In a curious twist of insurgent narrative, the banned outfit United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA-Independent), led by its leader Paresh Baruah, recently publicised an armed attack on one of its own camps – allegedly carried out by Indian security forces, possibly using drones & short range missiles.

This revelation did not come from any official Indian military source claiming success. Instead, it came directly from ULFA. The group named the deceased, released visuals, and ensured widespread circulation through Assamese media via long phone-ins and detailed statements.

At first glance, the move appears puzzling. Why would a militant organisation, which thrives on the mystique of strength and operational secrecy, so openly announce its own setback? Why expose its vulnerabilities and draw attention to its casualties?

The answer may lie not in weakness, but in a calculated strategic move – one that transforms a tactical loss into a powerful political and psychological play, making ULFA relevant again both in domestic as well as regional geo politics.

Guerrilla warfare thrives on propaganda and perception, and this week, ULFA nailed both with precision.

Controlling the narrative

By being the first to announce the attack, ULFA effectively seized the narrative. In conflict zones, who tells the story often matters more than the story itself. By controlling the flow of information, ULFA flipped the script: it projected itself not as a decaying outfit under siege, but as a significant enough force to warrant a cross-border strike.

The very fact that the Indian security establishment allegedly felt the need to launch such an operation inadvertently validates ULFA’s lingering threat. This announcement, therefore, functions less as a confession of weakness and more as a reaffirmation of relevance.

Moreover, it allowed the group to play the victim card. Framing itself as the subject of an unprovoked attack, ULFA rekindles old sentiments about Assamese sovereignty, Indian aggression, and a centrist government.

This may serve to stir dormant sympathies, especially among segments of the population disillusioned with state institutions.

The shadow of retaliation

The timing of the disclosure is also significant. Assam is on the cusp of a major election season, and the state government is aggressively promoting a narrative of stability, investment, and development. A destabilising event – real or perceived – could threaten this image. Even a minor act of violence, such as a small explosion or a targeted attack, could derail the momentum.

This looming threat of retaliation, which ULFA has not explicitly confirmed but implied through its communication strategy, grants the group immense psychological leverage. Without firing another shot, it can hold the state hostage to anticipation and fear, thereby entering an indirect bargaining position.

What that bargaining involves – amnesty, negotiations, safe passage or something materialistic – remains speculative. But ULFA has ensured the space for it now exists.

A new geopolitical play

There is also an international dimension to this strategy. ULFA’s historic ties with countries like Bangladesh and its operational bases in Myanmar have always kept the outfit entangled in regional geopolitics.

With Myanmar descending further into chaos and the possibility of a less India-friendly government in Bangladesh, ULFA’s declaration acts as a signal flare to foreign players interested in counterbalancing India’s regional dominance.

In global power games, insurgent groups often serve as proxies or pressure points. By publicising the attack, ULFA positions itself as a victimised nationalist force, potentially opening doors to new backers or reviving old ones. This rebranding from a forgotten insurgent outfit to a persecuted player in a contested region can be a valuable asset in the international arena.

Moreover for China also Bangladesh will be a fine buffer state to handle ULFA for any long term use.

The veteran’s last move?

At the heart of this entire spectacle is Paresh Baruah – aging but clearly not irrelevant. For someone who has led the group through decades of tactical highs and lows, this might be one of his final big plays. He appears to be leveraging both domestic and international perceptions to rebuild the narrative around ULFA as a force that cannot be ignored.

The attack, whether successful from a military standpoint or not, has allowed ULFA to regain visibility. It reminds both the Indian state and external players that the group is still breathing, still watching, and still capable of altering the equation – at least psychologically, if not militarily.

The repositioning

What seems like a defeat has been used for strategic repositioning. ULFA has managed to turn vulnerability into strategic capital, using narrative, timing, and perception as weapons.

In doing so, it has signaled strength through loss, fear through silence, and relevance through victimhood. In the complex chessboard of insurgency and statecraft, this may well be one of Paresh Baruah’s most subtle – and effective – moves.

Never before in its history has ULFA received such widespread global media attention. This spotlight– sparked not by a dramatic attack but by a self-publicised setback – has catapulted the outfit back into strategic discourse, both domestically and internationally.

In a world increasingly veering toward conflict over consensus, such visibility enables ULFA to reassert itself as a relevant player, capable of calling the shots in new theatres of disruption.

Mrinal Talukdar is one of the seniormost journalists in the Northeast region, with nearly four decades covering the region. He is currently the Consulting Editor of Pratidin Time.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.