Our Chakravyuh

Click to download pdf


  1. The views mentioned here do not necessarily represent those of the author. This exercise is just to present a case.
  2. The author has little expertise on the issue discussed here. He has never visited a naxalite area nor does he ever intend to.

You are right – this is inspired from the movie “Chakravyuh”. Naxalism or Left Wing Extremism remains an issue most of us remain familiarly unfamiliar with. The movie raises the issue nicely and brings out its many faces – perhaps better than any other movie in my generation.

But you are wrong – this is not any review of the movie. The idea here is to derive from the movie the various insights it offers and to dwell upon the real life questions which naxalism poses.

First and foremost, what is naxalism? Is it a mere ‘law and order’ problem? Or is it the much more dangerous but equally senseless terrorism? Or perhaps a sinister attempt by some foreign nations to destabilize our country? Is it just a business setup by the naxalites to extract money? And are the naxalites simply some miscreants who are misguiding and exploiting the ‘ignorant and illiterate’ tribals to their own end? Your answer to this question will invariably depend upon who do you think is ‘right’ here and to what extent.

But keeping biases apart lets consider some basic facts. This movement has been raging on in its present form since at least 45 years. This movement has had to face the armed might of the state continuously since almost its beginning. This movement has only spread since then. And this movement is the strongest in some of the most backward tribal areas of the republic. What these facts tell me simply is that this movement has got something right about it. To face the armed might of the state and yet to grow like this means the movement is popular. And 45 years is a long time over which nobody, however ignorant and illiterate, can be fooled. It means this cannot simply be dismissed as a ‘law and order’ problem or ‘a foreign hand’. Of course in a movement as large and as long as this, such elements are bound to creep in. But in its core, deep down, these facts tell me that there are genuine problems of the tribals and this movement genuinely represents them.

So this brings us to our next question – what are these grievances? Simple enough, isn’t it? Ask any MBA student – widespread poverty, illiteracy, hunger, ignorance, disease. And to address them we need to usher in ‘development’ in the area. This development means building roads, schools, hospitals and providing employment opportunities. So why haven’t we been able to address such issues so far? Because – (a) These naxalites don’t let us build there for they are afraid of losing their hold over the tribals, and (b) India is a poor country and lacks resources.

None of the above is false. There is indeed widespread poverty, illiteracy, hunger, ignorance and disease in the tribal areas and these form for genuine grievances. But history tells us that people put their lives at stake and revolt not when they have something to gain by revolting but when they have something to lose by the maintenance of the status quo. And the only thing which these tribals possess is their way of life. And in this way of life, their land on which they live and depend upon for livelihoods is an integral part. Its only when this land is threatened that the tribals will rise in revolt.

While schools, hospitals and employment opportunities sound nice and are welcome, the reality is that in the model of development we follow, these often come with a displacement of the tribals from their native lands. And this is where the problem starts. First of all our rehabilitation and resettlement policy is sh*t. In the name of compensation for the lost land we pay literally peanuts. It is ironical that while this law (of paying peanuts in compensation) was brought about in the name of social justice (land reforms), today this has become the single biggest weapon in exploiting the oppressed tribals. Secondly, in many cases even these weak provisions are not applied. Tribals are simply evicted by a nexus of the government and industrialists and purely by brute force. This government – industrialist nexus is so strong even at the topmost level that when there were attempts to empower the land owners in the new Land Acquisition Bill by paying them a compensation of 4 times the official land rate (which itself is 1/10th or 1/20th of the market rate in most cases) the industry raised a big cry and the government had to dilute the provisions of the Bill.

In the mines so built, of course some tribals will get jobs and if the mine owner keeps his promise, a school and a hospital would be built. But such gains are a mere fraction of the loss of land which they have to endure. And of course a smaller percentage still of the profits of the mine owner. Mines and dams are capital intensive activities – just how many workers are employed in them? And how much are the unskilled workers paid out of the mine owner’s profits? And it is no secret that over 99% of the coal mined or 99% of the electricity generated is never utilized in the same area. It is just used for the consumption of rest of us – the ‘citizens’ of the republic.

Finally who exactly are we to decide the course of development of these tribals? We are the majority… so what? The minority rights have to be protected from the tyranny of the majority for building a just society. After all don’t we think that the minority Jews also had some rights under the majority Nazi Germany? Or that the minority Tamilians have a right to life in a majority Sinhalese nation? Shouldn’t the tribals decide for themselves what course of development do they want? For a change, can we just let them live?

But how can they decide – they are too ignorant. Left to themselves they will never choose a developmental path and may remain forever in ignorance. “Like school kids… they need a master…” Aah… doesn’t that begin to sound now like the British paternalism which made for the moral foundation of the Raj?

And if we argue that we need those resources not for them but for us, then haven’t we removed even the mask of ‘development for them’ here? Isn’t this naked colonialism?

So does this mean that we should not utilize the tribal resources at all? If that be the case, what will happen to the number called ‘growth’? What will happen to the rest of us – the citizens? Well imagine if some alien species wants to destroy Earth tomorrow to make way for an interstellar expressway1? Isn’t it development? Would we support it? Of course not… just because we happen to be on the other side of the table this time. We would argue that anything which happens to the Earth should be done with the consent of the Earthlings. Shouldn’t we apply the same concept when it comes to the ‘development’ of the tribal areas? Shouldn’t we create an enabling environment for the development of strong self governing institutions in tribal areas and then require their free and fair consent before doing anything which affects them in a significant way? That I believe would be the way out of this Chakravyuh.


1Borrowed from “A Hitch Hiker’s Guide to the Galaxy”.


9 Replies to “Our Chakravyuh”

  1. Agree with most of the observations..
    1. Breaking the nexus between politicians and businessmen is of prime importance
    2. We have done well by creating Jharkhand and Chattisgarh which are mineral rich and have a large tribal population. If the democratic institutions were to work well the will of the people rather than that of the industrialists would prevail
    3. Tribals today have to choose between the lesser of two evils – government and naxalites – the second one being the preferred option in most cases


    1. Well said ahraz bhai. Re pt 2. Creating new states is a top down process.. Jharkhand doesnt even have panchayats. What use is statehood or democracy in general if local institutions are kept weak? How can will of the people rule in such case? No way… Its merely a continuation of the government industrialist nexus. This is another example of the classic principal agent problem which representative democracy suffers from.


  2. Hi Gaurav,
    What is Naxalism: All the definitions are true and all are false. It has no one definition. It started off as a Landless Tribals Vs Landowner struggle. Constitutional safeguards were built for Tribals but they were there only in theory. So it was a genuine people struggle. Sometime in 60s it took a more aggressive stance when tribals saw that none of the state machinery works impartially. So it started to become more militant, but it was still fragmented. Probably once it acquired critical mass, it got outside support both ideological and financial. So yes it does have its share of foreign support/terrorism.

    Next point: Has this movement been in its present form for the last 45 years ? I don’t think so. It was an offshoot of a political movement which assumed nature of an armed struggle. It had no clear broad based ideological base. Some tribals just joined because they saw they can use Naxal movement to settle personal scores. Infiltration by police, government etc is very common. That’s why their leaders have been arrested. Given it assumed nature of a government outside government, the core principles of the movement have been lost somewhere and the movement has become the same beast that it originally wanted to fight against.

    Grievances: While I generally agree with Poverty. I do not think illiteracy, ignorance is one of the grievances. Naxal movement has found support and leadership from some of the best educated people of the country. I think the biggest grievance is the total lack of government machinery functioning for the safeguards of basic rights of the tribals who have been living and cultivating their lands since ages. We have enough laws/statute in our constitution to protect and safeguard the interest of tribals. But implementation is utterly lacking.

    So there is no trust in the sanctity and efficacy of the institutions of the government among the tribals. And this I think is the fundamental reason for Naxalism. Who is wrong ? who is right ?
    Well it depends which side you are on !!
    Status Quo serves the purpose of the higher ups. It legitimizes the use of force against your own people.


    1. well said sumit sir, every movement begins with a holy cause but later on it also get mired with complexities, it aim to fight against at the first place. we have seen this in case of LTTE and off late in Congress party too.


  3. very nice and thought provoking article sir. Basically, the analogy you drafted with british colonialism is the best way to describe the situation of Naxalites.
    Modernisation theory is at work in our minds, where we justify creation of complex institution however ignoring the needs of native society.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s