Fortress India was never as physically well protected as today when there are multiple threats both external and internal. Left Wing Extremism has been snuffed out but for stray remnants by end of March, Jammu and Kashmir has seen isolated incidents of terror as the recent Anantnag attack on a policeman while barring Manipur, the North East is also devoid of major incidents of violence.
There is an old saying though that absence of violence does not imply peace. The UN in India defines peace in the larger context thus, “Peace is not just the absence of war. It is dignity, justice, education, safety, hope”. Security is thus not just physical but also political.
Take the case of Jammu and Kashmir. The lowest terrorism fatalities recorded in the state were in 2025 at 92 which also includes the 26 unfortunate who lost their lives in the Pahalgam terrorist attack of 22 April that year. The previous low was way back in 2012 when 121 lives were lost to terrorism in then State and now Union Territory. Sustained security enforcement and counter infiltration and terrorism operations have succeeded in bringing down incidents to new lows at various times of the long insurgency in the Union Territory.
Yet concerns of terrorist attacks remain and the State response to any incident is more crackdowns and targeting of Over Ground Workers. While frequently Pakistan support to terrorism in J & K and the frequent fulminations from that country asreflagged and these are serious challenges, it should be noted that a strong counter infiltration grid implies that sans a security lapse a Pakistan citizen is unlikely to sneak and survive without support from within. These are classified as OGWs which security forces crackdown upon as a group even though only a handful may be involved after every security incident. As the maxim goes – arrest one unfairly and create more terrorists or those willing to stand up against the State as this is seen as violation of the dignity and justice which a state must provide to every individual until proven guilty. Clearly security commanders in the Union Territory need to be sensitized over these nuances.
The principal political demands of the Union Territory of restoration of status of a State and special status whether justified or not are in a limbo. This has raised much hue and cry recently with the ruling National Conference organizing a protest in Delhi. Denial of this major administrative step is causing resentment not only in t political parties and leaders but also in the public which needs to be overcome.
Manipur a sensitive state which has not accepted union into India and has multiethnic and multi religious society with a strong awareness of political rights. Iron Sharmila is the symbol of Manipuri resistance fasting for over 500 weeks for removal of Armed Forces Special Powers Act [AFSPA] in the State.
Violence and fatalities were low in single figures in 2019, 2020 and 2022 but spiked to 157 in 2023 and have been in high double figures since then. While many reasons have been spawned for the same which have only attenuated since 2023 into a complex militancy, the basic factor remains a sense of injustice in the community – the Meitei and the Kuki the two main classes in the State. Resolution of the same through a constitutional amendment in favour of one community was the last straw on the camel’s back resulting in widening the ethnic divide which has manifested in geographic – the Hill and Plains. The option of community engagement before taking the proposed step of a constitutional amendment to alter the status of a community was never attempted seriously and as political patience ran out an attempt to use constitutional provisions was made. No amount of physical security measures including fencing the Myanmar border, inducting special police troops as the COBRA CRPF units from the Naxal belt where they excelled is likely to resolve the impasse for now. The issue is political engagement and the state needs patience for the same.
Applying this paradigm to other major security challenges faced by the state from hinterland terrorism to residual Naxalism could provide the same answer.
Yet why does the State adopt the physical rather than the softer approach? The answer could vary from political to institutional biases, lack of patience for resolution through engagement and the attraction of projecting power through the gun.
India’s state is no doubt security strong but has to demonstrate the statesmanship and sagacity to take hard political decisions which may be ideologically unpalatable to a section but are in the interest of real peace and stability. Compromise is an option which does not necessarily demonstrate a state’s weakness.
