1

Summary

Security Class 03

## BRIEF DISCUSSION OF THE PREVIOUS CLASS (4:16 P.M.)

## CRITIQUE OF THE STRATEGY/APPROACH OF THE INDIAN STATE (4:18 P.M.)

- (a) Lack of coordination between the state governments.
- The state police machinery has been reluctant to share intelligence inputs.
- (b) lack of coordination between the central security agencies and the state police forces.
- A turf war going on between the central security forces and the state police affects the much-needed coordination required to uproot Naxalism.
- (c) Inadequate training and combat capabilities of the state forces.
- A report by CAG pointed out that in the state of Chattisgarh, the police department had a total of 49000 units of weapons, of which 23% were obsolete.
- The police headquarters has assessed a total requirement of around 47000 units against which the availability was only 37000 units (20% shortage).
- The Ministry of Home Affairs allotted 14000 units of modern weapons between 2006 and 2009 against a demand of 19000 units by Chattisgarh police.
- The state police has spent a total of 205 crore rupees under the modernization scheme launched by the central government, as against the allotted 260 cr, leaving an unspent amount of 54 crore.
- (d) Lack of coordination between the civic administration and security establishments.
- As per the report of the expert group of the planning commission, there is a lack of synergy between civic administration and security agencies.
- Often when an area is cleared of the Naxalite influence, developmental agencies are too slow to respond leading to these areas falling under the control of the Naxalites again.
- On the other hand, when the civic administration develops the much-needed infrastructure, it is not provided adequate protection by the security forces, making development a wasteful effort.
- (e) High-handedness of the central security forces.
- (f) Inadequate surrender policies of the states
- The surrender policies of the several states do not focus on the rehabilitation of the Naxalites into the mainstream leading to a failure of the central policies.

## ANDHRA MODEL (4:42 P.M.)

- Andhra Pradesh suffered massively from Naxalism during the 1980s and 1990s.
- To deal with the problem, the state government evolved a comprehensive two-pronged strategy on the development and law and order front.
- **Developmental Front**
- On the developmental front, the state government launched a revamped scheme for PDS where food grains were provided to the most affected in Naxal districts.
- They initiated remote area development programs and interior area development programs to facilitate road connectivity and to improve the health facilities in the region.
- A massive program was launched for the modernization of land records and the discretionary powers in the hands of lower bureaucracy were curtailed.
- Schemes like Indiramma Yojana and Jalayagnam were launched to bridge the developmental gaps.
- **Law and Order Front**
- The state set up an elite anti-naxal force in 1989 called the Greyhounds.
- They were specially trained in jungle warfare and counter-maoist strategies.
- The state government also created civilian vigilante groups which were formed through attractive surrender and rehabilitation policies.

## WAY FORWARD (5:04 P.M.)

- **Political Solutions**
- (a) Making the tribal advisory councils functional.
- (b) Reforms in the Forest Rights Act, 2006.
- (c) A need for strong anti-corruption legislation to punish corrupt officials and politicians.
- (d) Initiation of a sincere dialogue with the marginalized groups to create opportunities for the rebels to join the mainstream, and resolve the issues democratically.
- **Administrative Solutions**
- (a) Sensitization of local bureaucracy towards the problems of the poor.
- (b) Encouraging community involvement in the development efforts.
- (c) Deputing officers with desired capabilities and motivation in naxal-affected areas and special incentives for them.
- **Law and Order Solutions**
- (a) The state governments need to upgrade the capability of state security forces for modern arms and ammunition, tactical training, and special training in guerilla warfare.
- (b) Modern surrender and rehabilitation policy must be designed by the center to address the lack of uniformity in the approach of states.

## DISCUSSION ON THE TRIBALS (5:12 P.M.)

- Humans begin as scavengers and foragers. They used to live in the wild and were often in conflict with each other.
- Then they organized themselves into groups.
- They developed some sort of knowledge which they then transferred to their progenies using paintings, inscriptions, etc.
- When these groups come in contact with each other they can cooperate, can have conflict, or may show indifference to each other.
- One thing constant in the history of humans is conflict.
- However, certain groups develop their unique style of living because of their aloofness from the mainstream.

## INSURGENCY IN THE NORTH EAST (5:52 P.M.)

- Britishers came to India as a trader to expand their markets.
- The resistance to British expansion came from Burma. It was under the rule of the Konbaung dynasty.
- The Burma was economically and militarily strong and was expansionist.
- In the 19th century, a large part of northeast India was ruled by the Ahom Dynasty.
- Ahoms were the descendants of the Tai race. They ruled this region from 1228 to 1826 A.D.
- ==Reasons behind the First Anglo-Burmese War==
- (a) British India was sharing a long border with Burma.
- (b) Burma and Britishers both wanted to increase their markets.
- (c) Burma had French influence, which was not acceptable to Britishers.
- After this war in 1826, the treaty of Yandaboo was signed.
- Under this treaty, Burma recognized British India's control over Assam and Manipur. It also asked for no interference in the Cachar and Jaintia Hills.
- This treaty terminated the Ahom Kingdom.
- The Lower Assam Valley was put under the control of the Commissionerate System.
- The Upper Assam Valley was put under the control of the martial race.
- Ahoms and Khasis started to rebel in the Upper Assam Rule.
- In 1828, this area was handed over to the Ahoms with certain conditions imposed by the Britishers.
- The whole of northeast  India was occupied by the Britishers in the period between 1826 and 1895.
- Ahoms had a P==osa== system with the hill tribes. Under this, the hill tribes were given some tributes by the Ahoms so that hill tribes wouldn't attack them.
- Britishers continued this system but placed this tribute with cash payment.
- This made the tribal societies their markets.
- Also, it allowed the Britishers to control the tribal chiefs.
- Britishers adopted the policy of non-interference in the context of tribals.
- Along the inner line, there was huge trade along the borders.
- **Administrative Apparatus (6:34 P.M.)**
- With Regulation I of 1873, the inner line permit was introduced.
- The province of Assam in 1874.
- In 1919, the hill areas were declared "backward areas".
- Under the Government of India Act, 1935 the hill areas were divided into the excluded areas and the partially excluded areas.
- The excluded areas had no representation in the Assam legislature.
- The Partially excluded areas had limited control of the province of Assam.
- (\* The dictation will be given in the next class.)

## THE TOPIC FOR THE NEXT CLASS: INSURGENCY IN NORTH-EAST INDIA (CONTINUED)