Regional Aspirations | Class 12 Political Science
The chapter familiarizes students with the diverse political ambitions across the Indian Subcontinent’s regions. It delves into the concepts of nation-building and the pursuit of regional autonomy. Additionally, it sheds light on significant accords such as those in Punjab and the North-East.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Nation Building
Nation Building is an ongoing endeavor, not a task that can be completed definitively. With each iteration, fresh challenges emerge alongside lingering unresolved issues. As the democratic experiment unfolds, individuals from diverse regions increasingly voice their aspirations for autonomy.
People in several parts of the country, particularly in Assam, Punjab, Mizoram, and the developments in Jammu and Kashmir, engaged in long conflicts and often aggressive and armed statements.
What were the characteristics of the movements?
Regional autonomy aspirations surfaced in the 1980s, marked by people’s armed assertions, governmental crackdowns, and the erosion of democratic and electoral frameworks, all intertwined within these movements. The majority of these conflicts were protracted and ended in negotiated settlements or agreements with the central authority. The agreements were made through a conversion process aimed at resolving controversial topics within the framework of the constitution. The road to the agreement was always raucous and often violent.
What was unique about the Indian approach?
Indian nationalism endeavored to find equilibrium amidst unity and diversity. In contrast to numerous European nations, which viewed cultural diversity as a peril to their existence, the Indian approach diverged significantly. The democratic approach accepts regional political expressions and does not regard them as anti-national.Democratic politics allows parties and groups to speak to people about their regional identity, aspirations, and concerns.
It also means that regional issues and challenges will be given the attention and consideration they deserve during the policy-making process.Political confrontations over problems of regional power, rights, and independent existence are prevalent among governments that desire to recognise diversity.
Tension Points
India has grappled with a multitude of challenges post-independence, ranging from partition, displacement, integration of princely states, to state reorganization, among others. The issue of Jammu and Kashmir emerged prominently post-independence, not just as a bilateral conflict between India and Pakistan, but also as a matter concerning the democratic aspirations of the Kashmiri people. Additionally, regions like Nagaland and Mizoram in the North East have witnessed robust independence movements.
- Some Dravid groups in the south also sought their own homeland. Following these events, mass movement for the construction of linguistic states erupted in many regions of the world.
- The states of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Gujarat were among those affected by the riots. There were protests in the south, particularly in Tamil Nadu, opposing declaring Hindi the country’s official language.
- In the North, there were strong pro-Hindi demonstrations demanding that Hindi be made the official language soon.
- During the 1950s, people who spoke Punjabi began to demand a separate state for themselves. In 1966, the states of Punjab and Haryana were formed as a result of this agreement.
- It was decided to form the states of Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, and Uttaranchal (now Uttarakhand).
- The country’s internal boundaries were redrawn. The problem in other areas, such as Kashmir and Nagaland, was so complicated that it could not be solved during the first phase of nation-building.
Jammu & Kashmir
The longstanding “Kashmir issue” has been recognized as a significant source of tension between India and Pakistan. Within the region of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), there are three distinct social and political areas: Jammu, Kashmir, and Ladakh. Kashmir, inhabited primarily by Muslims who speak Kashmiri, is home to a minority Hindu community also conversant in the Kashmiri language.Jammu is home to Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs who speak a variety of languages. Ladakh is a mountainous region with a small population that is evenly split between Buddhists and Muslims. The issue of Kashmiriyat, or Kashmiri identity, and the people of J&K’s desire for political autonomy.
The Sources of the Issue
Earlier to 1947, Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) existed as a princely state. Ruled by Hari Singh, a Hindu monarch, the territory resisted integration with India, as Singh sought autonomy through negotiations with both India and Pakistan. With a Muslim majority in Kashmir, Pakistan claimed ownership, contrasting with the local populace’s identification primarily as Kashmiris.
The National Conference’s Sheikh Abdullah led a movement within the state to depose the Maharaja, but he was opposed to joining Pakistan.
The National Conference was a non-denominational organisation with a long history of working with Congress. Pakistan launched tribal infiltrators from their side to conquer Kashmir in October 1947, forcing the Maharaja to seek Indian military assistance. India provided military assistance after the Maharaja signed an ‘Instrument of Accession’ with the Indian government.
It was also agreed that after the situation had stabilised, the people of J&K’s opinions on their future would be ascertained.In March 1948, Sheikh Abdullah became the Prime Minister of the State of J&K (the head of the state’s administration at the time was known as the Prime Minister).India pledged to preserve Jammu & Kashmir’s autonomy.
What is the Instrument of Accession?
The Instrument of Accession was a legal instrument formed by the Government of India Act 1935 and used in 1947 to allow each of the princely states under British supremacy to join one of the new dominions of India or Pakistan founded by the Partition of British India.
Internal and External Conflicts
Pakistan has always contended that the Kashmir valley should be a part of the country. In 1947, Pakistan funded a tribal invasion of the state, as a result of which one portion of the state, known as ‘Azad Kashmir,’ came under the Pakistani administration.Article 370 of our Constitution grants Kashmir unique status. In comparison to other Indian states, Jammu and Kashmir have more autonomy under Article 370.
The state had a constitution of its own. The State was exempt from all provisions of the Indian Constitution. Only if the State agrees do laws passed by Parliament apply to J&K.People outside of J&K argue that the special status provided by Article 370 does not allow full integration of the state with India and that J&K should be treated like any other Indian state. Another group, primarily Kashmiris, believes that the autonomy granted by Article 370 is insufficient.A section of Kashmiris has voiced its dissatisfaction.
First, the promise that accession would be referred to the people of the state afterwards was not kept, leading to calls for a “plebiscite.” In actuality, the special federal status promised by Article 370 has been eroded. In the state of Jammu and Kashmir, democracy has not been institutionalised in the same way.
What changed in terms of political dimensions after 1948?
Sheikh Abdullah was the driving force behind massive land reforms and other programmes. His stand on Kashmir’s status was causing a growing schism between him and the national government.In 1953, he was fired and imprisoned for a number of years. The leadership that succeeded him did not have as much public support and was only able to administer the state with the help of the federal government.
Several elections have been tainted by severe charges of fraud and rigging. During the majority of the period from 1953 and 1974, the Congress party had a significant effect on state politics. For a time, the National Conference (minus Sheikh Abdullah) remained in power with Congress’ active support, but it eventually united with Congress.
Sheikh Abdullah and the Indian government attempted to strike a deal on multiple occasions. Sheikh Abdullah became the Chief Minister of the State after Indira Gandhi made an arrangement with him in 1974.
He resurrected the National Conference, which won a majority in the 1977 assembly elections. After his father’s death in 1982, Farooq Abdullah, Sheikh Abdullah’s son, assumed command.The Governor quickly removed him, and a breakaway section of the National Conference rose to power. The trust that Kashmiris had earned in democratic processes following the agreement was shattered. In 1986, the National Conference agreed to form an electoral alliance with Congress, the federal government’s main party.
After the Insurgency
Farooq Abdullah was re-elected as Minister after the National Conference-Congress alliance won the assembly elections in 1987. The results did not represent a popular opinion, and the entire election process is thought to have been rigged. This resulted in a political crisis in Kashmir, which worsened as the conflict grew.
In 1989, the state was engulfed by a militant movement dedicated to the creation of a distinct Kashmiri country.Pakistan provided moral, material, and military support to the militants.For numerous years, the state was under President’s rule and effectively under the control of the military forces.
A Call for Regional Self-Government
In 1996, the National Conference, led by Farooq Abdullah, came to power in Jammu and Kashmir with a proposal for regional autonomy for the state.In 2002, the election in J&K was fairly fair. The National Conference lost its majority and was replaced by a coalition government led by the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and Congress.
“Separatist politics arose in Kashmir in various forms,” says the author.One group of separatists wants Kashmir to be its own country.
There are also others who want Kashmir to become part of Pakistan. Another strand wants the people of the state to have more autonomy inside the Indian union. The concept of autonomy appeals to the people of Jammu and Ladakh in a unique way. They frequently complain about being ignored and being behind the times. As a result, there is just as much demand for intra-State autonomy as there is for state autonomy.
The public’s initial support for militancy has given way to a desire for peace. The Centre has begun talks with a number of separatist parties. Instead of demanding an independent country, most separatists in talks are attempting to renegotiate the state’s relationship with India.
Jammu and Kashmir is a living example of a diverse society and political system.Despite these differences and divergences, the State’s multifarious and secular culture has generally stayed intact.
Punjab
The decade of 1980s also witnessed major developments in the State of Punjab. The social composition of the State changed first with Partition and later on after the carving out of Haryana and Himachal Pradesh. The rest of the country was reorganised on linguistic lines in the 1950s, Punjab had to wait till 1966 for the creation of a Punjabi speaking state.The Akali Dal, which was formed in 1920 as the political wing of the Sikhs, had led the movement for the formation of a ‘Punjabi suba’.The Sikhs were now a majority in Punjab.
Political Context
The Akalis came to power in 1967 and then in 1977. On both occasions, it was a coalition government. The Akalis discovered that despite the redrawing of the boundaries, their political position remained precarious.
- Firstly, their government was dismissed by the Centre mid-way through its term.
-
Secondly, they did not enjoy strong support among the Hindus.
-
Thirdly, the Sikh community, like all other religious communities, was internally differentiated on caste and class lines.
The Congress got more support among the Dalits, whether Hindu or Sikh, than the Akalis.It was in this context that during the 1970s a section of Akalis began to demand political autonomy for the region. This was reflected in a resolution passed at their conference at Anandpur Sahib in 1973.The Anandpur Sahib Resolution asserted regional autonomy and wanted to redefine the centre-state relationship in the country.
The resolution also spoke of the aspirations of the Sikh qaum and declared its goal as attaining the bolbala (dominance or hegemony) of the Sikhs.The Resolution was a plea for strengthening federalism, but it could also be interpreted as a plea for a separate Sikh nation. The Resolution had a limited appeal among the Sikh masses.
After the Akali government had been dismissed in 1980, the Akali Dal launched a movement on the question of the distribution of water between Punjab and its neighbouring States. A section of the religious leaders raised the question of autonomous Sikh identity. The more extreme elements started advocating secession from India and the creation of ‘Khalistan’.
Cycle of violence
The leadership of the movement passed from the moderate Akalis to the extremist elements and took the form of armed insurgency.Militants made their headquarters inside the Sikh holy shrine, the Golden Temple in Amritsar, and turned it into an armed fortress.The Government of India carried out ‘Operation Blue Star’, in June 1984. The Government could successfully flush out the militants, but it also damaged the historic temple and deeply hurt the sentiments of the Sikhs. A large proportion of Sikhs in India and abroad saw the military operation as an attack on their faith and this gave further impetus to militant and extremist groups. A still more tragic turn of events complicated the Punjab problem further.
Assasination Of Indira Gandhi
On October 31, 1984, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated by her bodyguards outside her residence. This tragic event sent shockwaves across the nation, prompting outbreaks of violence against the Sikh community in Delhi and various parts of northern India.The violence against the Sikhs continued for almost a week. More than two thousand Sikhs were killed in the national capital, the area worst affected by this violence. Hundreds of Sikhs were killed in other parts of the country, like Kanpur, Bokaro and Chas.Numerous Sikh households experienced the profound pain of losing their male relatives, enduring immense emotional and financial hardships. Two decades later, during a parliamentary session in 2005, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh voiced remorse for these tragic events, offering a formal apology to the nation for the atrocities inflicted during the anti-Sikh violence.
The Longowal Accord
In 1984, the newly appointed Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi embarked on a dialogue with moderate Akali leaders. By July 1985, he successfully brokered an agreement with Harchand Singh Longowal, who served as the President of the Akali Dal at the time. This landmark agreement, commonly referred to as the Rajiv Gandhi – Longowal Accord or the Punjab Accord, marked a significant stride towards restoring peace and stability in Punjab.
It was agreed that Chandigarh would be transferred to Punjab, a separate commission would be appointed to resolve the border dispute between Punjab and Haryana, and a tribunal would be set up to decide the sharing of Ravi-Beas river water among Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan.
The agreement also stipulated compensation and improved treatment for individuals impacted by the unrest in Punjab, along with the cessation of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act in the region. The tumultuous situation, characterized by militancy and counter-insurgency operations, resulted in police excesses and human rights abuses.
The central government had to impose President’s rule in the State and the normal electoral and political process was suspended.It was not easy to restore the political process in the atmosphere of suspicion and violence. When elections were held in Punjab in 1992, only 24 percent of the electors turned out to vote.
Militancy was eventually eradicated by the security forces. But the losses incurred by the people of Punjab Sikhs and Hindus alike were enormous.Peace returned to Punjab by the middle of the 1990s.
The alliance of Akali Dal (Badal) and the BJP scored a major victory in1997, in the first normal elections in the State in the post-militancy era.The State is once again preoccupied with questions of economic development and social change. Though religious identities continue to be important for the people, politics has gradually moved back along secular lines.
Operation Blue Star
It was a military operation carried out by the Indian government in June 1984. It aimed to remove Sikh militants who had fortified the Golden Temple complex in Amritsar, Punjab. Led by the Indian Army, the operation sought to restore control over the holy site, which had been taken over by militant leader Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale and his followers. The operation resulted in significant damage to the Golden Temple and other historical structures within the complex, as well as a high number of casualties among militants, civilians, and security forces. It remains a highly controversial event in Indian history, deeply affecting Sikh-Indian relations and shaping the political landscape of Punjab.
The North-East
The area, referred to as the seven sisters due to its seven constituent states in India, is linked to the rest of the country through a 22-kilometer corridor. Moreover, it shares borders with China, Myanmar, and Bangladesh, serving as India’s access point to Southeast Asia.
Since 1947, the region has changed dramatically. Tripura, Manipur, and Meghalaya’s Khasi Hills were once princely states that united with India following independence.
The entire North-East area has experienced significant political reorganisation. Nagaland became a distinct state in 1960, Meghalaya, Manipur, and Tripura in 1972, and Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram in 1986.
Following India’s partition in 1947, the North-East transformed into a landlocked region, dealing a blow to its economy and rendering its politics impenetrable. Concurrently, the influx of migrants from neighboring states and nations led to notable demographic shifts across most states in this region.
The region’s isolation, complex socioeconomic nature, and backwardness in comparison to other areas of the country have all resulted in a complex set of demands from several North-East states.
The extensive international border and inadequate connectivity between the North-East and the remainder of India heightened the delicate political landscape in the region. Dominating the politics of the North-East are three key concerns: desires for autonomy, secessionist movements, and hostility towards “outsiders.” During the 1970s, significant efforts addressing the autonomy question set the stage for substantial shifts regarding the secessionist movements and antagonism towards external influences in the 1980s.
What were the Autonomy demands of the North-Eastern states?
Except for Manipur and Tripura, the entire region was part of Assam at the time of independence. When non-Assamese people thought that the Assam government was forcing them to speak Assamese, they demanded political autonomy.Throughout the state, there were dissent and protest riots. The leaders of Assam’s major indigenous clans aspired to secede.
They established the Eastern India Tribal Union, which was eventually renamed the All Party Hill Leaders Conference in 1960.They urged that Assam be divided into tribal states. Finally, Assam was divided into numerous states, rather than a single tribal state.Tripura and Manipur were also elevated to the status of states. By 1972, the reorganisation of the North-East had been completed.
Communities such as the Bodos, Karbis, and Dimasas in Assam desired their own states. They fought for this demand through public opinion mobilisation, popular movement, and insurgency.More than one community claimed the same territory. It was no longer possible to create smaller and smaller states.
As a result, additional aspects of our federal structure were employed to meet their desires for autonomy while remaining in Assam.District Councils have provided autonomy to the Karbis and Dimasas, while the Bodos have lately been awarded Autonomous Council.
Secessionists Movements
Autonomy demands were easier to respond to because they included utilising various parts of the Constitution to accommodate diversity.It was far more difficult when some factions wanted a separate country on a consistent basis, rather than out of a fit of rage.For a long period, the country’s leadership had to deal with this issue in at least two North-East states.The Mizo Hills have constituted an autonomous region within Assam after independence. Some Mizos claimed they were never a part of British India and hence did not qualify for membership in the Indian union.After the Assam government failed to appropriately respond to the great famine in the Mizo Hills in 1959, the independence movement garnered public support.
The Mizo National Front
Laldenga founded the Mizo National Front (MNF) in response to the Mizos’ grievances, sparking an armed struggle for independence in 1966. This event initiated a twenty-year-long conflict between Mizo insurgents and the Indian military. The MNF adopted guerrilla tactics, garnered governmental backing, and sought sanctuary in the territory that was once East Pakistan.
The Indian security forces employed a series of forceful tactics, primarily targeting the civilian population, with even the Air Force being deployed at one point. These measures only served to escalate public anger and detachment. Ultimately, after two decades of conflict, everyone emerged as a victim of the prolonged turmoil.
The impactful maturity displayed by political leaders from both sides was pivotal. Laldenga’s return to India from exile in Pakistan initiated discussions with the Indian government, steered by Rajiv Gandhi. Ultimately, these negotiations culminated successfully with a ceasefire agreement signed in 1986 by Rajiv Gandhi and Laldenga. Subsequently, Mizoram attained full statehood with distinctive authorities, while the MNF committed to halting their pursuit of independence through armed conflict.
Laldenga was appointed Chief Minister.This agreement marked a watershed moment in Mizoram’s history. It is one of the most tranquil areas in the region, and it has made significant progress in literacy and development.Nagaland’s tale is similar to Mizoram’s, only it began far earlier and has yet to reach a happy conclusion.Angami Zapu Phizo, a branch of the Nagas who declared independence from India in 1951, was their leader.
Many proposals of a negotiated settlement were turned down by Phizo.The Naga National Council began an armed battle for Naga independence. A segment of the Nagas struck an agreement with the Indian government after a period of violent insurgency, but this was not acceptable to other rebels.Nagaland’s problem has yet to be fully resolved.
Movement Against Outsiders
As a result of the large-scale migration to the northeast, a particular challenge occurred. These latecomers, whether from India or elsewhere, are viewed as potential competitors for jobs and political influence, as well as encroachers on scarce resources such as land.
This issue has taken on a political and occasionally violent tone in several North-Eastern states. The Assam Movement, which ran from 1979 to 1985, is the best example.The Assamese suspected the presence of a sizable number of unauthorised Bangladeshi Muslim settlers.
They believed that without identifying and deporting these foreign nationals, the indigenous Assamese would be reduced to a minority.
Despite its natural resources such as oil, tea, and coal, Assam suffers from widespread poverty and unemployment.
These were believed to be being drained out of the state with little benefit to the populace. The All Assam Students’ Union (AASU), a non-partisan students’ organisation, spearheaded an anti-foreigner movement in 1979.
The movement also targeted illegal immigrants, Bengali and other foreigner dominance, and erroneous votes.The movement campaigned for the deportation of all foreigners who entered the nation after 1951. The campaign employed a number of innovative strategies to mobilise Assamese from all walks of life, collecting support from across the state.
Additionally, there were other tragic and violent incidents that resulted in the destruction of property and the loss of human life. Additionally, the movement aimed to disrupt train traffic and oil supply from Assam to Bihar refineries.Negotiations between the Rajiv Gandhi administration and the AASU’s leaders culminated in 1985 with the signing of an accord.
The Accord of 1958
Under this agreement, foreigners who relocated to Assam during and after the Bangladesh conflict, as well as afterwards, were to be recognised and deported. Following the movement’s victory, the Asom Gana Sangram Parishad and the AASU amalgamated to become the Asom Gana Parishad, a regional political organisation (AGP).
It was elected in 1985 on a platform of resolving the foreign national issue and establishing a “Golden Assam.”While the Assam Accord established peace and altered the face of Assam politics, it did not tackle the issue of immigration.Outsiders continue to be a contentious issue in Assam politics, as it is in many other parts of the North-East.
This is an especially acute situation in Tripura, where indigenous people have been reduced to a minority in their own territory.In Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh, the indigenous population’s hostility for Chakma refugees is founded on the same feeling.
What are the lessons to be learned from these examples?
The primary and paramount lesson underscores the significance of regional interests within democratic politics. The emergence of regional challenges is neither rare nor unexpected. Even in smaller nations like the United Kingdom, regional aspirations are prevalent. Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland serve as prime examples. Similar situations are evident in regions such as Spain’s Basque Country and Sri Lanka’s Tamil areas, where separatist movements persist.
- Regional demands must be addressed on a regular basis in a large and diverse democracy like India. The process of nation-building is never-ending.
- The second lesson is that dialogue, not repression, is the appropriate response to regional ambitions.
- The third lesson discusses the importance of power-sharing. It is insufficient to have a formal democratic organisation.
- It is insufficient to assert that governments and regions have autonomy in their own domains. The nation is divided into regions.
- As a result, regions must have a say in the destiny of the country. If areas are excluded from national decision-making, they may acquire a sense of injustice and alienation.
- The fourth lesson is that regional economic differences contribute to a perception of regional prejudice.
The progression of India’s development has intensified regional disparities, prompting disadvantaged states and regions, as well as certain pockets within states, to assert that rectifying their backwardness ought to be the top priority, attributing the imbalance to governmental policies. This phenomenon of regional disparities and internal migration arises from the coexistence of impoverished states alongside those experiencing rapid growth. These circumstances underscore the foresight of the framers of our Constitution in addressing the challenges posed by diversity. India’s federal structure demonstrates remarkable adaptability, with most states enjoying equal powers while certain regions like Jammu and Kashmir and the states in the North-East are accorded special provisions.
The Sixth Schedule of the Constitution vests each tribe with complete sovereignty over their customary laws and practices. These clauses were crucial in resolving some of the most challenging political issues in the North-most East.In the region, separatist aspirations are discouraged. Regionalism has been regarded as a necessary component of democratic politics in India.
Also Read:
Visit Readspot for articles on defferent Political issues
You may also like
Recent Developments In Indian Politics
14 March, 2024