Introduction: A Fire Ignited in the Fields of Naxalbari
In the quiet, agrarian village of Naxalbari in West Bengal, 1967, a spark of rebellion was lit that would soon engulf vast swathes of India in decades of violent unrest and ideological warfare. What started as a localized peasant uprising, led by the revolutionary minds of Charu Mazumdar and Kanu Sanyal, quickly transformed into the Naxalite movement — a radical left-wing armed struggle inspired by Maoist ideology. The movement not only shook the Indian political establishment but also marked the rise of the Communist Party of India (Marxist–Leninist), commonly known as CPI (ML).
---
The Backdrop: Social Injustice and Agrarian Exploitation
Post-independence India faced immense socio-economic disparities, especially in rural and tribal areas. Land reforms were slow and ineffective. Zamindars (landlords) and moneylenders continued to exploit poor peasants and tribals. Basic rights such as land ownership, fair wages, and dignity remained out of reach for the majority of rural India. This inequality created a fertile ground for radical ideologies that promised justice, equality, and land to the tiller.
---
Naxalbari Uprising: The Birth of a Revolution (1967)
The turning point came in May 1967, when a group of Santhal tribal peasants, under the leadership of Kanu Sanyal and Jangal Santhal, refused to give up their land to the landlords in the Naxalbari region. Armed with bows, arrows, and sickles, the peasants revolted against the local feudal system. The movement was backed ideologically by Charu Mazumdar, who advocated for an armed revolution based on Mao Zedong’s model in China.
This armed rebellion was brutally suppressed by the state, leading to the death of 11 people, including women and children. However, the uprising made national headlines and sent shockwaves across the country. The seeds of Naxalism were firmly planted.
---
Charu Mazumdar and the Ideological Foundation
Charu Mazumdar, a fiery intellectual and a member of the CPI(M), played a critical role in transforming the Naxalbari rebellion into a full-blown ideological movement. Disillusioned with parliamentary politics, he advocated for armed struggle as the only way to bring about real change. He penned the “Historic Eight Documents” — a series of writings that became the philosophical bedrock of Naxalism.
Mazumdar argued that India was a semi-feudal and semi-colonial country where the bourgeoisie and landlords oppressed the proletariat and peasants. Inspired by Marxist-Leninist and Maoist thought, he called for a protracted people's war to seize political power through the barrel of a gun.
---
Formation of CPI (Marxist–Leninist): A Radical Shift
In 1969, Charu Mazumdar, along with Kanu Sanyal and other revolutionaries, formally established the Communist Party of India (Marxist–Leninist). The party rejected electoral politics and emphasized violent armed struggle. This marked a significant break from mainstream communist parties like CPI and CPI(M), which were participating in democratic elections.
CPI(ML) became the principal Naxalite outfit and began to mobilize students, workers, and peasants across West Bengal, Bihar, Andhra Pradesh, and other parts of the country. Urban intellectuals and rural poor alike joined hands under the red banner, dreaming of a new social order.
---
Expansion of the Movement Across India
Throughout the 1970s, the Naxalite movement spread rapidly. In Bihar and Andhra Pradesh, the movement gained a strong foothold, particularly in tribal and backward regions. The slogans of "land to the tiller" and "death to landlords" resonated deeply with the oppressed masses.
Key areas of expansion included:
Telangana and Andhra Pradesh: Maoist-inspired guerrilla groups like the People's War Group (PWG) gained prominence.
Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand: Tribal lands were turned into battlefields as insurgents attacked police and state forces.
Bihar: The Naxalite presence became a potent force against caste-based oppression and feudal dominance.
Odisha and Maharashtra (Gadchiroli): Tribal belts with poor development became hotspots of Naxal activity.
By the late 1990s, the movement was dubbed the “Red Corridor,” spanning several states in central and eastern India.
---
State Response: Operation Green Hunt and Militarization
Successive governments oscillated between negotiation and militarization. However, as violence escalated — including attacks on police, infrastructure, and political leaders — the Indian state launched counter-insurgency operations.
In 2009, the Indian government launched Operation Green Hunt, a massive military offensive involving thousands of paramilitary troops aimed at flushing out Maoists from their forest strongholds. The move was met with mixed reactions. While it led to the capture and killing of key Naxal leaders, it also led to allegations of human rights violations against civilians.
---
Urban Naxals: The Intellectual Nexus
In recent years, a new term — “Urban Naxals” — has entered popular discourse, referring to academics, journalists, activists, and students who allegedly support or sympathize with the Maoist cause. While critics argue that this label is often misused to target dissent, others believe that the ideological backbone of Naxalism still thrives in some intellectual circles.
This development shows that the movement has gone beyond rural guerrilla warfare and permeated urban narratives, making it both a physical and ideological battle.
---
Decline of the Movement: Internal Splits and Leadership Crisis
Despite its initial momentum, the Naxalite movement has suffered from several setbacks:
1. Internal Factionalism: The CPI(ML) and other splinter groups like CPI(Maoist) often engaged in infighting and lacked a unified command structure.
2. Loss of Public Support: Excessive violence and extortion turned public sentiment against the rebels in many areas.
3. Leadership Vacuum: The deaths and arrests of key leaders like Charu Mazumdar (died in police custody in 1972) weakened the ideological rigor of the movement.
4. Development and Infrastructure: Improved access to roads, healthcare, education, and employment in rural regions undercut the support base of the insurgents.
---
Naxalism in Contemporary India (2025)
As of 2025, the Naxalite movement is no longer the nationwide threat it once was. According to the Ministry of Home Affairs, Naxal violence has significantly declined over the past decade. Several former strongholds are now under government control, and surrenders among rebels have increased.
Yet, pockets of insurgency still exist — particularly in parts of Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Odisha, and Maharashtra — where underdevelopment and state neglect persist.
---
Legacy and Impact of Naxalism
Despite its failures, Naxalism has left a lasting impact on Indian society and politics:
Policy Reforms: Land reforms, tribal rights (such as the Forest Rights Act, 2006), and greater attention to rural development were partly influenced by the Naxalite challenge.
Political Discourse: Issues of inequality, landlessness, and tribal rights became central to national debates.
Security and Governance: The movement exposed deep governance gaps in India’s hinterland and forced the state to rethink its developmental and security strategies.
---
Conclusion: The Fire That Still Smolders
What began in the dusty fields of Naxalbari as a cry for justice continues to echo in different forms across the Indian landscape. Though weakened militarily, Naxalism remains a potent symbol of resistance for those marginalized by India’s rapid but unequal development.
The story of the Naxalite movement is not just one of bullets and bombs, but also of broken promises, deep inequalities, and a nation’s struggle to bring justice to its most forgotten citizens.
If India is to truly overcome the legacy of Naxalism, it must go beyond counter-insurgency and deliver inclusive growth, land rights, and dignity to the people who still live in the shadows of Naxalbari.
Comments
Post a Comment