Red Terrorism Splits? Recent Rift Exposes Cracks in the Red Fortress

 

Is the 60-year reign of armed terror, loot, mass violence, kidnappings, destruction of public infrastructure and extra-judicial killings finally approaching its end? Are the red terrorists preparing to lay down arms?

 

 

 

Sonu, a senior Maoist leader long associated with the propaganda wing of the party, recently issued a letter acknowledging that conditions have changed both nationally and globally. He admitted that the Maoists are increasingly isolated, losing cadres, and facing unprecedented pressure from security forces. According to him, it is time to “temporarily surrender arms” and initiate talks with the Government.

 

Sonu even attempted to invoke the name of the late Basavaraju, the former general secretary, to add weight to his position. But make no mistake, this appears less about ideology and more about survival. Many of Sonu’s close family members, including his wife, have already surrendered, and his own fear of being cornered is clearly visible between the lines of his appeal.

 

 

 

In contrast, Devuji, the present general secretary and military head of the Maoists, has outright rejected any notion of surrender. In a fiery statement released by the party’s central committees, surrender was branded as “treason,” and Sonu’s stance was denounced as betrayal.

 

Devuji insists that only through the “barrel of the gun” can the Maoist agenda survive, despite decades of failure, bloodshed, and atrocities inflicted on poor tribal communities within their so-called “liberated zones.”

 

 

The first letter, written on 15 August and released on 17 September, by Sonu stated that the Communist Party of India (Maoist) was ready to “temporarily surrender arms” and enter “peace talks” with the Centre. It claimed that slain general secretary Basavaraju had also supported the idea of laying down arms.

 

A rebuttal soon followed in the form of a second letter released on 19 September by the Telangana state committee of the Maoists, which asserted that Sonu’s statement represented only his personal opinion. This letter was signed by Jagan, the state committee spokesperson.

 

 

A third letter, issued on behalf of the Central Committee, Politburo and Dandakaranya Special Zonal Committee, went further, calling Sonu’s position “treason” and ruling out surrender entirely. It declared: “It is not our policy to betray the oppressed people by surrendering weapons to the enemy and joining the mainstream.”

 

 

Speaking to the media, a top intelligence official explained, “These letters reveal the ‘two-line struggle’ within the party. One section believes it is time to lay down arms, while the other insists on fighting with renewed vigour.”

 

The latest Central Committee letter, issued under Devuji’s influence, argued: “The changing international and domestic circumstances do not indicate an abandonment of the armed struggle. On the contrary, they prove the necessity of continuing armed struggle.”

 

Devuji, who carries a bounty of Rs 1 crore, hails from Jagtial in Telangana. Sonu, also with a Rs 1 crore bounty, comes from Peddapalli in Telangana. Sources revealed that the tussle between these two factions has been ongoing for over a year.

 

Sonu’s wife, Tarakka, surrendered in Maharashtra a year ago, while his brother Kishenji’s wife, P Padmavati, surrendered in Telangana in September. In 2024, the Maoist Politburo itself admitted in an internal document that its ranks were “weak” and should consider “retreat.”

 

 

The so-called “people’s war” has delivered nothing but violence, fear and misery. Now, even its leaders cannot agree on whether to continue this futile bloodshed.

 

The so-called “revolutionary movement” of CPI (Maoist) stands at a crossroads of defeat and disintegration. Sonu and Devuji have openly clashed over the organisation’s future - whether to surrender before the Indian state or continue their failed path of armed violence.

 

This open split within the Maoist leadership is an unprecedented development in the history of the movement. It signifies either the beginning of a collapse in their terror strategy, or a new ploy to sustain violence under the guise of red vigilance.