Development and the Spread of Extremism

Prerequisites: Internal Security Challenges — overview · Social Justice and Welfare Schemes

The Hook: Why Did a Forest Become a Battlefield?

The Core Concept

Four theatres of internal security

Internal security in India is usually discussed in four theatres. Each has a different driver and a different response.

This page focuses on the third theatre because the syllabus line — linkages between development and spread of extremism — is built around it.

Origins and evolution of LWE

The ideology is Maoist: a “protracted people’s war” to capture State power, with armed squads in forest areas and front organisations in towns.

Why development matters: the deficit behind the gun

The Planning Commission’s Expert Group on Development Challenges in Extremist Affected Areas (chaired by D. Bandyopadhyay, 2008) and the Second Administrative Reforms Commission’s 7th Report (Capacity Building for Conflict Resolution, 2008) both traced extremism to grievances rather than to ideology alone.

Extremist groups exploit these gaps: they run “people’s courts”, fix wages for tendu leaf collection, and present themselves as the only authority that listens. Their violence, in turn, blocks roads, schools and mobile towers — so underdevelopment and extremism reinforce each other.

graph LR
    A["Development deficit: land, forest, displacement"] --> B["Grievance and alienation"]
    B --> C["Space for extremist mobilisation"]
    C --> D["Violence against roads, schools, towers"]
    D --> E["State presence weakens further"]
    E --> A

The legal shield for tribal communities

In Orissa Mining Corporation v. Ministry of Environment and Forests (2013), the Supreme Court left it to the Gram Sabhas of the Niyamgiri hills to decide whether bauxite mining would affect their religious and cultural rights. The Gram Sabhas rejected the project — a landmark for consent-based development.

The government’s strategy

The National Policy and Action Plan to address LWE (2015) describes a multi-pronged strategy: security measures, development interventions, and ensuring the rights and entitlements of local communities. Policing and public order are State subjects (List II), so the Union’s role is to support, coordinate and fund.

In 2017 the Union Home Ministry articulated the SAMADHAN doctrine to guide operations.

The courts have also drawn limits. In Nandini Sundar v. State of Chhattisgarh (2011), the Supreme Court held the use of tribal youth as armed Special Police Officers (in the context of “Salwa Judum”) unconstitutional, under Articles 14 and 21, and ordered them disarmed — a reminder that counter-insurgency must stay within the Constitution.

Memory Anchors

SAMADHAN (2017): Smart leadership · Aggressive strategy · Motivation and training · Actionable intelligence · Dashboard-based KPIs and KRAs · Harnessing technology · Action plan for each theatre · No access to financing

Root causes — “LAND-G”: Land alienation · Absent services · Non-recognition of forest rights · Displacement · Governance deficit

One-line Mains hooks:

• “Extremism is a symptom of governance failure as much as a security problem.” (a paraphrase of the line taken by the 2008 Expert Group — use as a paraphrase, not a quote)
• Development and security are not alternatives; they are sequence and condition — security creates the space in which development can reach.

For Prelims

For Mains

• Dimensions:
  • Socio-economic: poverty, land alienation, displacement, exploitation in forest produce markets.
  • Governance: thin administrative and police presence, poor implementation of PESA and FRA, corruption in welfare delivery.
  • Security: armed squads, IEDs, extortion economy, attacks on infrastructure.
  • Constitutional and ethical: Fifth Schedule promises, rule of law in counter-insurgency, human rights of tribal civilians caught in between.
• Keywords: governance deficit, relative deprivation, “clear–hold–build”, trust deficit, consent-based development, last-mile delivery, Gram Sabha empowerment.
• Value-addition: Bandyopadhyay Expert Group (2008); 2nd ARC 7th Report (2008); National Policy and Action Plan (2015); SAMADHAN (2017); Nandini Sundar (2011) and the Niyamgiri decision (2013); Aspirational Districts Programme (2018).

Common Traps

In the News

• 2024 — the Union Home Minister announced 31 March 2026 as the target date for ending LWE in the country; follow the Home Ministry’s official statements for the current status → see current affairs.

Practice

Prelims

Mains

Quick Revision

Key Takeaways

Related Topics

• Internal Security Challenges — quick revision
• Internal Security Challenges — practice questions
• Terrorism and Insurgency
• Security Forces and Agencies
• Local Government
• Social Empowerment