The “SAMADHAN” Framework That Ended a Five Decade Insurgency in Tribal Districts of India

The Union Ministry of Home Affairs drafted a National policy and Action Plan for coordinated efforts to oversee the anti-LWE CAMPAIGN in 2015. It placed the MHA at the center of a whole- of-government action that included security operations, development delivery and inter-state coordination. As a follow-up of this policy and action plan, MHA articulated SAMADHAN doctrine that gave operational coherence to Naxal-Mukt campaign that had historically suffered from fragmentations.

In this way, the “SAMADHAN” Framework, introduced in May 2017 by the Ministry of Home Affairs, represents a monumental shift in how India handles Left-Wing Extremism (LWE), commonly known as the Naxalite or Maoist insurgency. For five decades, this conflict was described by Indian leadership as the nation’s “greatest internal security challenge,” spanning across a heavily forested swathe of tribal districts nicknamed the “Red Corridor.”

Rather than relying purely on fragmented military containment, the SAMADHAN doctrine unified security, technology, operational metrics, and economic development under a singular “whole-of-government” approach.

Deconstructing the SAMADHAN Acronym

The Hindi word samādhān translates directly to “solution” or “resolution.” The strategy functions as an eight-pillar mnemonic blueprint:

• S – Smart Leadership: Building a highly accountable, professional, and unified command structure across state and central armed police forces.
• A – Aggressive Strategy: Shifting from defensive containment to proactive, offensive operations to dismantle insurgent strongholds deep within the forests.
• M – Motivation and Training: Capacity building for ground troops and local state police, focusing on elite specialized units like CoBRA (Commando Battalion for Resolute Action) and local District Reserve Guards (DRG).
• A – Actionable Intelligence: Cultivating real-time, ground-level human intelligence alongside tech-based surveillance sharing between central agencies and state forces.
• D – Dashboard-Based Key Result Areas (KRAs) & KPIs: Utilizing modern data dashboards to rigidly track the performance of security operations, road construction, and welfare deployment.
• H – Harnessing Technology: Deploying Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs/drones), thermal imaging, satellite tracking, and encrypted communication systems to neutralize the geographic advantage of dense jungle terrains.
• A – Action Plan for Each Theatre: Designing customized operational tactics for distinct regions (e.g., the Bastar division in Chhattisgarh vs. areas in Jharkhand) rather than a rigid “one-size-fits-all” approach.
• N – No Access to Financing: Choking the financial lifelines of the insurgency. Using agencies like the National Investigation Agency (NIA) and Enforcement Directorate (ED) to systematically crack down on money laundering, extortion networks, and illegal levies collected from local mining and forestry.

The Strategic Reality: “Clear, Hold, and Build”

The physical implementation of SAMADHAN relies heavily on establishing a dense network of Forward Operating Bases (FOBs) in areas that were historically unmapped “no-go zones” (such as Abujhmad in Chhattisgarh).

• Clear: Elite tactical forces aggressively push into core insurgent territory to disrupt active cadres.
• Hold: Fortified police stations and military camps are permanently planted to plug the security vacuum, ensuring insurgents cannot regroup or reclaim the territory.
• Build: As soon as security forces secure an area, civil administration rushes in with “development saturation.” This involves building roads (via the Road Connectivity Project for LWE areas), installing mobile towers in communication dark zones, setting up bank branches and post offices to bypass cash-based extortion, and opening Eklavya Model Residential Schools to provide education to tribal youth.

Impact and Current Status

The paradigm shift brought about by this framework has dramatically altered the internal security landscape of India:

• Shrinking Footprint: The number of LWE-affected districts across India dropped from a peak of 126 in 2014 down to just 18 in recent years, with only a handful now classified as “most-affected.” The most affected districts drop to 6 in 2025 from 36 in 2014.
• Drastic Drop in Violence: Over a ten-year comparison block, total violent incidents dropped by over 50%, while casualties among security forces and civilians plummeted significantly whereas from 2021 to 2026, decline in LWE violence incidents is more than70%.
• States with Active LWE Presence: At the beginning of 2026, states with active LWE presence drops to only 3 from10 in 2014.
• Surrender & Rehabilitation: Robust state policies have incentivized thousands of active cadres to surrender voluntarily, offering them financial packages, stipends, and vocational training to reintegrate into mainstream society. Parliamentary briefings by the Ministry of Home Affairs in late 2025 indicated that total cumulative surrenders since 2019 had crossed 5,571 cadres, with more than 10,000 surrenders recorded between 2015 and 2026.

The Dual Narrative: Security vs. Tribal Rights

While the government celebrates the framework for effectively dismantling the armed command structures of the insurgency and establishing long-absent infrastructure, the strategy faces sharp critiques from human rights defenders and tribal advocacy groups.

Critics argue that the “Aggressive Strategy” and performance-driven metrics on the ground can lead to collateral damage, including the wrongful arrest of tribal activists under anti-terror laws (like UAPA), displacement of indigenous populations (Adivasis), and instances of human rights violations. Analysts widely emphasize that while kinetic operations can eliminate the armed threat, lasting peace will ultimately depend on protecting tribal land rights through the strict implementation of the PESA Act (1996) and the Forest Rights Act (2006), giving local Gram Sabhas (village councils) true autonomy over their resources.

Way forward

• The 31^st March 2026, declaration was not an accidental event but the result of a sustained, system-driven transformation, under the SAMADHAN framework where intelligence took the lead, security forces worked in tandem, and political will stayed firm, along with institutional coordination.  Along with this success, it requires acknowledging what still remains to be dealt with.
• Approximately 675-armed Maoist cadre continues to operate in small pockets of Gachibowli, Bastar and southern Jharkhand. At the same time, the LWE ideological ecosystem has started migrating to urban areas’ Its mutation through digital platform and other frontal organizations in urban areas equally needs sustained response.
• The gains, so far in this direction, needs to be consolidated through a post – insurgency rehabilitation and developmental mechanism. It includes deep development investment, transparent governance penetration, resolution of forest and land rights in LWE- affected area, and continued vigilance against ideological revival.

The anti- LWE campaign under SAMADHAN was never about military success only. Its deeper purpose was to attain peaceful and protective environment, for those Indian citizens who had been denied them for half a century. That unfinished work of Governance, justice and inclusion in the tribal heartland, is the final chapter of The SAMADHAN framework.