While discussing Left extremism in the country, one must keep in mind the differences between the Maoists of the post-liberalization era and the Naxals of the socialist India of the late 1960s and early 1970s. If the latter were confined to West Bengal, and later to Bihar and Andhra Pradesh, their counterparts in the 21st century have dug themselves deep in at least nine states in the heartland of the country having predominantly a tribal population. The present insurgency should also be seen against the background of the marginalization of tribal movements.

If college graduates, journalists, writers, academics, landless peasants and industrial labourers formed the backbone of the Naxals of yesteryear, the Maoists of today have spread deep into the tribal and, to some extent, the Dalit pockets of the mineral-rich plateau region.

While in the past, plots of land were grabbed from feudal landlords, today the Maoists are resisting the acquisition of tribal land, whether by private entrepreneurs or by the government.

The gradual weakening of tribal political movements — for instance, of the one led by the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha — has also helped in the growth of the Maoists. The decline in the stature of Shibu Soren, arguably the tallest adivasi leader till a decade ago, also compelled the new generation to look elsewhere for leadership. When Shibu Soren, along with A.K. Roy and Binod Behari Mahto, formed the JMM in the Jharkhand region of what was then south Bihar in early 1970s, the police in West Bengal were busy crushing the Naxals in the green fields and highlands in the northern parts of that state. The tribal region of Bihar, West Bengal, Orissa and Madhya Pradesh was largely unaffected by the ultra-Left movement then.

Red Indians

While Soren, known as Guruji, struggled against the dikkus (people from outside the tribal region) and moneylenders, today the Maoists are targeting the security forces and government machinery on the ground that the latter are protecting and promoting multi-national companies in the region. The Maoists are openly championing the cause of the people displaced by industrialization. That is why, even today they are able to draw the support of a section of intellectuals who feel that some of the issues raised by the Maoists are genuine, though they may disagree with their modus operandi.

The non-fulfillment of the dream of the Greater Jharkhand spread over the tribal belts of the then Bihar (now Jharkhand), Orissa, West Bengal, and the Chhattisgarh part of the then Madhya Pradesh, also played a key role in letting down the adivasis. The National Democratic Alliance government, in November 2000, played its own card and created a truncated Jharkhand comprising only 18 districts of the then south Bihar, while the demand was for a bigger tribal state. The Bharatiya Janata Party, which espouses the cause of the merchants and industrialists of the region, wanted to weaken the tribal movements and so imposed its own agenda.

It must also be noted that while the Naxals of a previous generation lost the battle within a few years in West Bengal, the Maoists of today are proving to be a much potent force. In 1960s and 1970s, the Naxals largely adopted the hit-and-run tactic. Now the Maoists come in hundreds to stop trains like the Rajdhani, lead an assault on the jail in the heart of Bihar’s Jehanabad, or kill 55 cops in one go in Chhattisgarh. These ‘Red Indians’ virtually run parallel government in many parts of the country, and hold kangaroo courts.

Now the Maoists are consolidating themselves in the forests. The strategy is to allure the security forces to the landmines laid down for them. The forests and hills have become the Maoists’ happy hunting grounds.