Ex-Maoist Leader Points to Internal Rifts and Intelligence Failures in Movement's Decline
In a detailed account, senior former Maoist leader Thippiri Tirupathi, known as Devji, has outlined the key factors that led to the weakening of the Maoist movement in India. Speaking from Hyderabad, Devji emphasized that the decline was not due to a single event but a combination of delayed political decisions, internal leadership conflicts, betrayal by informants, and an expanding intelligence network that allowed security forces to infiltrate the organization.
Political and Moral Dilemmas Following Arrest
Devji revealed that his arrest by Telangana police created a significant political and moral dilemma for him. "As a party leader, I should go to jail," he stated, but added that imprisonment would leave him unable to communicate with the leadership, cadre, or the public. He insisted that the decision to surrender arms was not driven by fear, countering claims that fear of death motivated such actions. "If we were really afraid of death, we would come and surrender earlier like Sonu and Ashanna," he said, referring to recent operations where resistance was maintained until the end.
Leadership Rifts and Allegations of Betrayal
Devji blamed senior leaders Mallaojula Venugopal alias Sonu and Takkellapalli Vasudeva Rao alias Ashanna for deepening divisions within the party. According to him, the split was neither a power struggle nor a caste issue but widened after the launch of Operation Kagar. He alleged that some leaders lost confidence in continuing the armed struggle, with Sonu proposing surrender due to fear of death. "He claims this was discussed in the central committee, but that is a distortion and a falsehood," Devji asserted.
He recalled that the party leadership opposed such moves, urging leaders not to split the party or hand over weapons to the enemy. However, he alleged that these leaders nevertheless "split the party and handed over weapons." Devji also rejected claims that former general secretary Nambala Keshava Rao alias Basavaraj had agreed to lay down arms, calling such statements falsehoods.
Failed Adaptation and Organizational Challenges
Devji admitted that the party failed to adapt to changing social realities and aspirations, particularly outside its traditional rural base. In a 2020 review, they acknowledged an inability to design programmes that matched the evolving aspirations of different sections of society. "While society, production relations, and aspirations change, we couldn't mobilise urban people, employees, students, or intellectuals. We became limited to the forests and the Adivasis," he explained.
The party attempted to rethink both political and military strategies, including expanding legal and public forms of mobilisation. In regions like Dandakaranya, where about 2.2 lakh police and paramilitary forces were deployed, plans were made to decentralize into smaller 'civil teams' across wider areas. However, Devji conceded that "we failed to implement these decisions correctly," comparing the scale of operations against the organization to "using a Brahmasthra on a sparrow."
Intelligence Penetration and Informer Threats
Long-term intelligence penetration was cited as another major factor behind setbacks, including the killing of Basavaraj. Devji alleged that rising consumerism and financial incentives led some individuals to become informers. He detailed how members of the 7th company, responsible for Basavaraj's protection, "got scared and told the enemy about his location and movements," later guiding security forces during the attack.
Devji distinguished between informers and 'coverts', defining coverts as anyone working with the enemy from within the party. He clarified that while coverts were involved, they did not directly provide information to kill Basavaraj, stating, "We didn't say in the past, nor are we saying now, that these people gave information to kill BR (Basavaraj)."
Whereabouts of Veteran Leader Ganapathi
On the whereabouts of veteran Maoist leader Muppalla Lakshmana Rao alias Ganapathi, Devji revealed that even the party does not know his location. "Whether he is inside or outside is something even we don't know," he said, explaining that security measures for certain individuals were kept extremely secret, limited only to the general secretary. This secrecy means that no one, including Devji or other leaders, is aware of Ganapathi's current status.
Overall Decline and Future Implications
Devji concluded that the movement's decline resulted from a combination of delayed political decisions, organizational splits, loss of wider social support, and sustained state pressure. "Society changes constantly. If we don't provide a matching programme and slogans to mobilise millions, the movement regresses. This, combined with constant, relentless repression, led to this state," he added, highlighting the multifaceted challenges that contributed to the weakening of the Maoist movement in India.
