Introduction

The six-decade-long Left-Wing Extremism (LWE), or Maoist insurgency, in India, which first emerged in the Naxalbari village of West Bengal in 1967, is on its last legs. The Communist Party of India (Maoist), which not too long ago spread its influence across nearly one-third of India (223 districts at its peak in 2011), triggering unprecedented violence and paralysing development and governance across several states, has lost most of its strongholds in the recent years.

The Maoist insurgency, according to the Ministry of Home Affairs, is today at a historical low—contained to six districts in Chhattisgarh, Odisha, Jharkhand, and Telangana.^[1] The killing of Nambala Keshav Rao (also known as Basavaraju), the organisation’s General Secretary, on 21 May; the killing of Madvi Hidma, the CPI-Maoist’s top military commander, on 18 November; and the surrender of Venugopal Rao (Sonu), a Politiburo member and key ideologue—all signal that the rebels are battling for survival. Chhattisgarh, particularly the Bastar region, remains the last stronghold, though it now appears to be slipping from their control too. The Union government’s deadline of 31 March 2026 to end India’s longest-running insurgency seems within reach.

In this context, it is imperative to examine the multi-layered dynamics of this protracted insurgency: how and what sustained it for many decades, its ideological attraction, and its leadership and cadre; and how the government—both at the central and state levels—responded to counter it. It is equally important to think about the post-insurgency challenges, particularly, bridging the long-standing development and governance deficits, promoting the equitable and sustainable management of natural resources, implementing transitional justice (particularly for the large number of surrendered rebels), and pursuing the peace process.

Indeed, the development-conflict conundrum has confronted the ‘red corridor’ for six decades. Material deprivation, economic hardships, the absence of basic connectivity infrastructure, and poor educational and healthcare facilities remain widespread.  Addressing post-conflict development needs and governance priorities in a region marked by prolonged violence is crucial.

This publication seeks to explore and analyse the key dimensions of left-wing insurgency and shed light on its diverse dimensions. Most importantly, it attempts to outline what a post-conflict future of peace and development should look like in this vast, violence-prone region.

The volume comprises 15 articles that address the insurgency’s trajectory, its military and social impact, its recent decline, and the plausible developmental and governance pathways in a post-conflict scenario. Ajai Sahni provides a critical overview of the insurgency’s dramatic ascent and accounts for its containment. Kanchan Lakshman traces the insurgency’s trajectory in Chhattisgarh, the state once considered the worst-hit by the conflict. Shashank Ranjan details the decline of the Maoist militarisation which significantly weakened the organisation. Sameer Patil analyses the role of technology and intelligence in enhancing the effectiveness of counterinsurgency strategies. Ajay Gudavarthy’s piece examines the ideological motivations behind the rise of Maoist insurgency and how structural factors and the revolutionary movement’s own shortcomings have led to its decline. Anshuman Behera offers a holistic view of the movement’s legacies.  

Ambar Kumar Ghosh then discusses how cooperative federalism has served as an important tool against the further spread of LWE. Niranjan Sahoo and Ambar Kumar Ghosh uncover the role of developmentalism as an instrument for violence mitigation. Shubhranshu Choudhary examines current thinking within Maoist leadership and highlights the uncertain future of Bastar’s Adivasis, who have borne the brunt of decades of conflict. Sudha Ramachandran reviews the experiences of women whose lives were profoundly shaped by the insurgency. Nayakara Veeresha offers a historical analysis of the youth’s critical role in the movement and their prospects in a post-conflict environment.

Also in the context of post-Maoist India, Bharat Chandra Rout explores how educational opportunities can bridge human development gaps in Maoist-affected regions. Niranjan Sahoo examines governance paradoxes in Maoist-affected Fifth Schedule Areas and identifies the governance reforms required for sustaining peace and development in these regions. Samrat Sinha provides a comparative perspective on post-conflict governance by drawing lessons from the Bodoland Territorial Region (BTR) in the Northeast.

Finally, Nilanjan Ghosh’s article provides a blueprint for a new development paradigm for the ‘red corridor’. Collectively, the volume offers comprehensive, multi-layered and nuanced perspectives on the factors that shaped the insurgency’s evolution and eventual decline, and those that will influence post-conflict development discourse in the region.

Read the report here.

All views expressed in this publication are solely those of the authors, and do not represent the Observer Research Foundation, either in its entirety or its officials and personnel.

Endnotes

^[1] “Union Home Minister and Minister of Cooperation Shri Amit Shah Says, Number of Districts Most Affected by Left-Wing Extremism Has Been Reduced to Just 6,” Press Information Bureau, April 1, 2025,

• Domestic Politics and Governance
• India
• Counterinsurgency strategy in India
• CPI (Maoist)
• Development–conflict nexus in India
• Governance in Maoist-affected regions
• Internal security challenges in India
• Left-Wing Extremism in India
• Maoist insurgency in India
• Naxalite movement
• Post-conflict development in Maoist areas
• Red Corridor India

The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.

PREV NEXT