Political Economy of Insurgency
The political economy of insurgency examines the relationship between violence, politics, and economic structures in conflict-affected societies. In Jammu and Kashmir, insurgency cannot be understood solely as an ideological or political movement; it is also deeply embedded in economic conditions, resource flows, institutional breakdown, and material incentives. Insurgency here has both political motivations and economic consequences, and over time it has generated its own economy that sustains conflict.
Analyzing insurgency through a political economy lens helps move beyond moral or security-centric explanations and focuses instead on how conflict is produced, financed, and reproduced.
Political Economy: An Analytical Framework
Political economy studies how power and resources are distributed and contested within society. Applied to insurgency, it highlights:
- Economic grievances that fuel rebellion
- Material incentives that sustain violence
- Institutional weaknesses that enable conflict economies
- Interactions between state, non-state actors, and external forces
Insurgency thus emerges not only from political alienation but also from economic disruptions and opportunities created by conflict.
Structural Economic Conditions in Jammu and Kashmir
Prior to the rise of insurgency, Jammu and Kashmir exhibited several structural economic vulnerabilities:
- Limited industrial development
- High dependence on state employment
- Regional economic disparities
- Restricted private investment due to political uncertainty
While these conditions alone did not cause insurgency, they created a context in which political frustration overlapped with economic insecurity, especially among educated youth.
Unemployment, Youth, and Economic Marginalization
One of the most significant political-economic factors in the insurgency has been youth unemployment. A growing educated population faced:
- Shrinking job opportunities
- Patronage-based recruitment
- Weak private-sector growth
In this environment, insurgent groups offered:
- Financial support
- Social status and recognition
- A sense of purpose and belonging
Thus, economic marginalization interacted with political grievances to facilitate recruitment.
Insurgency Financing and Resource Flows
Insurgencies require sustained financial resources. In Jammu and Kashmir, funding networks included:
- External financial support
- Informal economic channels
- Donations and coercive extraction
These resource flows transformed insurgency into a structured enterprise, enabling long-term operations. The availability of funds also intensified competition among militant groups and prolonged violence.
Conflict Economy and the Normalization of Violence
Over time, insurgency generated a conflict economy, where violence itself became economically consequential. This included:
- Expansion of informal and shadow economies
- War-time profiteering
- Dependence on security-related expenditures
For some actors, continued instability became materially beneficial, reducing incentives for peace. Conflict thus shifted from being a means to a political end to becoming an end in itself.
State Response and Economic Consequences
The state’s counter-insurgency response significantly shaped the political economy of conflict. Prolonged militarization resulted in:
- Diversion of resources from development to security
- Disruption of tourism, trade, and agriculture
- Increased dependency on central financial transfers
While security spending created some local employment, it also entrenched economic dependency and distorted development priorities.
Governance, Corruption, and Institutional Decay
Conflict weakened governance institutions, creating spaces for:
- Corruption and rent-seeking
- Informal power brokers
- Parallel authority structures
Weak accountability allowed both state and non-state actors to exploit economic opportunities generated by conflict. This institutional decay further alienated citizens and reduced faith in democratic governance.
External Political Economy of Insurgency
Insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir has also been shaped by external political economy dynamics. Regional geopolitics influenced:
- Flow of arms and resources
- Training and logistical support
- Internationalization of the conflict
External involvement not only intensified violence but also altered local economic incentives, embedding the conflict within broader geopolitical rivalries.
Insurgency, Displacement, and Livelihood Disruption
Violence and insecurity led to:
- Internal displacement
- Loss of livelihoods
- Breakdown of local markets
Displacement altered labor patterns and reinforced dependence on aid and state support. These economic disruptions deepened social inequalities and prolonged post-conflict recovery.
Insurgency as a Developmental Trap
From a political economy perspective, insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir created a developmental trap, where:
- Underdevelopment fueled conflict
- Conflict prevented development
This circular relationship made peace increasingly difficult, as economic recovery depended on stability, while stability required economic inclusion.
Beyond Economic Reductionism
While economic factors are crucial, insurgency cannot be reduced to material incentives alone. Political aspirations, identity, and historical grievances remain central. However, political economy analysis shows how economic structures sustain and institutionalize violence, even when original political goals become blurred.
Conclusion
The political economy of insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir reveals that conflict is sustained not only by ideology or identity, but also by economic incentives, resource flows, and institutional weaknesses. Insurgency emerged from political alienation but persisted through the creation of a conflict economy that benefited certain actors and entrenched instability.
Addressing insurgency therefore requires more than security operations. It demands:
- Inclusive economic development
- Employment generation and youth engagement
- Institutional reform and accountability
- De-linking livelihoods from violence
Without transforming the underlying political economy, insurgency risks reproducing itself even when overt violence declines. The experience of Jammu and Kashmir demonstrates that peace and development are mutually constitutive, and neither can be sustained without the other.
References
- Bose, Sumantra. Kashmir: Roots of Conflict, Paths to Peace
- Collier, Paul & Hoeffler, Anke. “Greed and Grievance in Civil War”
- Keen, David. The Economic Functions of Violence in Civil Wars
- Schofield, Victoria. Kashmir in Conflict
- World Bank reports on conflict and development
