Chapter 7 Regional Aspirations

Region And The Nation

The 1980s were marked by rising **regional aspirations for autonomy**, sometimes seeking expression outside the framework of the Indian Union. These movements often involved armed actions and their repression by the government, leading to political instability. Many of these struggles were prolonged, concluding in **negotiated settlements or accords** between the central government and the groups demanding autonomy. These accords aimed to resolve contentious issues within the constitutional framework, though the path to settlement was often violent and tumultuous.

Indian Approach

The Indian approach to diversity, as seen in the Constitution and nation-building process, is based on the principle that the Indian nation should not deny regions and linguistic groups the right to maintain their distinct cultures. India aimed for a united social life while preserving numerous constituent cultures. Indian nationalism sought a balance between unity and diversity, where the nation did not negate the region. This differed from some European countries that viewed cultural diversity as a threat.

India adopted a democratic approach to diversity, allowing political expression of regional aspirations without deeming them anti-national. Democratic politics provides avenues for parties and groups to mobilise people based on regional identity, aspirations, and specific problems, thereby strengthening regional aspirations. Simultaneously, this means regional issues receive attention and accommodation in policy-making.

While this arrangement can cause tensions, where national unity concerns might override regional needs, or focus on region might neglect national needs, political conflicts over regional power, rights, and existence are common in democracies aiming to balance unity and diversity.

Areas Of Tension

India faced significant challenges immediately after Independence (Partition, displacement, princely state integration, state reorganisation). Many observers predicted India's eventual disintegration. Conflicts arose early on, including the issue of Jammu and Kashmir (aspirations of Kashmir valley people) and separatist movements in parts of the Northeast (Nagaland, Mizoram). Some groups within the Dravid movement in the South also briefly considered a separate country.

Mass agitations for linguistic states followed, affecting regions like Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Gujarat. Protests against Hindi as the official language occurred in the South (Tamil Nadu), while pro-Hindi agitations happened in the North. The demand for a Punjabi-speaking state led to the creation of Punjab and Haryana in 1966. Later, Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, and Jharkhand were created. Redrawing internal boundaries addressed some diversity challenges.

However, this didn't resolve all issues. Complex challenges in Kashmir and Nagaland persisted from the first phase of nation-building. New challenges emerged in Punjab, Assam, and Mizoram. Studying these cases, and earlier instances of difficulties, provides lessons for achieving unity with diversity in India's future.

Jammu And Kashmir

Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) has been a politically complex and conflict-ridden region, marked by violence, cross-border terrorism, and political instability with internal and external dimensions. This has resulted in loss of life and large-scale displacement, particularly of Kashmiri Pandits from the valley.

J&K comprises three distinct regions: Jammu (predominantly Hindu, mixed population), Kashmir (Kashmir valley, mostly Kashmiri Muslims), and Ladakh (mountainous, sparse population equally divided between Buddhists and Muslims).

Roots Of The Problem

Before 1947, J&K was a Princely State. Its ruler, Maharaja Hari Singh, wanted independence, not merger with India or Pakistan. Pakistani leaders claimed Kashmir valley due to its Muslim majority, but the people identified primarily as Kashmiris, reflecting the regional aspiration known as **Kashmiriyat**. A popular movement led by Sheikh Abdullah (National Conference) opposed the Maharaja and Pakistan, advocating for independence. National Conference was secular and allied with Congress; Sheikh Abdullah was close to Nehru.

In October 1947, Pakistan sent tribal infiltrators, forcing the Maharaja to seek Indian military help. India intervened after the Maharaja signed the **‘Instrument of Accession’**. As Pakistan retained control of part of the state, India referred the issue to the UN, which recommended Pakistan withdraw forces, India reduce troops, and a plebiscite. No progress was made. Sheikh Abdullah became Prime Minister of J&K (March 1948), and India granted provisional autonomy under **Article 370**.

Dravidian movement in Tamil Nadu: A major regional movement emphasising Dravidian identity against perceived North Indian dominance. Initially sought a Dravida nation but shifted to democratic means. Led by E.V. Ramasami ‘Periyar’, later C. Annadurai. Opposed Brahmin dominance, Hindi imposition, and advocated regional pride. DMK and later AIADMK dominated Tamil Nadu politics, demonstrating compatibility of regionalism and nationalism.

External And Internal Disputes

J&K's politics since 1947 has been marked by external and internal disputes. Externally, Pakistan claims Kashmir valley, leading to conflict since 1947 and controlling part of the state (POJK - Pakistan occupied Jammu and Kashmir) (Cartoon on Kashmir issue). Internally, disputes over J&K's status within India exist. Article 370's special status faced opposition from those outside J&K who wanted full integration (revocation of 370) and Kashmiris who felt autonomy was insufficient.

Kashmiris' grievances included: unfulfilled promise of plebiscite after normalisation, erosion of Article 370's special status in practice (demand for restoration of autonomy), and feeling that democracy wasn't fully institutionalised in J&K.

Politics Since 1948

After becoming PM, Sheikh Abdullah implemented land reforms but clashed with the central government over J&K's status, leading to his dismissal and detention (1953-1974). Successor leadership lacked popular support and relied on central support. Congress influenced state politics, merging with a section of National Conference. Congress gained direct control and made changes. Attempts were made to reach agreements with Sheikh Abdullah. The state PM post became Chief Minister in 1965.

In 1974, Indira Gandhi reached an agreement with Sheikh Abdullah, who became CM and revived National Conference, winning elections in 1977. Farooq Abdullah became CM after Sheikh's death (1982) but was dismissed by the Governor, leading to resentment. National Conference's alliance with Congress in 1986 further fueled feelings of central intervention.

Insurgency And After

The 1987 Assembly election results (official victory for NC-Congress alliance, Farooq Abdullah returns as CM) were widely believed to be rigged, adding to resentment against inefficient administration and perceived undermining of democracy by the Centre. This generated a political crisis leading to the rise of insurgency.

By 1989, a militant movement for a separate Kashmiri nation gripped the state, receiving support from Pakistan. The state was under President's rule and army control from 1990, experiencing extreme violence from insurgents and army actions. Assembly elections were held in 1996; NC won with a demand for regional autonomy. In 2002 elections, NC lost, replaced by a PDP-Congress coalition.

2002 And Beyond

Under a coalition agreement, Mufti Mohammed headed the government for three years, followed by Ghulam Nabi Azad (Congress). President's rule was imposed in 2008 after the coalition failed. Elections in late 2008 brought an NC-Congress coalition government headed by Omar Abdullah (2009). Disturbances led by the Hurriyat Conference continued. The 2014 elections saw high turnout. A PDP-BJP coalition government formed under Mufti Mohammed Sayeed, followed by his daughter Mahbooba Mufti as the first woman CM (2016). Her tenure saw major terrorism and tensions. President's rule returned in 2018 after BJP withdrew support.

On 5 August 2019, Article 370 was abolished, and the state was reorganised into two Union Territories: Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh. Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh represent plural societies with diverse aspirations that the 2019 Act seeks to address.

Punjab

The 1980s were marked by major developments in Punjab. The state's social composition changed due to Partition and later the carving out of Haryana and Himachal Pradesh. While other states were linguistically reorganised in the 1950s, Punjab had to wait until 1966 for a Punjabi-speaking state.

Political Context

The Akali Dal, formed in 1920 as the Sikhs' political wing, led the movement for a ‘Punjabi suba’. After 1966, Sikhs were a majority in the reduced Punjab. Akalis formed coalition governments in 1967 and 1977 but faced precarious political positions: central government dismissal of their governments, lack of support among Hindus, and internal differentiation within the Sikh community (Congress got more support among Dalits, Hindu or Sikh).

In the 1970s, a section of Akalis demanded greater political autonomy, reflected in the **Anandpur Sahib Resolution (1973)**, which sought to strengthen federalism and asserted the aspirations and 'dominance' (bolbala) of the Sikh community (qaum). The Resolution had limited mass appeal. After the Akali government's dismissal in 1980, Akali Dal launched a movement on river water distribution. A section of religious leaders raised autonomous Sikh identity issues.

Cycle Of Violence

Movement leadership shifted from moderate Akalis to extremists, escalating to armed insurgency. Militants based themselves inside the Golden Temple (Amritsar), turning it into an armed fortress. In June 1984, the government launched **‘Operation Blue Star’**, military action to remove militants. This damaged the temple and deeply hurt Sikh sentiments, boosting militant groups.

Tragically, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated on 31 October 1984 by her Sikh bodyguards seeking revenge for Operation Blue Star. This led to widespread violence against the Sikh community in Delhi and northern India, with over two thousand killed in Delhi alone. Many Sikhs suffered loss and felt hurt by the government's slow response and ineffective punishment of perpetrators. (Source details findings of Nanavati Commission). In 2005, PM Manmohan Singh expressed regret and apologised for the anti-Sikh violence.

Road To Peace

Rajiv Gandhi, after becoming PM, initiated dialogue with moderate Akali leaders. In July 1985, the **Rajiv Gandhi - Longowal Accord (Punjab Accord)** was signed with Harchand Singh Longowal, aiming for normalcy. It included transferring Chandigarh to Punjab, resolving border disputes, and sharing Ravi-Beas water. It also provided for compensation for militancy victims and withdrawing the Armed Forces Special Powers Act from Punjab.

Peace was not immediate. Violence continued for a decade, with excesses by police and human rights violations. Politically, it led to Akali Dal fragmentation, central government imposition of President's rule, and suspension of political process. Restoring political process in a climate of suspicion was difficult. In 1992 elections, only 24% turnout occurred.

Militancy was eventually suppressed. Punjab suffered enormous losses. Peace returned in the mid-1990s. Akali Dal (Badal)-BJP alliance won elections in 1997. The state is now focused on economic/social change, with politics gradually moving along secular lines, though religious identities remain important.

The North-East

The Northeast region saw regional aspirations culminate in the 1980s. It comprises eight states: Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Nagaland, Manipur, Tripura, Mizoram, Meghalaya ('seven sisters') plus Sikkim ('Brother'). It holds 4% of population but double the area share, connected by a narrow corridor to the rest of India. It shares borders with China, Myanmar, Bangladesh, serving as a gateway to Southeast Asia.

The region underwent significant changes post-1947: princely states merging, political reorganisation (statehood granted to various areas over time). Partition cut off the region, impacting its economy and isolating its politics. Demographic changes occurred due to migration. Isolation, social complexity, and backwardness led to diverse demands. Border location and weak communication added to political delicacy. Three issues dominate: demands for autonomy, secession, and opposition to 'outsiders'.

Demands For Autonomy

Political autonomy demands arose in Assam when non-Assamese groups felt Assamese language imposition. Tribal communities sought separation, forming the Eastern India Tribal Union, demanding a tribal state. Instead of one, several states were carved from Assam over time (Meghalaya, Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh), and Tripura/Manipur were upgraded to states. Reorganisation largely completed by 1972.

Autonomy demands continued within Assam (Bodos, Karbis, Dimasas). As creating smaller states wasn't feasible, federal provisions were used for autonomy within Assam (District Councils, Autonomous Council for Bodos). Accommodation using existing framework was easier than dealing with outright secessionist demands.

Secessionist Movements

Demands for separate countries were harder. India faced this challenge in at least two Northeast states. After independence, Mizo Hills was autonomous within Assam. Some Mizos felt they weren't part of British India. A famine in 1959 and Assam government's inadequate response fueled anger and popular support for secession, leading to the formation of the Mizo National Front (MNF) under Laldenga.

In 1966, MNF began armed struggle for independence, starting a two-decade conflict with the Indian army. MNF fought a guerrilla war, got support/shelter from Pakistan. Indian forces used repressive measures, causing anger/alienation. After two decades, everyone was a loser. Political maturity led to peace: Laldenga negotiated with the Indian government after exile. In 1986, the **Rajiv Gandhi-Laldenga Accord** granted Mizoram full statehood with special powers, MNF gave up secessionist struggle. Laldenga became CM. Mizoram became peaceful, advancing in literacy/development. (Source on ceasefire by MNF).

Nagaland's story is similar but started earlier and is unresolved. Led by Angami Zapu Phizo (Source on Angami Zapu Phizo), a section of Nagas declared independence in 1951 and launched armed struggle. Phizo rejected settlements. Some Nagas signed an agreement, but not all rebels accepted. The Nagaland problem is ongoing. (Quote on friend Chon and map knowledge).

Movements Against Outsiders

Large-scale migration into the Northeast created tension between 'locals' and 'outsiders'/migrants (from India or abroad), seen as competitors for resources (land), employment, and political power. This led to political and sometimes violent movements.

The **Assam Movement (1979-1985)** is a prime example against 'outsiders'. Assamese suspected illegal Bengali Muslim settlers from Bangladesh were making indigenous Assamese a minority. Economic issues (poverty, unemployment despite resources) were also factors. The All Assam Students' Union (AASU) led an anti-foreigner movement against illegal immigrants and outsider dominance, demanding expulsion of post-1951 arrivals. The movement used various methods, involving all Assamese sections but also violence. (Cartoon on terrorists in four regions).

The Rajiv Gandhi government negotiated with AASU, signing an accord in 1985 to identify and deport post-1971 migrants. AASU and Asom Gana Sangram Parishad formed a regional party, Asom Gana Parishad (AGP), winning elections promising to resolve the issue and build a 'Golden Assam'. The accord brought peace but didn't solve immigration. The 'outsider' issue remains contentious in Assam and other parts of the Northeast, especially in Tripura where original inhabitants are now a minority, and regarding Chakma refugees in Mizoram/Arunachal Pradesh. (Quote on outsider business).

Accommodation And National Integration

Even after 75 years, national integration issues persist, with regional aspirations for statehood, development, autonomy, and sometimes separation. The post-1980 period amplified these tensions, testing democratic politics' capacity to accommodate diverse demands. Lessons learned:

1. Regional aspirations are inherent to democratic politics, not abnormal. Large democracies like India regularly deal with them. Nation-building is ongoing.

2. Democratic negotiation is the best response, not suppression. Addressing militancy/agitation (Punjab, Northeast, Assam, Kashmir) through negotiated settlements reduced tensions (Mizoram is an example of successful political settlement resolving separatism).

3. Power sharing is crucial. Formal democracy isn't enough. Regional groups must share power at state level. States/regions must share in national decision-making to prevent alienation from lack of voice.

4. Regional economic imbalance fuels feelings of discrimination. Addressing backwardness and inter-regional migration is vital. Disparities lead to feelings that government policies caused imbalance.

5. The Constitution makers' foresight is evident in the flexible federal system. Special provisions exist for states like J&K and the Northeast (though Article 370 for J&K was abrogated in 2019). The Sixth Schedule grants autonomy to tribes for cultural/customary law preservation, crucial in the Northeast. India's constitutional framework is flexible and accommodative, discouraging separatism. Indian politics accepts regionalism as part of democracy. (Cartoon on India-Pakistan relation and regional cooperation).

Sikkim’s Merger

At independence, Sikkim was an Indian ‘protectorate’ (defence/foreign relations by India, internal rule by monarch Chogyal). The Chogyal struggled with democratic aspirations of the Nepali majority. Anti-Chogyal leaders (Nepali/Lepcha-Bhutia) sought support from India. The first democratic elections in 1974 saw Sikkim Congress (pro-India integration) win. Assembly sought 'associate state' status, then full integration (April 1975). A referendum approved this. Indian Parliament accepted, making Sikkim the 22nd state. Chogyal opposed, but merger was popular. (Kazi Lhendup Dorji portrait).

Goa’s Liberation

After British departure (1947), Portugal retained control of Goa, Diu, and Daman (under colonial rule since 16th century). Portugal suppressed Goans, denied rights, and forced conversions. Indian government patiently sought withdrawal. A popular movement within Goa, supported by socialists from Maharashtra, pressed for freedom. In December 1961, India sent army, liberating territories after two days. Goa, Diu, Daman became Union Territory.

A complication arose: Maharashtrawadi Gomanatak Party (MGP) wanted Marathi-speaking Goa to merge with Maharashtra. Others led by United Goan Party (UGP) wanted separate Goan identity (Konkani language). In Jan 1967, central government held an ‘opinion poll’; majority voted against merging. Goa remained UT. In 1987, Goa became a State of the Indian Union.