Context

• The story of the displacement of the Gond tribals is one of historical irony, governmental neglect, and a struggle for identity and dignity.
• Sparked by counter-insurgency operations and sustained by bureaucratic apathy, the experience of these tribals sheds light on the complexities of internal displacement in India, particularly where indigenous communities and state security policies intersect.
• Therefore, it is important to examine the historical context, the implications of displacement, and the ongoing challenges faced by these communities, especially in the absence of robust legal and humanitarian support.

Historical Context: From Strategic Hamlet to Strategic Failure

• The displacement of around 50,000 Gond tribals in 2005 from Chhattisgarh to the then-undivided Andhra Pradesh (now Telangana) marked the continuation of a long-standing policy of forced relocations in India's counter-insurgency strategy.
• The policy, inspired by the U.S. "strategic hamleting" used in Vietnam during the 1960s, was aimed at isolating Maoist guerrillas from their support bases among the local tribal population.
• However, as history repeated itself, the strategy failed yet again.
• Much like similar efforts post-Independence in 1949 to counter communist revolutionaries in Telangana, the policy led to further alienation rather than integration.
• Tribals were relocated to roadside camps with minimal support, and many eventually returned to the forests or, ironically, joined security forces or Maoists themselves due to lack of alternatives.

Tribal Contributions and Tactical Shifts

• Despite the historical injustice of displacement, a paradox emerges in recent years: the same tribal communities that were forcibly uprooted have become instrumental in the state’s military successes against Maoists.
• Unlike central paramilitary forces or non-tribal local police, these tribals possess critical knowledge of the local terrain and language, making them strategic assets in anti-Maoist operations.
• Some surrendered Maoists have also joined the forces, creating a new dynamic in the battle for control in the region.
• This transformation illustrates both the resilience of the tribal communities and the irony of state dependency on a population it had once marginalised.

The Consequences of Displacement

• Vulnerable to Exploitation
  • The consequences of displacement, however, extend far beyond military operations.
  • The Gutti Koya tribals, as they are known in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, have lived on illegally occupied forest land for nearly two decades, caught in a legal and administrative limbo.
  • With no national or international framework guiding the treatment of Internally Displaced People (IDPs) that India adheres to, these communities have been left vulnerable to exploitation, from state officials, local police, and even neighbouring tribals who view them as resource usurpers.
• Stateless due to Bureaucratic Apathy
  • Even though the Forest Rights Act (FRA) offers a legal recourse through Clause 3.1(m), which mandates the provision of alternative forest land for tribals displaced before December 13, 2005, its implementation remains dismal.
  • Displaced tribals in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana have submitted applications under this clause, but the Chhattisgarh government has neither processed them nor escalated the issue to the central authorities.
  • This bureaucratic inertia contrasts sharply with the proactive measures taken in the 2019 Bru Rehabilitation Plan, under which displaced Bru tribals were provided options and state support.
• Denial of Identity and Humanitarian Concerns
  • One of the most pressing issues facing these displaced tribals is the denial of tribal identity by host states.
  • Despite generations having grown up in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, state governments continue to treat them as ‘migrants’ rather than tribals, excluding them from essential entitlements and welfare benefits.
  • This classification not only strips them of legal protection but also perpetuates a cycle of poverty and marginalisation.
  • Though state representatives claim to offer limited humanitarian support, their actions, such as Telangana’s takeover of tribal farmlands for afforestation or Andhra Pradesh’s destruction of makeshift homes, reveal a systematic effort to push the tribals back to Chhattisgarh.
  • Meanwhile, judicial interventions have occasionally provided temporary relief, but a lack of political will for a comprehensive rehabilitation strategy means that most displaced tribals continue to live in uncertainty.
  • The younger generation, in particular, seeks stability, opportunity, and recognition in the states where they have spent most of their lives.

Conclusion

• The saga of the displaced Gond tribals is a stark reminder of the human cost of state security strategies and bureaucratic indifference.
• Their story is not just about migration or insurgency but about the fundamental rights to land, identity, and dignity.
• With the 2026 deadline for ending the Maoist insurgency approaching, it is imperative for the central and state governments to address the rehabilitation and recognition of these communities with the seriousness they deserve.
• A fair and compassionate policy framework, rooted in legal guarantees and inter-state cooperation, is essential, not only to correct historical wrongs but to build a more just and inclusive society.