UPSC IAS exam preparation - Post-Independence India - Lecture 8

Excellent study material for all civil services aspirants - begin learning - Kar ke dikhayenge!

Regionalism in India

1.0 Introduction

India is a large country having continental dimensions and comprising 29 States and 7 Union Territories. It is a multi-racial, multi-lingual nation. There are scores of regional languages, various strains of culture and different loyalties, single as well as multiple. Amidst the amazing diversities, it is natural that regional feelings, regional parties, regional institutions and similar other organizations meant for voicing the aspirations of local people and providing forums for them, should emerge. Indeed, with the passage of years, the multi-faceted aspirations, which together may be described as regionalism, have gained strength.

Advocates of smaller States argue that smaller size facilitates better administration and better development. This is in contrast to Nehru's idea that "small States make small minds". He batted for multi-lingual and multi-cultural States when faced with the problem of re-organization of provinces after independence. He was willing to concede the demand of any individual language as the basis for formation of a separate State on merit, but did not accept that the principle could be adopted for wholesale re-organization of provinces. That itself was reversal of the Congress stand on linguistic States during the Freedom Movement.

There have always been contradictory views on the formation of linguistic States in India. Even the States Re-organization Committee's Report, which is erroneously considered as the report on linguistic States, did not endorse the linguistic principle in toto. While recommending separate State for some major languages like Telugu, Tamil, Kannada, Marathi, Malayalam, and Bengali, it presented a case for both linguistic and multi-linguistic States. Pressures for integration and not linguistic principle decided the cases of over 550 princely States that merged with India.

The linguistic principle, from the beginning was not for "one language, one State", but for "one State, one language". Explaining this position, B R Ambedkar worked out several safeguards against what was termed as "linguistic communalism" that was strongly emerging with great expectations in free India. The presence of linguistic minorities in a unilingual State was unavoidable throughout India despite demarking State boundaries at the village level.

Besides this, no linguistic group has ever been a unified or a homogeneous group. The population of all major language-based States exhibits several dissensions within on account of unequal development and opportunities open to different regions within the linguistic region.

2.0 Major Causes for Regionalism

There are various reasons for its emergence of regionalism in Indian politics such as :

The administrative policies and decisions as well as the developmental plans taken at the national level may not satisfy all people of the country and these people, who remain dissatisfied, may feel that their interest are not properly safeguarded. In such a context they form the regional parties to solve their own problems. That was how the regional parties like D.M.K, A.D.M.K. the National Conference of Jammu and Kashmir etc. were formed.
India is still not free from ethnic, racial and religious orthodoxy. Sometimes the Regionalism in Indian Politics emerge on these ethnic, racial or religious grounds. That was how the Hindu Mahashava, Ramrajya Parishad, Siromani Akali Dal, the Muslim League or even the Tele Desham party was formed.
Sometimes the Regionalism in Indian Politics are formed on language issues as well. The D.M.K, A.D.M.K. parties of Tamil Nadu, the Telengana Praja Samiti of Andhra Pradesh or the Gorkha League of West Bengal etc. was formed on the basis of this language issue.
Sometimes the regional political parties are formed on the initiative of one or a few political leaders. However, these types of regional parties usually do not last long. They generally extinguish when the leader himself dies.
Sometimes the Regionalism in Indian Politics are formed to safeguard the minority interests. The Muslim League, the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha, the TYC etc. belong to this category of the regional political parties.
Sometimes the internal conflicts of the big national parties may pave the ground for the rise of the regional political parties. That was how the Congress party was divided into several small parties like Congress for democracy, Congress (J) etc.
Sometimes a leader of a big national party, if ousted from his other original party, forms a regional party to express his or her grievances. That was how Sri Ajoy Mukherjee formed the Bangla Congress or Sm. Mamata Banerjee formed the Trinamul Congress in Bengal.
The regional political parties formulate their policies and programmes on the basis of the regional demands, grievances and interests of the people. Naturally they pin with them the confidence and loyalty of the people. The National parties to try to utilize this confidence and loyalty of the people for their own sinister interest. Thus they form Coalitions and Fronts and the Leftist and right political parties appear as strange bed fellows. This has made the regional parties gain a lot of importance and confidence.
During the pre-independence days people fought for the country's freedom and a unique sense of oneness, a sense of nationalism had flared up in them which had strengthened the solidarity and integrity of the nation. But after independence that burning sense of nationalism has evaporated and a narrow sense to regional interest has developed. This has also paved the grounds for the emergence of regional political parties.

Lastly, the general decadence of values, too much centralization of power, dictatorial role of the leaders, negligence to the regional leadership etc. in the national parties have not only weakened their status but also facilitated the rise of numbers of regional political parties both big and small, in India.

2.1 Regional politics

Regionalism in Indian Politics become a striking feature of the Indian political party system. The rise of regional political parties have played significant role in the regional, state and even national politics of our democratic country.

After the first general election of 1952 the Election Commission had declared 19 political parties as regional parties. In fact, the regional political parties have become a part and parcel of Indian political system.

A regional political party confines its activities within the boundary of a often represents the interest of a particular regional group, language group, ethnic group or cultural group. While forming their policies these regional political parties have often shown ideological integrity. They are generally not interested in taking parts in national politics. Rather sometimes they show militant attitude towards the national politics or to the Central Government. While showing this militant attitude they often get themselves engaged in unscrupulous political activities. Yet while they themselves come into power in their respective regions or states they perform political activities with tremendous responsibility.

The most noteworthy examples of these regional political parties are the D.M.K. and A.D.M.K of Tamil Nadu, the Telegu Desham of Andhra Pradesh, the National Conference Party of Jammu and Kashmir, the Akali Dal (party) of Punjab, the Trinamul Congress of West Bengal, the CPIM of West Bengal, the Assam Gana Parishad of Assam, the Gorkha League of Darjeeling in West Bengal etc.

It is also striking that, now-a-days, both in their political activities and range of their success, many a national political parties have taken the character of the regional parties. They also share their regional parties especially in the affairs and problems having all Indian importance. Even the Indian National Congress Party itself has more or less, taken the character of regional political party.

3.0 MOVEMENTS IN INDIA

3.1 Bodoland (Assam)

Bodos (also known as 'Kacharis') are the largest group of Assam's plains tribes. The All-Bodo Students Union (ABSU), the most influential organisation campaigning for a separate Bodo homeland, defined the term 'Bodo' as those who speak or are supposed to have one spoken language belonging to the Bodo group.

In the 1960s the plains tribal people of Assam formed the Plains Tribal Council of Assam (PTCA) and launched in 1967 a popular movement with the demand for a new state for all the plains tribes of Assam to be called 'Udayachal' on the north bank of Brahmaputra. But the PTCA gave up agitation for a separate homeland after it joined the Janata government in 1978-79.

In the mean time an anti-alien movement in Assam under the All-Assam Students Union (AASU) began in 1979 which lasted for six years which was opposed by ABSU. The Asom Gana Parishad (AGP) government, which was formed by ex-AASU leaders after signing the 'Assam Accord' in 1985, did not try Upendra Nath Brahma to think about some alternatives. When the ABSU under Upendra Nath Brahma [ABSU (UB)] failed to bring in the other plains tribes for a new movement, it decided to move ahead on its own and they gave up the earlier vague demand for a 'tribal homeland' in favour of a full-fledged state of 'Bodoland' for the plains tribals.

In today's trend of politics several themes have been overlapping with each other in such a complex way that one observer cannot easily explicate the particularly of a single theme. Whether it is regarding multiculturalism or pluralism, whether it is recognition or it is difference, the inherent complexity has always kept the analyzer away from the theme. It is in this context, convenient to state that the politics of recognition, being not exceptional has been a dominant theme in the arena of contemporary politics and has interconnections with identity, multiculturalism and of course with difference.

There are minority groups demanding recognition of their identity and accommodation of their cultural differences. Recognition is required in order to have an undistorted identity as minorities often feel depreciated in relation to the majority. As Taylor asserts that the politics of difference must be based on mutual respect of the right to culture of each group: the right of the minority to preserve its cultural integrity and resist its assimilation by a dominant or majority identity. In this regard the Bodos of Assam and their struggle for a separate Bodoland is such an instance which incorporates many broad things viz. recognition, assimilation, identity, etc. The Bodo people from the very beginning opposed the assimilation strategies of the greater Assamese identity as they have a distinct language and culture. Recognition of their distinct identity would help them to assert their aspirations and most importantly difference. But the successive failures of the greater composite Assamese umbrella to accommodate the demands of the Bodos had further aggravated the situation and consequently massive launch of movement. Formation of BLT and NDFB (later periods) has provided the required impetus for the dissenting voices. Rest is the prolonged agitations by both BLT and NDFB in the 80s, 90s.

Though opposition by BLT ended as a result of Bodo Accord II of 2003, yet their other representative namely NDFB never ended their struggle considering the fact that the accord II had never satisfied the needs of the community. The present scenario witnesses the continuous violent agitation by this group in reaction to the insufficient commitments of the government of Assam.

3.2 The Telangana movement

The region, now being called Telangana, was part of the erstwhile Hyderabad state which was merged into the Indian Union on September 17, 1948. Central government appointed a civil servant, M K Vellodi, as the first Chief Minister of Hyderabad state on 26 January 1950. In 1952, Burgula Ramakrishna Rao was elected Chief Minister of Hyderabad state in the first democratic election. Andhra was the first state to be carved out (from erstwhile Madras state) on linguistic basis on November 1, 1953. It had Kurnool town (in Rayalaseema region) as its capital after the death of Potti Sriramulu who sat on a 53-day fast-unto-death demanding the new state. The proposal for amalgamation of Hyderabad state with Andhra state came up in 1953 and the then Chief Minister of Hyderabad state, Burgula Ramakrishna Rao, supported the Congress central leadership's decision in this regard though there was opposition in Telangana region. Accepting the merger proposal, Andhra assembly passed a resolution on November 25, 1955 promising to safeguard the interests of Telangana. An agreement was reached between Telangana leaders and Andhra leaders on February 20, 1956 to merge Telangana and Andhra with promises to safeguard Telangana's interests. A "Gentlemen's Agreement" was then signed by Bezawada Gopala Reddy and Burgula Ramakrishna Rao to the effect. Eventually, under the States Re-organisation Act, Telugu-speaking areas of Hyderabad state were merged with Andhra state, giving birth to the state of Andhra Pradesh on November 1, 1956. The city of Hyderabad, the then capital of Hyderabad state, was made the capital of Andhra Pradesh state. In 1969, an agitation began in Telangana region as people protested the failure to implement the Gentlemen's Agreement and other safeguards properly.

Marri Channa Reddy launched the Telangana Praja Samiti espousing the cause of a separate state. The agitation intensified and turned violent with students in the forefront of the struggle and about 300 of them were killed in violence and police firing that ensued. Following several rounds of talks with leaders of the two regions, the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi came up with an eight-point plan on April 12, 1969. Telangana leaders rejected the plan and protests continued under the aegis of Telangana Praja Samiti. In 1972, Jai Andhra movement started in Andhra-Rayalaseema regions as a counter to Telangana struggle. On September 21, 1973, a political settlement was reached with the Centre and a 6-point formula put in place to placate people of the two regions. In 1985, employees from Telangana region cried foul over appointments in government departments and complained about 'injustice' done to people of the region.

The then Telugu Desam Party government, headed by N T Rama Rao, brought out a Government Order to safeguard the interests of Telangana people in government employment. Till 1999, there was no demand from any quarters for division of the state on regional lines. In 1999, Congress demanded creation of Telangana state. Congress was then smarting under crushing defeats in successive elections to the state Assembly and Parliament with the ruling Telugu Desam Party in an unassailable position. Yet another chapter opened in the struggle for Telangana when Kalvakuntla Chandrasekhar Rao, who was seething over denial of Cabinet berth in the Chandrababu Naidu government, walked out of TDP and launched Telangana Rashtra Samiti on April 27, 2001.

Following pressure applied by Telangana Congress leaders, the Central Working Committee of Congress in 2001 sent a resolution to the then NDA government seeking constitution of a second States Re-organisation Commission to look into Telangana state demand, which was rejected by the then Union Home Minister L K Advani saying smaller states were "neither viable nor conducive" to integrity of the country. TRS started gradually building the movement for a separate state. Congress forged an electoral alliance with TRS by promising to create Telangana state. Congress came to power in 2004, both in the state and at the Centre, and TRS became part of the coalition governments at both places. Protesting delay in carving out the separate state, TRS quit the coalition governments in the state and at the Centre in December 2006 and continued an independent fight. In October 2008, TDP changed its stance and declared support for bifurcation of the state.

TRS launched an indefinite hunger-strike on 29 November, 2009 demanding creation of Telangana. The Centre budged and came out with an announcement on 9 December, 2009 that it was "initiating the process for formation of Telangana state". But the Centre announced on 23 December, 2009 that it was putting Telangana issue on hold. This fanned protests across Telangana with some students ending their lives for a separate state. The Centre then constituted a five-member Committee on 3 February, 2010, headed by former judge Srikrishna, to look into statehood demand. The Committee submitted its report to the Centre on 30 December, 2010. Telagana region witnessed a series of agitations like the Million March, Chalo Assembly and Sakalajanula Samme (general strike) in 2011-12 while MLAs belonging to different parties quit from the House. With its MPs from Telangana upping the ante, Congress made Union Home Ministry to convene an all-party meeting on December 28, 2012 to find an "amicable solution" to the crisis.

After several twists and turns, the state of Telangana was formed on 02 June, 2014.

3.3 Gorkhaland

Indian Gorkhas are indigenous people living all along the Himalayan belt and the North-East states of India. The Gorkhas inhabit areas in J&K, Himachal, Uttarakhand, Sikkim, Darjeeling, Assam, and all other states in the North- East region of India.

In all of these regions the Gorkhas have a long history going back to the pre-independence days. In fact, the his- tory of some of these places begins with the history of the Gorkhas. They have contributed to the history of these places as soldiers, administrators, plantation workers, agriculturalists, and as educationists. Today, the Gorkhas also live in the major cities of India such as Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkota, Bengaluru, and Chennai.

Following the agitation that began in 1986, a tripartite agreement was reached between Government of India, Government of West Bengal, and Gorkha National Liberation Front on 25th July 1988 to set up an autonomous Hill Council (DGHC) under a State Act for "the social, economic, educational, and cultural advancement of the people residing in the Hill areas of Darjeeling District". The Council covered the three hill sub-divisions of Darjeeling district and a few Mouzas within the Siliguri sub-division.

The Council was given limited executive powers but in the absence of legislative powers the aspirations of the people of the region could not be addressed. The non-inclusion of the Dooars region in the Council became a major reason of discontent. The people of the Dooars had equally participated in the movement and thus felt betrayed. The Council also created a divide between the Hills and the Dooars which till then had shared a common history and heritage.All of these factors had created serious fault-lines in the Council right at the time of its inception. Over a period, these fault lines, along with the apathy of the state government, led to a renewal of the voices demanding Gorkhaland. Later, the elected councilors resigned en masse in support of Gorkhaland on 21st March 2005.

3.4 Proposal to include Darjeeling in the sixth schedule in 2007

The Government of India, in consultation with the Government of West Bengal and the Council administrator, brought two amendment bills to the Parliament - Sixth Schedule to the Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2007 and the Constitution (107th Amendment) Bill, 2007 These bills sought to provide Sixth Schedule status for the Darjeeling Hill Areas.Given the serious trust deficit in the Hills about the functioning of the Administration and the State Government, the two bills were seen as another conspiracy to deny the aspiration of the people. Following opposition the Bill was referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs which was headed by Sushma Swaraj. In the hearings held by the Committee, all Gorkha groups rejected the proposal and reiterated that the aspirations of the people could only be met by the creation of a State. Based on the hearings and consultations, the report presented to the Rajya Sabha recorded,

"The committee would like to caution and advise the ministry of home affairs (MHA) to make a fresh assessment of the ground realities all over again before proceeding with the Bills in the two Houses of Parliament."

3.5 Gorkhaland Territorial Administration (GTA)

With rising discontent against the Council administration and the shelving of the proposal of Sixth Schedule status to the region, another wave of a mass movement for Gorkhaland began in 2007. The Chairman of the Council was dislodged and banished along with his party members. A new leadership took over the movement. After three years of agitation for a state of Gorkhaland, the party leading the movement reached an agreement with the state government to form a semi-autonomous body to administer the Darjeeling hills. The Memorandum of Agreement for GTA was signed on 18 July 2011 at Pintail Village near Siliguri in the presence of Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and movement leaders. A bill for the creation of GTA was passed in the West Bengal Legislative Assembly on 2 September 2011. The GTA will have administrative, executive and financial powers but no legislative powers.

The GTA agreement too has apparent inbuilt fault-lines. First, lack of legislative powers means that the people of the region have no control over laws to govern themselves by. The most basic instrument to meet the aspirations of the people has thus been denied to them. Second, Dooars again has been left out and instead a verification team has been set to identify "Gorkha majority" areas in the Dooars. Once again, this is a political ploy to divide Dooars. United Dooars has a distinct history and culture. Diversity has been the mark of Dooars culture as the Gorkhas, Adivasis, Rajbongshis, Bengalis, Meches, Boros and other people groups have lived alongside each other for decades. The move to identify "Gorkha majority" areas will not only deny the aspiration of the people of the region but will also divide the area along communal lines.

Demand for Gorkhaland still exists: Even though the GTA is signed, the voices demanding Gorkhaland refuse to die down. For fear of backlash, the signatory party to the GTA keeps harping about Gorkhaland and making ambiguous statements about both the GTA and Gorkhaland. Besides being seen as a major climb-down from the demand for a state, the agreement is also perceived as a betrayal of the peoples' aspiration of a state of their own. Dooars, of course, continues to simmer.

The history of the movement and the responses to the movement clearly illustrate that the demand is for nothing short of a full-fledged state and that any other administrative arrangement will only fail. As long as the complete power to legislate is not made available to the people of the region all arrangements will only prove to be temporary and futile.

3.6 Marathi Vs. Bihari

On 3rd February 2008, violent clashes took place between the MNS and the Samajwadi party. MNS chief Raj Thackeray explained that the attack on the Samajwadi Party was a response to the "provocative and unnecessary show of strength" and "uncontrolled political and cultural dadagiri) of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar migrants and their leaders". Following this, he made various comments based on language politics and regionalism, accusing North Indians from UP and Bihar for "spoiling Maharashtrian Culture and not mingling with the local population". He accused them of taking away their jobs, and said that they should go back to where they came from. A lot of violence against North Indians by MNS workers ensued, resulting in thousands of them fleeing back to their native states, apart from heavy damages to lives, property and industry in the state.

A lot of arrests were made, due media coverage was given to the incidents and the politicians and political parties blamed each other, and amongst all the chaos, the common man and the root of their problems were forgotten. It is true that migrants from other states have overcrowded Maharashtra and put heavy pressure on the civic amenities. It has also created a scarcity of jobs for them. But the migrants are not to be blamed for that. The people from underdeveloped areas have no choice but migrate to hunt for jobs and survive.

According to the Constitution of India, an Indian citizen is free to move around and settle down peacefully any part of the country. So they go to places where jobs are available, and get them on the basis of merit. This gives the political parties absolutely no reason to accuse them of stealing anything, or criticizing their language and culture, or for that matter, instigating violence against them. Their want for limelight and votes ends up being a nightmare for the common man. This is not the solution to the problem of excessive migration. It can only be solved by development and creation of jobs in other states, and tackling the issue of overpopulation. If this unnecessary propagation of hatred continues, it will solve nothing, and only divide the people more. Today it is the division of states. Tomorrow it will be the division of districts, and so on.

4.0 Measures to curb regionalism

Regionalism is short cut to attain the political ambitions by emotionally exploiting the sentiments of the people. As long as the political leaders thrive for regional development without discriminating against outsiders, Regionalism is good for India.

Some measure to curb the evil effects of regionalism could be

To promote even development of the nation. The neglected areas must be given more importance so that they feel a part of the national mainstream.
The central government must not interfere in the affairs of the state unless it is unavoidable for national interest.
Problems of people must be solved in a peaceful and constitutional manner. Politicians must not be allowed to misuse the issue of regional demands.
The different departments for different states can be constituted at central government level so that that specific department can look upon state critically and suggest the ways to government for the upliftment of the state.
Except for issues of national importance, the states should be given freedom to run their own affairs.
There should be a nominal participation of all the states at central level government. The leaders of the deprived states should come forward to participate in the central government and raise their concern rather than sitting in the state and demanding the new state.
A system of national education that would help to overcome regional feelings and develop an attachment towards the nation should be introduced.
Election Commission should lay down some norms for regional parties against regionalism. Election Commission should define that any party who will be found in promoting unnecessary regionalism will be banned.
As much as possible, public policies depicting the idea of nationalism should be introduced and there should be uniformity in schemes and policies for all the states.
Irrespective of the political party whose government is the state, the central government should not be biased with any state. Funds, packages, allocations should be equally distributed.
Proper committees should be set up to look into the matters where there is demand for different state. Rationale of new smaller states need not necessarily be perceived as balkanization or regionalization. As such the demand for new states has to be effectively scotched and conceded after only after careful scrutiny of each case on the basis of economic development and administrative convenience.
Non-Government Organizations should come forward to promote idea of nationalism among people. They should spread awareness of living by unity in the diversity. They should teach people the advantages of living with a big nation and state rather than small and segregated states.

5.0 POSSIBLE FUTURE DEMANDS

Vidharbha is another region in eastern region of Maharashtra state made up of the Nagpur Division and the Amravati Division that has demanded a separate state. Vidharbha was a separate state before being merged with the newly formed Maharashtra state in 1960.

The main reason in demanding of a separate state of Vidharbha is the constant neglect of the Maharashtra state government in terms of developement and improving the investment in to the region. People also feel that they are different from the people of Maharashtra in terms of their dialect and the cultural inclination. Other than BJP, no other political party has actually supported them in their demand for a separate state.

Saurashtra has also demanded a separate state. Formally known as United State of Kathiawar, it was later renamed as Saurashtra state after much convincing from Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel in 1948. Later it was merged with Bombay state in 1956 and subsequently merged with Gujarat state in 1960.

People of Saurashtra have always been ignored by Gujarat government. The region remained under-developed whereas the rest of the state of gujarat prospered. People want a separate state to be carved of Saurashtra so that the region can develop and more job oppurtunities can be produced in the area. Although the region contributes magnificantly to the state and the Centre, very little has been done for the developement of he region.People feel that as a seperate state,the region will surely flourish.

Another state that has been proposed for bifurcation is Harit Pradesh, which lies in the western part of Uttar Pradesh.

Uttar Pradesh is one of the largest states in India. There is considerable difference between the eastern and western part of the state. People from western region feel that they contribute more to the developement of the state as a whole. This is the one of the reason for the separation of the state into Harit Pradesh. Moreover, there is linguistic difference between the people from the same state. Also, the western region feels that they have less political advantage compared to the eastern region. A separate state would guarantee them the political and economical independence which has been missing for quite some time now.