On 5th May, All India Students Association (AISA) conducted a discussion on Operation Kagar in Bengaluru, which marks the latest phase in the ongoing offensive against the Adivasis of Central India. This operation follows in the footsteps of its predecessors, Operation Green Hunt and Operation Samadhan Prahar, all of which have been launched under the pretext of countering Maoism but have, in effect, served to kill and displace Adivasis, facilitating corporate plunder of Jal-Jangal-Jameen
The discussion was facilitated by Com. Clifton D’Rozario, State Secretary, CPIML (Liberation), Com. Shivasundar, senior journalist, and V.S. Krishna of Human Rights Forum.
The discussion was started by Mr. V.S. Krishna. He began his talk by stating that, the human rights movement for half a century have repeatedly told the state that the Naxal movement is not merely a law-and-order issue, but a political movement deeply rooted in the lives of the country’s most marginalized communities- Dalits, Adivasis, mine workers, etc. He emphasized that the state must understand and respond to this reality accordingly.
Krishna pointed out that in 2006, the Planning Commission established an expert group led by D. Bandyopadhyay, which included prominent human rights activists like Bela Bhatia and K. Balagopal. This group produced a report titled “Development Challenges in Extremist-Affected Areas”. The report strongly argued that the state should not view the Naxalites as a mere outbreak of criminality, rather as a political movement that uses violence to achieve its goals. Therefore, the state has a constitutional responsibility to address the causes behind this violence such as poverty, landlessness, and unemployment. However, Krishna noted that while individuals from the security establishment occasionally echo this view as a formality, both the NDA and UPA governments have effectively discarded the report and consistently and responded with torture, rape, arson, and extrajudicial killings, often making people simply disappear, in a completely lawless manner.
Krishna lamented: what has Chhattisgarh not witnessed, what have its people not endured? He referred to the emergence of the Salwa Judum in 2005, a completely illegal, and criminal armed militia that ruthlessly raped, killed and displaced Adivasi villagers. According to him, the state has consistently used such ‘dirty tactics’. After four years of its operation, in 2011, Supreme Court Justices B. Sudarshan Reddy and S.S. Nijjar delivered a landmark judgment that not only banned Salwa Judum but also critiqued neoliberalism as one of the root causes of Naxalism that must be addressed. However, the state later inducted those criminals into Chhattisgarh Auxiliary Armed Police Force with higher salaries and more advanced weapons.
Despite this judgment, the state pressed ahead with its National Action Plan. P. Chidambaram famously declared, “We will establish law in the lawless land”, laying the groundwork for what Krishna described as today’s horrific developments, Operation Green Hunt, marked by the massive deployment of paramilitary forces in Adivasi territories. This operation was succeeded by Operation Samadhan Prahar in 2017 and Operation Kagar more recently. As an epitome of this strategy, he pointed to the then ongoing events in the Karregutta hills, where more than 10,000 paramilitary personnel had encircled top Maoist leaders.
Krishna also spoke about the increasing lawlessness of the state, which now bans even fully constitutional organizations like the Moolwasi Bachao Manch for speaking out against state repression. Civil liberties organizations are under immense pressure, and conducting a simple fact-finding mission has become extremely risky. Human rights activists and journalists are being charged under the draconian UAPA. For the first time in his life, Krishna said, he had to switch off his phone and go on a fact-finding mission without informing others, living like an underground activist.
In conclusion, he drew a chilling parallel to the Tamil Eelam genocide in Sri Lanka, warning that a similar, albeit smaller-scale, genocide is unfolding in India today. He warned that while the state may wipe out all Maoists, but will not kill all Adivasis, as some of his colleagues believe. On the contrary he thinks that the state aims instead to enslave the adivasis as a source of cheap labour.
Comrade Cliffton D’Rozario was the second speaker, he began by expressing that this was a moment of crisis, particularly for those committed to justice and democracy. The situation, he argued, was no longer just about insurgency but had become a war on ideology itself. He said, “We have a state that is saying: we are going to end Naxalism and Maoism. Basically, it’s a war not on people, it’s a war of ideology. Anything remotely close to the ideology, we will destroy with any means possible.”
He criticised the ideological rigidity within public discourse, arguing that this was not the time for debates about political alignment with Maoist ideology. He asked, “Can we say, ‘Because I have differences with a particular formation, this kind of massacre is fine’? That is not acceptable.” He emphasised that the conflict was not just about Maoiism or state security but fundamentally about the place Adivasis hold in Indian democracy. He said this was about access to natural resources and what rights the state believed Adivasis should or should not have. He noted past atrocities such as the displacement of over 650 villages during Salwa Judum and the systematic violence that targeted not just Maoists but entire communities. He pointed out that the Maoists had made multiple overtures for peace, including writing four letters requesting dialogue and declaring a suspension of hostilities. Referring to Maoist leader Roopesh, he noted, “He said, ‘We’ve suspended all our acts. We aren’t taking any military action. We are only protecting ourselves when we are being attacked.’” Clifton argued that continuing with targeted killings even after this amounted to a one-sided war, not law enforcement. He expressed serious concern about the use of repressive laws like the UAPA, which, he noted, had been used not just against armed insurgents but also against labour organisers and peaceful protestors. According to him, the pattern was clear, any form of dissent was being criminalised.
He then read out the demands that All India Lawyers’ Association for Justice and allied groups had issued that includes an appeal to the government to stop the offensive, engage in dialogues, and release democratic rights activists.
He concluded by reiterating that opposition to the killings did not mean support for Maoist ideology. “If they’re going to exterminate people in this fashion, we are going to raise our voices against it,” he said. “Standing against the killings doesn’t make you pro-Maoist — it just makes you pro-Constitution.”
The last speaker was Mr. Shivasundar. He began his talk by reading an open letter by Himanshu Kumar. Himanshu Kumar is a Gandhian activist who has, for several years, fought for the rights of Adivasis in Bastar. His activism eventually led to his being chased out of the state of Chhattisgarh.
In the letter, Himanshu Kumar recounted attending a conference organized by a senior Gandhian Adivasi activist from Bastar. During the event, the speaker broke down on stage, lamenting that they could do nothing against the cruel police officer who had stuffed stones into the vagina of the activist Soni Sori. Witnessing this emotional moment brought vivid images of Hidma to his mind, Himanshu Kumar recalled.
Hidma is a young rebel leader from Bastar, with a bounty of ₹5 crore on his head. Himanshu wrote that when he heard Hidma had been surrounded by state forces under orders from Home Minister Amit Shah, he felt deeply worried. He also shared a moment when Soni Sori told him that an Adivasi constable from Bastar had confided in her, saying, “Sister, Hidma must not die.”
After five days of encirclement, when Hidma managed to escape, Himanshu Kumar felt a sense of relief and even happiness. He questioned himself: why was he happy that someone the government labels a Naxalite had survived? The answer, he reflected, lies in decades of witnessing how government forces have raped Adivasi women, tortured Adivasi men, and looted their forests. If Hidma were to die, the fear he instills in these exploitative forces would also die.
He concluded the letter by saying that Hidma would one day be immortalized in the pages of history like Birsa Munda and Gunda Dhur, while the rest of them would be remembered as cowards. Shivasundar, having finished reading the letter, pointed out the tragic irony that a Gandhian like Himanshu Kumar now finds himself praising a rebel like Hidma. It is a reflection, he said, of how lawless the state apparatus has become that has forced even the most non-violent voices to sympathize with armed resistance.
Following this, Shivasundar spoke about Bela Bhatia’s PhD on Bihar that along with D. Bandyopadhyay’s report, emphasizes that it was the Naxal movement that truly established democracy in Bihar, by redistributing land to the tillers and bringing about socio-economic equality, something the state itself had failed to achieve.
Further expanding on the lawless nature of the state, Shivasundar highlighted how the government has been unleashing violence against all forms of dissent, including peaceful and democratic ones. He cited the example of the Moolvasi Bachao Manch, a democratic organization that was banned merely for “breeding dissent against the state.” He also drew attention to Article 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, which criminalizes even non-violent struggles if they obstruct a government official from performing their duties.
Shivasundar remarked that at least during the Naxalbari phase of the 1960s-70s, there existed some degree of freedom to dissent, which gave rise to many civil liberties organizations. In contrast, he said, the current environment offers very little space for democratic opposition.
He concluded by quoting Prashant Bhushan, who once said that under fascism, everyone must be prepared to go to jail, a call to action that implies we must all be ready to fight for our rights, regardless of the consequences.
AISA strongly condemns the Indian state’s war on Adivasis and its persistent refusal to engage in peace talks with the Communist Party of India (Maoist). Operation Kagar must be halted immediately. The state must initiate sincere and transparent peace negotiations with the CPI (Maoist), ensure an unconditional ceasefire, and bring an end to the ongoing corporatization-militarization efforts on Adivasi lands.
