Rajiv Tuli, Prashant Barthwal
The concept of Urban Naxalism has emerged as a contentious issue in Bharatiya political discourse, with some arguing that it poses a significant threat to the nation’s internal security. This phenomenon, along with concerns about foreign-funded initiatives such as the Joshua Project and clandestine missions by organizations like PFI, has led to intense debates about internal security challenges.
The term Urban Naxal is derived from the Naxalite movement, which began as a peasant uprising in Naxalbari, West Bengal, in 1967. Traditional Naxalites were inspired by Maoist ideology and sought to overthrow the state through armed struggle, primarily operating in rural areas. However, the concept of Urban Naxalism suggests that this ideology has evolved and spread to urban centres, with alleged sympathizers working within various sectors of society to undermine the state through non-violent means.
Opponents of the Urban Naxal argue that these individuals operate as a network of intellectuals, academics, artists, and activists who use their positions to influence public opinion, challenge government policies, and potentially provide logistical support to rural Maoist insurgents. They claim that Urban Naxals seek to destabilize the nation by portraying Muslims, Tribals, and Dalits as victims while depicting Hindus as fascists and despots.
To understand the potential impact of Urban Naxalism on Bharat’s security, it is crucial to examine the broader context of the country’s internal security challenges. Bharat has long grappled with various insurgencies, separatist movements, and ideological conflicts that have threatened its territorial integrity and social fabric. The Naxalite-Maoist insurgency, which primarily affects the eastern and central regions of Bharat but is now impacting other areas such as Maharashtra and significant parts of Northern states like Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, and Punjab, has been described as the nation’s most serious internal security threat.
Use of institutions to propagate certain narrative
Expanding this ideology into urban areas could amplify anti-state elements’ reach and influence. Advocates of this perspective argue that Urban Naxals employ a range of tactics to weaken the state. They use academic institutions, media outlets, and cultural platforms to propagate anti-establishment narratives and challenge the state’s legitimacy. They exploit the judicial system to hinder development projects, challenge security operations, and advocate for the rights of individuals accused of Maoist activities. They leverage social media and digital platforms to spread disinformation, mobilize protests, and shape public opinion against government policies. They also establish connections between urban intellectuals and rural insurgents, potentially facilitating the flow of resources, information, and support.
Additionally, they engage with foreign organizations and media to highlight alleged human rights abuses and generate international pressure on the government.
While these activities, if coordinated and widespread, could pose challenges to Bharat’s internal security, it is essential to approach the Urban Naxal theory with critical scrutiny. Labelling dissent and intellectual discourse as Urban Naxalism raises concerns about the potential erosion of democratic values and the right to free speech. The Joshua Project, another element mentioned in the context of Bharat’s security concerns, is a research initiative that aims to highlight the ethnic groups of the world with the fewest followers of Christianity. While primarily focused on gathering demographic and cultural information to support Christian missionary efforts, the project has attracted controversy in Bharat due to concerns about its potential impact on social harmony.
The Joshua Project represents a form of cultural imperialism and could potentially destabilize Bharat’s spiritual diversity. The main concerns surrounding the Joshua Project are about Bharat’s security, including fears that targeted evangelism could lead to significant changes in the spiritual composition of vulnerable communities, potentially exacerbating social tensions. There are concerns that conversion efforts may lead to a loss of traditional cultural practices and beliefs, particularly among tribal and indigenous communities. Suspicions about the motives of foreign-funded religious organizations and their potential to influence local politics and social dynamics are also prevalent.
Additionally, there are worries that aggressive proselytization could lead to communal tensions and conflicts between religious groups, and that large-scale conversions could impact national integration and the sense of shared cultural identity.
To assess the actual threat of Urban Naxalism and the Joshua Project to Bharat’s integral security, it is important to note that while individual cases of anti-state activities or controversial religious conversions may occur, the existence of a large-scale, coordinated network of Urban Naxals or a systematic campaign of religious demographic change remains unproven. Bharat has established laws and institutions to address internal security threats and regulate foreign contributions to NGOs and religious organizations. Urban Naxalism and perceived threats from initiatives like the Joshua Project, which is also supported mainly by PFI and Communist ideologies, have gained prominence in discussions about Bharat’s integral security.
A nuanced approach required
While these issues deserve serious consideration, they must be approached with nuance and critical analysis. The debate surrounding Urban Naxalism and the Joshua Project underscores the need to continuously evaluate Bharat’s security paradigms. As the nature of threats evolves, so too must the approaches to addressing them. This requires a delicate balance between vigilance against genuine security risks and preserving the democratic values that form the bedrock of society.
To understand this whole hatred politics against the Hindus, there is a need to examine the intent and objective of Islamic radicalism in South Asian countries. Popular Front of Bharat (PFI) released its objective to transform Bharat by 2047 and to expand its Islamic credentials by increasing the anarchy, political chaos, and unrest in the state. Even the CPI (Maoist) strategies state, sharing the exact outline of the PFI model of 2047, that “the specific characteristics of revolutionary war in Bharat determine the military strategy to be one of protracted people’s war of establishing revolutionary base areas first in the countryside where the enemy is militarily weak and then to gradually surround and capture the cities which are the bastions of the enemy forces” (India 2047, Towards Rule of Islam in India, Internal Document, Pvt. Circulation, p. 8, Strategy and Tactics). Therefore, it is clear that their armed struggle and the movement in the rural areas will play the primary role, and the work in the cities will play a secondary role, complementary to the rural work.
Even the Islamic radical forces in Bharat share the same outline as what some ultra-Left outfits intend to plan by targeting the religious minorities after mobilizing, manipulating, and misdirecting the Muslims and youths for the revolutionary movement and sending them as their cadre in urban and rural areas. They not only targeted the marginalized for revolutions, but they also stressed the importance of white-collar employees who, for them, are the reliable allies of the working class and the revolution. For them, ‘it is essential to penetrate the military, para-military forces, police, and higher levels of the State’s administrative machinery. It is necessary to obtain information regarding the enemy, to build support for the revolution within these organs, and even to incite revolt when the time is ripe”.
Fifth Generation Warfare Tactics
The Fifth Generation Warfare (5GW) employed by the PFI utilizes non-kinetic military operations, including social engineering, misinformation, cyber-attacks, and emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and fully autonomous systems. 5GW is fundamentally an information and perception war. Since World War II, state actors have diminished in combat theatres, while non-state actors have become increasingly prominent. Today, war can be waged without conventional weapons; tactical approaches allow adversaries to achieve their objectives adaptively. This has led to the rise of “Elastic Wars,” where a flexible pattern replaces a fixed chain of command, ensuring that activities align with battle theatre conditions. This approach aims to defeat the enemy by adapting to various combat theatre dimensions. The US refers to this as ‘Hybrid War.’
Political instability in South Asian countries is often driven by complex historical, social, and economic issues. Global market forces and influential figures such as George Soros shape economic and political landscapes, contributing to political unrest and chaos. Soros is notorious for spreading misinformation and providing financial support to radical groups, both in South Asia and Western countries, as well as the Middle East.
The core of this troubling plan involves forming alliances with marginalized groups in society, such as Scheduled Castes and Tribes, Muslims, and OBCs, to create a broad platform for undermining the nation’s security and unity. The complex interplay of global economic factors, local political dynamics, and domestic and foreign stakeholders significantly influences South Asian politics. Understanding these dynamics requires detailed research and recognition of each country’s unique context.
By adopting a holistic and adaptive approach to security, Bharat can effectively address the challenges posed by phenomena like Urban Naxalism. This approach should be grounded in the country’s democratic ethos, respecting diverse opinions and beliefs while remaining vigilant against genuine threats to national integrity. As the debate evolves, stakeholders must engage in constructive dialogue, critically examine evidence, and work towards solutions that enhance Bharat’s democracy while ensuring its security. A well-strategized and thoughtful approach, not merely defensive, will enable Bharat to navigate the complex landscape of security challenges while upholding its foundational principles of unity in diversity, social justice, and democratic governance.
