Special Secretary of Internal Security and ex-Special Director of Intelligence Bureau. He tells Mukesh Ranjan that he exuded confidence that the state apparatus has now started dominating the military formations of the Maoists. Excerpts:

How do you see one of the biggest anti-Naxal operations in recent times, in Chhattisgarh, where nearly 70 Maoists have been killed?

It is a major achievement of the security forces. It is also a significant endorsement of the governments’ policy and integrated strategy. The multi-pronged strategy of successive Union governments has gained momentum and is beginning to dominate the military formations of the LWEs. The success is also due to the ‘All-India Response System’ in place.

INTERVIEW | ‘Basavaraju killing a success, but gun can’t kill ideology’
27 Naxalites killed in encounter with security forces in Chhattisgarh; top leader Basavaraju among them

How significant an impact will the killing of Maoist leader Basavaraju have on the left-wing movement?

The elimination of Basavaraju is a massive setback to Maoists and a devastating blow to the morale of the outfit’s ground-level cadre. His death will boost the morale of the security forces and inspire them to pursue the extremists more vigorously. This operation proves that nothing succeeds like success. However, the killing of a top Maoist should not be seen as a death blow to the outfit, which has an extensive structure.

Do you agree that recent successes of the security forces signal the beginning of the end for Maoists?

This is a complex question that does not permit a binary ‘Yes-No’ answer. Naxal movements in India are multifaceted and chronic sociopolitical phenomena that demand complex and persistent remedies. Violence is the most visible aspect, and the government’s strategy has made a significant dent in the movement, resulting in substantial containment of bloodshed below the tolerance threshold. The movement has suffered major setbacks in the past, too, but it has resurfaced.

INTERVIEW | ‘Basavaraju killing a success, but gun can’t kill ideology’
State may not stop after eradicating Maoists, says Civil rights activist Prof G Haragopal

Will going aggressively against Maoist leaders and cadre eliminate Naxalism? The Centre has fixed a target to do it by March 2026.

Aggressive actions can lead to higher attrition among the Maoist cadres and result in significantly lower levels of violence, as they would prefer escaping the wrath of the forces. However, aggression does nothing to undermine the political, ideological and social components of the Naxal movement and its public support, nor does it address the root causes, like perceived deprivation among people under the influence of Maoists, which gave birth to the movement in the first place.

What more must the government do to choke their ideological, operational and financial bases?

The government already has a constant, coordinated and focused strategy to deal with Maoist violence. Key progress has been made. Difficulties faced by security agencies and civil administration on the ground — especially those about access to terrains, communication and other resources — have been addressed. Other mitigation steps like surrender policy are major initiatives. But the main issue is the ideological and political appeal of Maoists among the masses, which you can’t kill with a gun.

INTERVIEW | ‘Basavaraju killing a success, but gun can’t kill ideology’
Anti-Maoist success welcome, but heed economic issues raised

Do you think that alienation of the poor local population feeds and justifies the armed rebellion of Naxal leaders and cadres against the state?

Poverty plays an important role in the spread of the Naxal movement, but the key lies in perceived inequality in resource availability and exploitation by those higher up in the food chain. These are exploited by vested interests in mobilising a support base, which is subsequently used to spread violence. While the moral and ethical justification for political violence is a subject of debate the world over, in the context of internal security, particularly in India, this is unequivocally illegal and undemocratic.

Related Stories

No stories found.

X
Open in App
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com