20. Security Notes 04

Elaborate Notes

EVOLUTION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPARATUS

The British administrative framework for the North-East, particularly Assam and its surrounding hill areas, was distinct from the rest of British India. It was driven by a mix of strategic concerns, commercial interests, and a paternalistic view of the tribal populations. This evolution laid the groundwork for many post-independence political assertions.

• Creation of Assam Province (1874): Prior to 1874, Assam was a part of the Bengal Presidency. The British carved out Assam as a separate Chief Commissioner’s Province. This was done for administrative efficiency, to better manage the vast tea plantations, and to create a more effective frontier administration against incursions from hill tribes and Burma. This act formally brought the region under a centralized, albeit distinct, colonial administrative structure.
• Scheduled District Act, 1874: This was a landmark piece of legislation that institutionalized the administrative separation of remote and “backward” areas. The Act empowered the local government to declare certain territories as ‘Scheduled Districts’, where general laws and regulations of British India would not automatically apply. This was an early form of the ‘non-regulation’ system, designed to provide a simpler, more paternalistic form of administration suited to tribal customs, as perceived by the colonial authorities. This act effectively created a legal and administrative buffer between the plains and the hill areas.
• Government of India Act, 1919 (Section 52 A (2)): The Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms introduced the system of dyarchy. Section 52 A (2) of this Act further refined the administrative isolation. It allowed the Governor-General in Council to declare any territory a “backward tract.” Areas so designated were removed from the purview of the provincial and central legislatures, and their administration was vested directly in the Governor, who could legislate for them at his discretion. This reinforced the policy of keeping tribal areas insulated from mainstream political developments.
• Simon Commission Report (1927): The Indian Statutory Commission, popularly known as the Simon Commission, visited the region and took note of the distinct character of the hill tribes. Its members, particularly Chairman John Simon, were influenced by the arguments of administrators like J.H. Hutton and N.E. Parry, who advocated for the continued separation of hill areas. The Commission recommended that these areas required a different administrative treatment and should be kept under the direct control of the Governor, thus advocating for further centralization of power away from the elected provincial legislatures.
• Government of India Act, 1935 & The 1936 Order: Acting on the recommendations of the Simon Commission, the Government of India Act, 1935, created two categories of special areas: ‘Excluded Areas’ and ‘Partially Excluded Areas’.
  • Excluded Areas: These were administered directly by the Governor in his discretion, completely outside the purview of the provincial legislature (e.g., Naga Hills, Lushai Hills).
  • Partially Excluded Areas: The provincial ministry had some jurisdiction, but the Governor retained special responsibilities and overriding powers (e.g., Mikir Hills).
  • The Government of India (Excluded and Partially Excluded Areas) Order, 1936, formally listed these areas, regrouping the former ‘backward tracts’ into this new two-tiered system, thereby solidifying the administrative and political isolation of the hill tribes on the eve of India’s independence.

GROWTH OF IDENTITY CRISIS

The colonial administrative policies, combined with socio-economic changes, led to the development of distinct, and often conflicting, political identities among the various communities of the North-East.

• Emergence of a Tribal Middle Class: The introduction of modern, Western-style education, primarily by Christian missionaries, created a new educated elite among the tribal communities. This class, proficient in English and aware of modern political concepts, became the voice of their communities, articulating their grievances and aspirations. Figures like Angami Zapu Phizo (Naga) and Laldenga (Mizo) emerged from this new social stratum.
• Modern Education and Proselytization: Christian missionaries, such as the Welsh Presbyterians in the Lushai Hills (Mizoram) and American Baptists in the Naga Hills, were instrumental in this process. They not only spread Christianity but also introduced the Roman script for local languages, promoted literacy, and established schools. This fostered a shared sense of identity based on a common religion and script, which was distinct from the predominantly Hindu, Assamese-speaking population of the plains. This religious and cultural divergence became a powerful marker of identity.
• Conflict of Interest: A significant divide emerged between the interests of the “core” Assamese population in the Brahmaputra valley and the “peripheral” tribal populations in the surrounding hills. This conflict revolved around control over land, forests, resources, and political representation. The Assamese elite viewed the hill areas as integral parts of Assam, while the hill tribes, conscious of their distinct history and culture, resisted what they perceived as assimilationist policies.
• Caste Discrimination and Power Sharing: The caste-based social structure of the plains was alien to the largely egalitarian and casteless tribal societies. The tribals perceived a sense of cultural superiority and discrimination from the plainspeople. The refusal of the Assamese political leadership in the post-independence era to grant significant political autonomy or share power adequately fueled resentment and strengthened the demand for separation.
• Bordoloi Sub-Committee: In the run-up to independence, the Constituent Assembly formed the North-East Frontier (Assam) Tribal and Excluded Areas Sub-Committee, chaired by Gopinath Bordoloi, the Premier of Assam. This sub-committee was tasked with devising an administrative framework for the hill areas. Recognizing the unique cultural identity and the apprehension of the hill peoples, the committee recommended a system of self-governance through autonomous councils, rejecting both complete assimilation and complete separation. Its report became the foundational document for the Sixth Schedule of the Indian Constitution.

SIXTH SCHEDULE

The Sixth Schedule was the constitutional embodiment of the Bordoloi Sub-Committee’s recommendations, a unique administrative arrangement for the tribal areas of the North-East.

• Objective: As enshrined in Article 244(2) and Article 275(1) of the Constitution, the Sixth Schedule was designed to protect the distinct customs, traditions, and way of life of the tribal communities. It aimed to provide a mechanism for self-governance and safeguard their rights over land and natural resources from encroachment by non-tribal populations.
• Administrative Mechanism: The schedule provides for the creation of Autonomous District Councils (ADCs) and Autonomous Regional Councils (ARCs). These are elected bodies with significant powers.
  • Legislative Powers: They can make laws on subjects like land, forests (except reserved forests), canal water, shifting cultivation, village administration, inheritance of property, marriage, divorce, and social customs.
  • Executive Powers: They are responsible for establishing and managing primary schools, dispensaries, markets, fisheries, roads, etc.
  • Judicial Powers: They can constitute Village Councils and Courts to try cases between tribals, based on customary law.
• Specification of Areas (Section 20): Originally, Section 20 of the Sixth Schedule specified the tribal areas of Assam in two parts:
  • Part A: Included the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills, Garo Hills, Lushai Hills, Naga Hills, North Cachar Hills, and Mikir Hills.
  • Part B: Included the North-East Frontier Tract (present-day Arunachal Pradesh) and Naga Tribal Area. This distinction reflected different levels of administrative integration at the time.

STATE REORGANIZATION

The recommendations of the States Reorganization Commission (SRC) in the mid-1950s proved to be a major turning point for the politics of the North-East.

• SRC Recommendations (1955-56): The SRC, headed by Fazl Ali, primarily used language and administrative viability as the criteria for redrawing state boundaries. Based on this, it created 14 states and 6 union territories in 1956.
• Application to the North-East: For the North-East, the commission’s report was deeply unsatisfactory to the hill communities. It approved the continuation of a large, composite state of Assam. Furthermore, it recommended the merger of the princely states of Manipur and Tripura into Assam, arguing for administrative and economic consolidation.
• Consequence: This recommendation was viewed by the tribal and non-Assamese communities as a move towards forced assimilation under Assamese dominance. It completely disregarded the distinct ethnic, historical, and cultural identities that had been crystallizing for decades. Instead of integration, the SRC’s report intensified the demands for separate states, shifting the political discourse from autonomy within Assam to complete separation from Assam.

NAGALAND

The Naga political movement is the oldest and one of the most significant secessionist movements in India, with deep historical roots.

• Pre-Colonial and Colonial Policy: The Ahom kings of Assam had a complex relationship with the Naga tribes, characterized by raids and punitive expeditions but also trade and diplomacy—a “carrot and stick” policy. The British, after annexing Assam, largely adopted a policy of non-interference or isolation, formalized by the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation Act of 1873, which created the “Inner Line,” restricting entry into the Naga Hills.
• Rise of Political Consciousness:
  • Naga Club (1918): Formed by educated Nagas and government officials, this was the first pan-Naga political organization. It aimed to articulate Naga interests to the colonial administration.
  • Memorandum to Simon Commission (1929): The Naga Club submitted a historic memorandum to the Simon Commission, famously stating, “Leave us alone to determine for ourselves as in ancient times.” They demanded to be excluded from the proposed constitutional reforms and to be kept under direct British administration, highlighting their distinct identity from the people of the plains.
  • Naga Hills as “Excluded Area” (1935): Based on these demands and the Simon Commission’s report, the Naga Hills district was declared an “Excluded Area” under the Government of India Act, 1935, placing it directly under the Governor’s authority.
• The Naga National Council (NNC):
  • In 1945, the Naga Hills District Tribal Council was formed to aid post-war reconstruction. This body soon transformed into a political organization and renamed itself the Naga National Council (NNC) in 1946, with Angami Zapu Phizo eventually becoming its most influential leader.
  • Memorandum to Cabinet Mission (1946): The NNC submitted a four-point memorandum demanding: (1) Solidarity of all Naga tribes, including those in Burma and unadministered areas; (2) Protest against the grouping of Assam with Bengal; (3) Constitutional inclusion in an autonomous Assam with safeguards; and (4) A separate electorate for Nagas.
• Diverging Aspirations and the Hydari Agreement: Within the Naga community, opinions varied: some favoured autonomy within India, others a sovereign state, and some a temporary trusteeship under Britain. The dominant faction of the NNC, led by Phizo, gravitated towards complete independence.
  • In June 1947, the NNC declared Naga independence, a day before India’s independence.
  • Nine-Point Hydari Agreement (June 1947): An agreement was signed between Sir Akbar Hydari, the Governor of Assam, and the NNC. It granted Nagas significant autonomy in legislative, executive, and judicial matters. However, the interpretation of Clause 9 became a major point of contention. The NNC interpreted it as a right to secede after ten years, while the Government of India saw it as an option to suggest new administrative arrangements within the Indian Union. The breakdown of this agreement led to the start of a long and violent insurgency.

MIZORAM

The political history of Mizoram is a story of transformation from colonial patronage to armed insurgency and finally, a successful peace process.

• Historical Context: The Mizo people, part of the larger Zo ethnic group, have a history primarily recorded after the arrival of the British in the late 19th century. They share ethnic kinship with communities in Myanmar, Bangladesh, and other North-Eastern states.
• British Interference:
  • Political: The British annexed the Lushai Hills but adopted a policy of indirect rule, leaving the traditional system of village chiefs largely intact. This preserved the local power structures.
  • Religious and Social: The arrival of Welsh missionaries on January 11, 1894, was transformative. Christianity spread rapidly, becoming the dominant religion by the 1930s. The Church introduced education, healthcare, and Western cultural norms. Organizations like the Young Mizo Association (1935) were formed, fostering a modern Mizo identity.
• Post-Independence Politics:
  • Two main political parties emerged: the Mizo Union, which was moderate and sought integration with India with autonomy, and the United Mizo Freedom Organization (UMFO), which initially favoured joining Burma. The Mizo Union dominated the first District Council elections in 1952.
  • Failure of Autonomy: The Autonomous District Council for the Lushai Hills faced chronic financial shortages and was perceived as ineffective. A key political move by the Assam government, supported by the Mizo Union, was the abolition of chieftainship in 1954. While aimed at democratizing Mizo society, it dismantled a traditional institution, creating a power vacuum.
• The Path to Insurgency:
  • Language Politics: The attempt to impose Assamese as the state’s official language under the Assam Official Language Act of 1961 was seen as a direct assault on Mizo identity and was fiercely resisted by all hill leaders.
  • Mautam Famine (1959): This was the pivotal event. ‘Mautam’ is a cyclical ecological phenomenon where the flowering of bamboo leads to a rodent population explosion, which in turn destroys crops, causing severe famine. The Assam government’s response was widely seen as inadequate and negligent.
  • Rise of Laldenga: Laldenga, a former government clerk, founded the Mizo National Famine Front (MNFF) in 1960 to organize relief efforts. His organization’s success earned him widespread popularity. In 1961, he transformed the MNFF into a political party, the Mizo National Front (MNF), with the explicit goal of achieving a sovereign, independent Mizoram.
• The Insurgency and Statehood:
  • On March 1, 1966, the MNF launched “Operation Jericho,” an armed uprising, and declared independence.
  • The Government of India’s response was swift and harsh. In a controversial move, the Indian Air Force conducted airstrikes on Aizawl in March 1966, the only known instance of India using air power against its own civilian population.
  • After years of conflict, peace talks began. In 1972, the Mizo Hills were separated from Assam to form the Union Territory of Mizoram.
  • The historic Mizoram Peace Accord was signed in 1986 between the Government of India and the MNF. Laldenga became the Chief Minister, and in 1987, Mizoram was granted full statehood.

MANIPUR

Manipur’s conflict dynamics are uniquely complex, shaped by its history as a princely state and the tripartite ethnic composition of its society.

• Historical Background: Manipur boasts a long recorded history, with the Meitei kingdom dating back to 33 A.D. (as per the royal chronicle, Cheitharol Kumbaba). The majority Meiteis of the Imphal Valley adopted Vaishnavite Hinduism in the 18th century under King Garibniwaj. The kingdom faced a devastating Burmese invasion in 1824, which ended with British intervention and the Treaty of Yandabo (1826). The British restored the Manipuri monarchy but established a protectorate, exercising significant control.
• Creation of a Gulf Between Communities:
  • The Meiteis (plains), Nagas (northern hills), and Kukis (southern hills) coexisted for centuries but with limited assimilation.
  • The British ‘divide and rule’ policy exacerbated this separation. They administered the hill areas differently from the valley, directly through a Political Agent, thus preventing the integration of hill and plain administrative systems.
  • The spread of Christianity among the Naga and Kuki tribes further widened the cultural and religious gap with the Hindu Meiteis.
  • Post-independence, these separate identities hardened, leading to overlapping claims over territory and resources, and competing political aspirations.
• Growth of Meitei Identity and Insurgency:
  • Forced Merger: Many Meiteis believe that the Merger Agreement of 1949, signed by Maharaja Bodhachandra Singh, was done under duress, and they view Manipur’s integration into India as an illegal annexation. This forms a core grievance for Meitei insurgent groups like the United National Liberation Front (UNLF).
  • Other Factors: Poor governance, economic neglect, and a sense of being culturally overwhelmed have fueled Meitei nationalism. The threat posed by the Naga nationalist demand for “Nagalim” or Greater Nagaland, which claims large parts of Manipur’s hill districts, has also intensified Meitei insecurity.
• Contemporary Causal Factors:
  • Hill-Valley Divide: Development has been concentrated in the valley, leading to a sense of neglect in the hills. The political structure is also seen as biased towards the valley due to higher population density and more assembly seats.
  • Land Laws: A key point of friction is land ownership. Under Article 371C and state land laws, Meiteis (as non-tribals) are prohibited from buying land in the hill areas, which are protected for Scheduled Tribes. However, tribals can buy land in the valley. This is seen as unjust by the Meiteis.
  • Meitei Demand for ST Status: The recent demand by Meitei groups for inclusion in the Scheduled Tribe (ST) list is a flashpoint. They argue it is necessary to protect their land, culture, and ancestral heritage. The hill tribes (Nagas and Kukis) vehemently oppose this, fearing that it would allow the more populous and politically dominant Meiteis to acquire their land and corner ST reservation benefits.

ASSAM

Assam’s ethnic landscape is a complex mosaic, and its conflicts are multi-layered, driven primarily by issues of identity, immigration, and control over resources.

• Nature of Ethnic Conflict: The conflicts in Assam can be categorized into four main types:
  1. Inter-Tribal Conflict: Clashes between different tribal groups over land and resources. A prominent example is the conflict between Bodos and Santhals (adivasis brought as tea garden laborers) in the Bodoland region.
  2. Tribal vs. Non-Tribal Conflict: This often involves indigenous tribal groups and migrant or settler communities. The recurring violence between Bodos and Bengali-speaking Muslims over land occupancy is a case in point.
  3. Conflict over Preferential Rights: This is a struggle for political and cultural dominance between the mainstream community and smaller ethnic groups. The conflict between the Bodos and the Assamese stems from the Bodos’ demand for special rights and recognition of their distinct identity against perceived Assamese cultural chauvinism.
  4. Conflict for a Separate Homeland: This involves demands for separate states or autonomous regions carved out of Assam. The most prominent example is the long-standing and often violent movement for a separate state of Bodoland.
• Origin of Ethnic Conflict:
  • Identity Politics and Politicisation of Ethnicity: The post-independence state saw the rise of Assamese nationalism, which sought to create a linguistically and culturally homogenous state. Policies like the Assam Official Language Act of 1960, which made Assamese the sole official language, were perceived by non-Assamese groups as hegemonic. This triggered counter-mobilizations among communities like the Bodos, who began to assert their distinct identity politically. The scholar Sanjib Baruah has extensively written on this “sub-national” conflict between Assamese and other indigenous groups.
  • Immigration and Demographic Pressure: This is the most emotive and persistent issue.
    • Colonial Period: The British encouraged the migration of tribal people from Central India (e.g., Santhals) to work in tea plantations and Bengali peasants to cultivate fallow lands.
    • Post-Partition: The partition of India in 1947 and the subsequent Bangladesh Liberation War in 1971 led to massive influxes of refugees and migrants into Assam.
    • This continuous migration from across a porous border led to perceptible demographic changes, creating anxiety among the indigenous population about the loss of their political, cultural, and economic rights. This culminated in the six-year-long Anti-Foreigner Agitation (1979-1985).
  • Geographical Isolation and Colonial Policies: Pre-colonial Ahom rule involved a degree of cooperation with tribes like the Bodos. However, British policies like the Inner Line system and the creation of ‘Excluded Areas’ created administrative and psychological barriers, reducing social cohesion between the hills and the plains.
  • State’s Attitude and Perceived Neglect: There is a widespread perception in Assam and the wider North-East that the central government’s policies have been driven more by national security concerns (due to its strategic location) than by a genuine commitment to the region’s socio-economic development. This feeling of neglect has historically fueled separatist sentiments.
• State Response to Assam Conflict: The state has employed a multi-pronged strategy to manage these conflicts:
  1. Creation of New States: Over time, states like Nagaland, Meghalaya, and Mizoram were carved out of the larger state of Assam to satisfy ethnic aspirations.
  2. Autonomous District Councils (ADCs) under Sixth Schedule: For certain tribal-majority areas within Assam, ADCs have been established. These include the Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC), Dima Hasao Autonomous Council, and Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council.
  3. Statutory Autonomous Councils: For other ethnic groups not covered under the Sixth Schedule, the Assam government has created statutory councils through state acts. There are six such councils (e.g., Mising Autonomous Council, Rabha Hasong Autonomous Council), though they have fewer powers than Sixth Schedule ADCs.
  4. Development Councils: To address the developmental aspirations of smaller and more scattered communities, 33 Development Councils have been created.
  5. Updation of National Register of Citizens (NRC): The Assam Accord of 1985, which ended the anti-foreigner agitation, mandated the detection and deportation of illegal immigrants. A key provision was the updation of the NRC of 1951. The agreed-upon cut-off date was midnight of March 24, 1971. The exercise, monitored by the Supreme Court, was completed in 2019, but the final list has been controversial and has not yet been officially notified by the Registrar General of India.

---

Prelims Pointers

• Assam was separated from the Bengal Presidency and made a Chief Commissioner’s Province in 1874.
• The Scheduled District Act was passed in 1874.
• The Government of India Act, 1919, introduced Section 52 A (2) for creating “backward tracts”.
• The Government of India Act, 1935, created two categories: ‘Excluded Areas’ and ‘Partially Excluded Areas’.
• The North-East Frontier (Assam) Tribal and Excluded Areas Sub-Committee of the Constituent Assembly was chaired by Gopinath Bordoloi.
• The Sixth Schedule of the Constitution is derived from Article 244(2) and Article 275(1).
• The States Reorganization Commission (SRC) was headed by Fazl Ali. The SRC recommended the merger of Manipur and Tripura with Assam.
• The Naga Club was formed in 1918. It submitted a memorandum to the Simon Commission in 1929.
• The Naga National Council (NNC) was formed in 1946. Its prominent leader was A.Z. Phizo.
• The Nine-Point Hydari Agreement was signed in June 1947 between the Governor of Assam and the NNC.
• Christianity was first brought to Mizoram by Welsh Missionaries on January 11, 1894.
• The Young Mizo Association (YMA) was formed in 1935.
• The Mautam Famine in Mizoram occurred in 1959.
• The Mizo National Front (MNF) was formed by Laldenga in 1961.
• The MNF declared independence for Mizoram on March 1, 1966.
• The Indian Air Force carried out airstrikes in Aizawl in March 1966.
• Mizoram became a Union Territory in 1972 and a full-fledged state in 1987 after the Mizoram Peace Accord (1986).
• The Treaty of Yandabo (1826) ended the First Anglo-Burmese War and brought Manipur under British influence.
• Manipur’s special provisions regarding administration and land laws are covered under Article 371C of the Constitution.
• The Assam Official Language Act was passed in 1960.
• The Assam Agitation or Anti-Foreigner Movement took place from 1979 to 1985.
• The Assam Accord was signed in 1985.
• The cut-off date for identifying illegal migrants in Assam as per the accord is March 24, 1971.
• Sixth Schedule ADCs in Assam: Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC), Dima Hasao, Karbi Anglong.

---

Mains Insights

GS Paper I (Modern History, Post-Independence Consolidation, Indian Society)

1. Legacy of Colonial Policies: The British administrative policies of creating ‘Excluded’ and ‘Partially Excluded’ areas, while ostensibly for protection, created a deep political and psychological separation between the hill and plain populations. This ‘policy of isolation’ hindered the natural process of integration and laid the foundation for post-independence separatist movements. The administrative lines drawn by the British became the ethnic fault lines of independent India.
2. Process of Identity Formation: The identity consciousness in the North-East is a modern phenomenon shaped by multiple factors.
   • Role of Religion: Christianity provided a unifying ideology and a link to the Western world for many tribal groups, creating a cultural identity distinct from the Hindu plains.
   • Role of Language and Script: The introduction of the Roman script by missionaries for tribal languages created a literary tradition separate from those using Indic scripts (e.g., Assamese, Bengali). The imposition of Assamese in 1960 was a major trigger for resistance and assertion of linguistic identity.
   • Education and New Elites: Modern education created an articulate middle class that championed the cause of their communities, transforming localized identities into modern political movements.
3. Challenges of National Integration: The case of the North-East highlights the challenges of the ‘nation-building’ project in a diverse country. The initial approach of the Indian state, influenced by the SRC’s emphasis on linguistic homogeneity, failed to address the aspirations of smaller ethnic groups, leading to alienation and conflict. The Naga and Mizo movements are classic examples of how a perceived threat of assimilation can fuel secessionism.

GS Paper II (Polity and Governance)

1. The Sixth Schedule: A Double-Edged Sword?
   • Successes: The Sixth Schedule has been crucial in protecting tribal land and preserving cultural identity. ADCs have provided a platform for political representation and self-governance.
   • Limitations: ADCs have often been criticized for being underfunded, suffering from corruption, and having an overlapping jurisdiction with the state government, leading to administrative conflict. Their failure to meet the aspirations of all groups has often led to demands for further fragmentation or direct statehood.
2. Federalism and Asymmetric Arrangements: The North-East exemplifies India’s use of asymmetric federalism (e.g., Sixth Schedule, Article 371A for Nagaland, 371C for Manipur, 371G for Mizoram) to accommodate regional diversity. While these special provisions are necessary, their implementation and the political dynamics surrounding them remain a continuous challenge for Centre-State relations.
3. From Conflict to Resolution - The Role of Accords: India has often used peace accords (e.g., Naga Ceasefire, Mizo Accord, Assam Accord, Bodo Accords) as a tool for conflict management.
   • Success Story: The Mizo Accord of 1986 is considered a model of success, where an insurgent group was brought into the political mainstream, leading to lasting peace.
   • Challenges: Other accords, like the Naga agreements, have been more complex and fraught with challenges of interpretation and implementation, leading to fragmented peace and the rise of splinter groups. The success of an accord depends on its inclusivity, clarity, and the political will to implement it in letter and spirit.

GS Paper III (Internal Security)

1. Development-Security Nexus: A recurring theme in the North-East is the linkage between perceived economic neglect, poor development indicators, and the rise of insurgency. The feeling of being ‘left behind’ creates fertile ground for anti-state mobilization. The Indian government’s policy has shifted from being purely security-centric to a dual approach focusing on security and development (e.g., Act East Policy, special infrastructure projects).
2. Immigration, Demography, and Conflict: The issue of illegal immigration in Assam is a critical internal security challenge. It is not merely a legal or humanitarian issue but a deeply political one that fuels social conflict, puts pressure on resources, and can be exploited by extremist elements. The NRC exercise, while aimed at providing a solution, has become a source of immense controversy and potential instability.
3. Insurgency as a Political Tool: In many parts of the region, insurgency has evolved from an ideological struggle to a complex ecosystem involving politics, ethnic identity, and an underground economy. The multiplicity of insurgent groups, factionalism, and their nexus with local politicians create a challenging security environment where the lines between insurgency, extortion, and politics are often blurred.