Drone Attacks on Myanmar Rebels

Recent claims by various anti-India rebel groups operating from Myanmar, notably the United Liberation Front of Asom-Independent (ULFA-I) and the Revolutionary People's Front (RPF) of Manipur, of targeted drone attacks by the Indian Army on their camps in Myanmar's Sagaing region have ignited a fresh controversy. While the rebel outfits have provided detailed accounts of the alleged strikes and claimed casualties, the Indian Army has vehemently denied any involvement, adding another layer of complexity to the already volatile border region.

The Allegations: A Coordinated Drone Offensive?

On Sunday, July 13, 2025, ULFA-I, led by Paresh Baruah, issued statements claiming that the Indian Army had carried out multiple waves of drone attacks on their "mobile camps" in Myanmar between 2 AM and 4 AM. The outfit alleged that over 150 drones, reportedly of Israeli and French make, were used in these pre-dawn strikes. ULFA-I specifically claimed the deaths of three senior members – Nayan Asom, Ganesh Asom, and Pradip Asom – with Ganesh and Pradip allegedly killed in a second strike while attending Nayan's funeral. The outfit also reported 19 members wounded and stated that the attacks occurred across a stretch of the India-Myanmar border, adjoining Longwa in Nagaland and Pangsau Pass in Arunachal Pradesh.

Separately, the RPF, the political wing of Manipur's People's Liberation Army (PLA), also claimed that Indian security forces dropped bombs using high-end drones, targeting four ULFA-I camps and a joint camp of ULFA-I and RPF. While RPF claimed no casualties on its side, it corroborated the death of ULFA-I's Nayan Asom. Both groups have contested the Indian Army's denials, asserting that residents of the border belt in Arunachal Pradesh could testify to the attacks.

India's Official Denials

In response to these serious allegations, the Indian Army has issued firm denials. A spokesperson for the Ministry of Defence, Lt Col Mahendra Rawat, stated, "There are no inputs with the Indian Army on such an operation." Similarly, the Assam Chief Minister and state police have denied any involvement or knowledge of operations against the outfit from Assam's soil, stating that clarity would emerge as more information arrived from the remote border areas. These official denials maintain India's long-standing policy of not confirming cross-border military operations, even when such actions are widely speculated or alleged by the targeted groups.

Analysis: Navigating a Complex Border Landscape

The alleged drone attacks and India's subsequent denials highlight the multifaceted and often clandestine nature of security operations along the porous India-Myanmar border. Several factors contribute to this complexity:

• Insurgent Sanctuaries in Myanmar: For decades, insurgent groups from India's Northeast, including ULFA-I, NSCN-K (YA), PLA, and others, have exploited the ungoverned or loosely governed territories in Myanmar, particularly in the Sagaing region and the Naga Hills. These areas, characterized by dense forests and difficult terrain, serve as bases for training, recuperation, and planning hit-and-run attacks into Indian territory.
• India's "Hot Pursuit" Doctrine and Cross-Border Operations: While officially unacknowledged, India has a history of conducting cross-border operations against these insurgent groups in Myanmar. Notable instances, though often denied or vaguely acknowledged, have occurred in the past, reflecting India's consistent security imperative to neutralize threats emanating from across the border. The use of drones, if confirmed, would mark a significant technological escalation in these efforts, offering precision and minimizing risk to ground troops.
• Myanmar's Internal Turmoil: The ongoing civil war in Myanmar, following the 2021 military coup, has severely destabilized the country. The military junta (Tatmadaw) is engaged in widespread conflict with numerous ethnic armed organizations (EAOs) and People's Defence Forces (PDFs). This breakdown of state control has created a chaotic environment where various armed groups operate with increased impunity, and allegiances can shift. A source in the security establishment, while confirming casualties in the ULFA-I camps, suggested that the attacks "could plausibly originate from Myanmar's own ethnic armed organizations, or even the Myanmar military, rather than by Indian forces." This points to the possibility of proxy warfare or opportunistic attacks amidst the broader conflict within Myanmar.
• The Element of Deniability: For both India and Myanmar, maintaining plausible deniability regarding cross-border operations is a strategic necessity. Acknowledging such attacks could lead to diplomatic repercussions, violate international sovereignty principles, and potentially escalate tensions. The ambiguity allows for flexible responses to security threats without direct political fallout.
• China's Influence and Regional Geopolitics: China also has significant interests and influence in Myanmar, including relationships with some ethnic armed groups. Some analysts suggest that India's alleged kinetic actions could be seen as a challenge to China's "deniability model" and its strategic reach into Myanmar's border regions. The presence of Chinese-made drones, if accurate, further complicates the narrative.
• Impact on Peace Processes: The alleged attacks, particularly on ULFA-I, could have implications for peace processes in Northeast India. While a faction of ULFA has signed a peace deal, the Paresh Baruah-led ULFA-I has refused talks without a discussion on "sovereign Assam." Any perceived military action could either compel them to talks or push them further into belligerence.

Conclusion

The claims of drone attacks on anti-India rebel groups in Myanmar, met with official denials from India, underscore the intricate security challenges along the Indo-Myanmar border. While the Indian Army's official stance is clear, the allegations themselves highlight the constant pressure on India's security forces to counter cross-border insurgency. The ongoing civil war in Myanmar adds a layer of complexity, making it difficult to ascertain the exact perpetrator of such attacks with absolute certainty. This situation necessitates continued vigilance, sophisticated intelligence gathering, and a nuanced diplomatic approach from India to manage its eastern border and protect its national interests without overtly compromising international relations.