India’s ongoing conflict with the Naxalite insurgency has entered a new, intense phase in 2025. Recent military operations, including the high-profile Operation Black Forest and the killing of the Maoist movement’s supreme commander Nambala Keshava Rao, have been framed by the government as decisive victories in its declared mission to eliminate left-wing extremism by 2026.
Yet, beneath this narrative lies a far more complex and enduring struggle. The Naxalite insurgency is not simply a matter of law and order. It is rooted in decades of economic exclusion, political marginalization, and social injustice affecting India’s tribal populations. The violence is a symptom of structural inequality and land dispossession that successive governments have failed to address. To view the conflict purely through a security lens is to misunderstand the depth of the grievances that continue to fuel resistance in India’s Red Corridor.
Click to read about Communism in Nepal
Origins of the Naxalite Insurgency
The Naxalite movement began in 1967 in the village of Naxalbari, West Bengal, when impoverished peasants and tribal people took up arms against exploitative landlords. Inspired by Maoist ideology, the rebellion sought radical land redistribution and social justice for marginalized communities.
Over the decades, the movement spread to mineral-rich states such as Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Odisha, Telangana, and Andhra Pradesh. These areas, home to large tribal populations, suffer from poor infrastructure, limited government presence, and high poverty rates. For many locals, the Naxalites have represented the only effective resistance against a state that is often seen as indifferent or hostile to their plight.
Operation Black Forest: Official Claims and Local Realities
Between April and May 2025, Indian security forces launched Operation Black Forest, targeting Maoist strongholds in the Karreguttalu Hills along the border between Chhattisgarh and Telangana. Official statements boast the killing of 31 Maoists and the arrest of 22 others. This campaign is presented as a key milestone in the government’s broader goal of eliminating left- wing insurgency by next year.
However, local reports paint a different picture. Eyewitnesses and community sources have confirmed far fewer casualties among insurgents — closer to four deaths rather than the 31 claimed. This discrepancy suggests a degree of exaggeration in official accounts, raising questions about the true human cost of the operation. The area itself is a difficult terrain where local populations often blur the line between insurgents and civilians, complicating both the fighting and the reporting.
The Death of Nambala Keshava Rao: A Significant But
Symbolic Loss
On May 21, 2025, security forces reported the killing of Nambala Keshava Rao, the supreme commander of the Maoist movement, in the dense forests of Abujhmarh, Chhattisgarh. With a bounty of ₹3.5 crore, Rao was one of India’s most wanted figures.
His death is undoubtedly a blow to the insurgency’s leadership and morale. Yet, it is important to understand that the movement is not solely dependent on individual leaders. It is embedded deeply within tribal and rural communities who continue to see the Maoists as defenders of their rights in a system that frequently neglects them. The forests of Abujhmarh have long served as both sanctuary and battleground. The killing of a leader does not automatically translate into the collapse of local support. In many ways, it could deepen resentment and prolong the cycle of violence.
The Clashes in Bijapur: Violence and Displacement
The Bijapur district in Chhattisgarh has witnessed fierce confrontations throughout 2025. Clashes between Maoist insurgents and security forces in February and May resulted in the deaths of at least 38 Maoists and four security personnel.
These ongoing battles wreak havoc on local populations, many of whom are tribal people caught in the middle. Civilians often face forced evacuations, destruction of property, and trauma from living in a conflict zone. The government’s approach has tended to prioritize military victories over civilian protection, leading to widespread human rights concerns.
Furthermore, the area’s natural resources have drawn extractive industries, often backed by the state. The expansion of mining and logging projects has exacerbated tensions, displacing communities without adequate compensation or rehabilitation.
Surrenders and Shifts in the Insurgency
In a notable development, Maoist commander Ravan Koda surrendered to Bihar’s Special Task Force in May 2025 after evading authorities for 15 years. This event may point to growing strains within the insurgency, whether due to relentless military pressure or internal disagreements. However, surrenders rarely spell the end of rebellion. Many former insurgents face social stigma, economic hardship, and limited prospects for reintegration. Without proper support and opportunities, some may be driven back into armed struggle.
The Larger Picture: Socioeconomic Roots of the Conflict
India’s counter insurgency campaign focuses heavily on military tactics and infrastructure development. The government promotes construction of roads, schools, and police posts in Maoist-affected areas, aiming to integrate these regions more fully into the national economy and polity. Yet, this development often overlooks the core grievances of the tribal populations. Many see these projects as further encroachments on their land and livelihoods. Economic growth in India has been uneven, with wealth concentrated in urban centers and upper classes, while rural and tribal areas remain mired in poverty and neglect.
Key issues include:
Land dispossession as industries and government projects seize ancestral tribal lands. Lack of access to quality education and healthcare. Political marginalization and exclusion from decision-making The Maoist insurgency channels these frustrations into armed resistance. It is not simply a law-and-order problem, but a manifestation of systemic injustice.
What the Future Holds
The government aims to eliminate left-wing extremism by March 2026, and the operations of 2025 reflect this urgency. But history warns that armed conflict rarely ends through force alone. Without meaningful political dialogue, land reforms, and social inclusion, the insurgency is likely to persist or evolve into new forms.
The cycle of violence, displacement, and poverty will continue unless the state addresses the deep inequalities that fuel rebellion. Genuine peace requires recognizing tribal rights, honoring land claims, and delivering equitable development.
Conclusion
India’s conflict with the Naxalite insurgency is one of the world’s longest-running internal struggles. Recent military campaigns and high-profile killings are only part of a much larger story of resistance against inequality and marginalization.
The headlines of Operation Black Forest and the death of Nambala Keshava Rao capture moments of violence but do not mark an end. They highlight the urgent need to look beyond security measures and tackle the social and economic roots of conflict. Until then, the forests and villages of India’s Red Corridor will remain contested spaces where poverty and power collide, and where many continue to fight for a future they have long been denied.