A deadly intersection

When subversion intersects with an insurgency, the movement shifts from purely armed confrontation to a broader strategy designed to weaken the state from within. The classical insurgency doctrine emphasises that militant violence alone rarely defeats a state; in fact, an armed struggle combined with political, psychological, economic and informational tools erodes legitimacy and fractures institutional cohesion of a country. Subversion therefore operates as a parallel line of action alongside insurgent attacks.

While militant operations aim to sap the strength of security forces with an attrition mindset, subversion targets governance credibility, public trust and administrative functionality of a state with the ultimate result of making cheap human resource – male and female, young and old – available for recruitment. Unless the state and its institutions take drastic short-and-long-term measures, this deadly intersection may continue to create local, sub national, national and international ripples, thus presenting multifarious challenges to the existence of a state.

At its core, subversion attacks legitimacy of a state rather than its territory. Insurgent movements amplify grievances to portray the state as unjust or incapable to address public needs. Through propaganda, rumour networks and narrative manipulation, they attempt to shape perception before changing the environment of the battlefield. When segments of the population begin to question state authority, insurgents gain recruitment opportunities, energise passive support networks, and maintain monopoly of control over local intelligence access.

A strong patriarchal society starts showing signs of matriarchal sublimity as subdued sections become so active and charged that they start goading the male members to take up arms in all possible means to join hands with insurgents hiding in crevices, river beds and mountains in the regions. As a result, women arrange funerals of the dead, conduct road blocks and stage demonstrations at various points at national and sub national levels.

Subversion also manifests itself through infiltration and influence. The sympathisers of insurgents attempt to penetrate student organisations, dominate civil society platforms, overshadow professional associations, or radicalise lower administrative tiers. The objective is not always immediate sabotage; often it is to shape discourse, slow decision-making, or create friction between state institutions and communities. In some cases, insider threats emerge through compromised individuals within security or development sectors. Such penetration enables information leakage, operational compromise or targeted intimidation of those cooperating with the state. The civil administration and its structures are run over by insurgents without any resistance.

Economic disruption forms another critical component of subversion. Insurgents always target infrastructure projects, transport networks, energy installations or foreign investment initiatives. By attacking development schemes, they aim to signal that the state cannot protect economic progress. This not only discourages investment but also reinforces narratives of instability. Extortion and coercive taxation further serve to finance insurgent operations while demonstrating alternative authority structures in contested areas. In the end, the insurgents get a hefty share in mining, development schemes, smuggling and precious minerals as well.

Usually subversion is evolved in phases. Initially, it may pivot on grievance articulation and narrative framing. In this phase the local population is demoralised from state actions and is attracted towards insurgency. As the insurgent movement matures, it expands into targeting military to undermine confidence of LEAs. It can be termed as destabilisation phase. In its advanced stage, insurgents seek to establish control in certain regions or districts, thus exerting coercive influence while contesting state authority.

The state needs to come out of its reactive mode. It must strike the core of insurgent leadership. The external support linkages and their connecting points are to be blocked effectively. A complex strategy needs to be evolved through police and LEAs to deal with this deadly intersection.