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 Posa 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)