Chapter 8 Regional Aspirations

The 1980s witnessed a rise in **regional aspirations** for autonomy in India. These aspirations sometimes manifested as movements operating outside the traditional framework of the Indian Union, occasionally involving armed assertions, state repression, and disruption of political processes. These struggles were often prolonged and concluded through negotiated settlements or accords between the central government and the groups seeking autonomy. These accords aimed to address contentious issues within the constitutional framework, although the path to reaching them was frequently marked by turmoil and violence.

This poster from the Uttarakhand movement, appealing to Indian citizens in multiple languages, highlights how regional aspirations can be expressed in ways that affirm rather than contradict national identity, showcasing the compatibility of regional pride and nationalist sentiment.

Region And The Nation

A core principle of India's approach to diversity, evident since the time of Constitution building, is the commitment to balance national unity with regional rights. The Indian nation is built on the idea that it will not deny the rights of different regions and linguistic groups to maintain their unique cultures. Indian nationalism aims to be inclusive, ensuring unity without negating the distinctiveness of its numerous cultural components. This approach contrasts with some European models that view cultural diversity as a threat to national unity.

Indian Approach

India adopted a **democratic approach** to managing diversity and regional aspirations. Democracy allows for the political expression of these aspirations and does not automatically label them as anti-national. It provides platforms for parties and groups to articulate regional identities, aspirations, and specific problems. This process strengthens regional aspirations while simultaneously ensuring that regional issues receive attention and accommodation within the national policy-making framework.

This balance between national unity and regional needs can sometimes lead to tensions and conflicts. Prioritizing national unity excessively might overlook regional concerns, while focusing solely on regional needs might overshadow national interests. Conflicts over regional power, rights, and identity are inherent in democratic nations that aim to respect diversity while maintaining unity.

Areas Of Tension

India faced several significant challenges to national unity immediately after independence (Partition, displacement, princely state integration, linguistic reorganization). Some observers predicted India's disintegration due to its complexities. Early challenges included the issue of **Jammu and Kashmir** (involving conflict with Pakistan and the political aspirations of Kashmiris) and secessionist movements in parts of the **North-East** (Nagaland, Mizoram). Some groups in the South (Dravidian movement) also briefly considered the idea of a separate country.

Mass agitations for the formation of **linguistic states** (Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Gujarat) and protests against the imposition of Hindi (especially in Tamil Nadu) alongside pro-Hindi movements in the North were also significant challenges in the early years. While linguistic reorganization (leading to states like Punjab, Haryana, Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, Jharkhand) addressed some demands by redrawing internal boundaries, it did not resolve all issues. Complex challenges persisted in regions like Kashmir and Nagaland, and new ones emerged in Punjab, Assam, and Mizoram in later decades. Studying these cases is crucial for understanding both India's past and future in managing diversity and unity.

Jammu And Kashmir

**Jammu and Kashmir (J&K)**, despite its special status under Article 370 of the Constitution (until its abrogation), has experienced significant violence, cross-border terrorism, and political instability, resulting in loss of lives and displacement. The state comprises three distinct socio-political regions:

• Jammu: Predominantly Hindu but also with significant Muslim, Sikh, and other populations.
• Kashmir: Primarily the Kashmir Valley, inhabited mostly by Kashmiri Muslims, with minorities of Hindus, Sikhs, and Buddhists.
• Ladakh: A mountainous region with a small population roughly equally divided between Buddhists and Muslims.

Information about Union Territories of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh (Post-August 2019):

On 5 August 2019, Article 370 of the Constitution, which granted special status to Jammu and Kashmir, was effectively abrogated. The state was subsequently reorganized into two Union Territories: **Jammu & Kashmir** and **Ladakh**. This change fundamentally altered the administrative and constitutional status of the region. These two Union Territories, while representing diverse populations and aspirations, are now administered directly by the central government.

Roots Of The Problem

Before 1947, J&K was a princely state under Maharaja Hari Singh, who initially wanted independence rather than joining India or Pakistan. Pakistani leaders claimed Kashmir based on its Muslim majority, but the people's primary identity was **Kashmiriyat**, a unique Kashmiri identity separate from both India and Pakistan. The popular movement led by **Sheikh Abdullah** of the National Conference sought to end the Maharaja's rule but opposed joining Pakistan. The National Conference was secular and aligned with the Indian Congress; Sheikh Abdullah had close ties with Nehru.

In October 1947, Pakistan sent tribal infiltrators into Kashmir, prompting the Maharaja to request Indian military help. India provided support after the Maharaja signed the **'Instrument of Accession'** with India. However, Pakistan retained control of a part of the state (Pakistan-occupied Kashmir). India took the issue to the UN, which recommended a three-step process involving Pakistan withdrawing its forces, India reducing its forces, and a plebiscite. This resolution was not implemented. Sheikh Abdullah became the State's Prime Minister in March 1948, and India granted it provisional autonomy under Article 370 (which has since been abrogated).

Information about Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah:

Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah (1905-1982) was a prominent leader from Jammu and Kashmir, known for advocating autonomy and secularism for the state. He led the movement against princely rule, opposed Pakistan due to its non-secular character, and headed the National Conference. He became the State's Prime Minister after accession but was later dismissed and imprisoned by the Government of India multiple times due to differences over Kashmir's status. He returned to power as Chief Minister after an agreement with Indira Gandhi in 1974.

This photograph shows Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah addressing a large gathering, symbolizing his popular leadership and the support he commanded in Jammu and Kashmir, particularly in the Kashmir Valley.

Since 1947, J&K's politics has been marked by external and internal disputes. Externally, Pakistan has continuously claimed Kashmir. Internally, there are disputes over Kashmir's status within India. While some in India felt Article 370 prevented full integration and should be revoked (which eventually happened in 2019), many Kashmiris believed the autonomy under Article 370 was insufficient. Their grievances included:

• The promise of a plebiscite after normalizing the situation was not fulfilled.
• They felt the special federal status under Article 370 was eroded in practice, leading to demands for restoration of 'Greater State Autonomy'.
• A perception that democracy, as practiced in the rest of India, was not fully institutionalized in J&K.

Politics Since 1948

After becoming Prime Minister, Sheikh Abdullah implemented land reforms and other pro-people policies. However, differences with the central government over Kashmir's status led to his dismissal and detention in 1953. Subsequent leadership in the state lacked strong popular support and relied on central government backing. Allegations of malpractices and rigging in elections were common. The Congress party gained influence, and the National Conference eventually merged with Congress. Attempts were made to reach agreements between Sheikh Abdullah and the Government of India, culminating in the 1974 accord where he became Chief Minister again.

Information about the film Roja:

The 1992 Tamil film "Roja" depicts the human cost of the conflict in Kashmir, focusing on a woman's struggle to rescue her husband abducted by militants demanding the release of their leader. Set against the backdrop of the Indo-Pakistan dispute and the insurgency in Kashmir, the film brought the complexities and emotional toll of the conflict to a wider audience in India, resonating due to the issue's national significance.

Insurgency And After

In 1977, National Conference, led by Sheikh Abdullah, was elected with a majority. However, after Sheikh Abdullah's death in 1982, his son Farooq Abdullah became CM but was controversially dismissed by the Governor, leading to resentment. The decision of the National Conference to ally with Congress in 1986 further strengthened the feeling among Kashmiris that the Centre was interfering in state politics, setting the stage for instability.

The 1987 assembly election, widely believed to be rigged, fueled political crisis and the rise of **insurgency** by 1989. The militant movement, seeking a separate Kashmiri nation, received support from Pakistan. The state came under President's rule and army control, experiencing significant violence from insurgents and army actions from 1990 onwards. Assembly elections were held only in 1996, bringing National Conference back to power, advocating for regional autonomy. In 2002, a coalition government of PDP and Congress replaced the National Conference.

2002 And Beyond

After 2002, J&K saw coalition governments led by PDP and then Congress, but experienced instability and President's rule. Elections in 2014 saw high voter turnout, leading to a PDP-BJP coalition government led by Mufti Mohammed Sayeed, and later his daughter Mahbooba Mufti. This period witnessed acts of terrorism and mounting tensions. The BJP withdrew support in 2018, leading to President's rule. On 5 August 2019, Article 370 was abolished, and the state was reorganized into two Union Territories: Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh. J&K and Ladakh remain examples of India's plural society with diverse aspirations that the 2019 Act aimed to address.

Punjab

The 1980s were also marked by significant developments in Punjab. The state's social composition changed after Partition and further after the carving out of Haryana and Himachal Pradesh in 1966. The **Akali Dal**, the political wing of the Sikhs, had led the movement for a Punjabi-speaking state ('Punjabi suba'), finally achieving it in 1966, making Sikhs a majority in the truncated Punjab.

Political Context

After reorganization, the Akalis formed coalition governments in 1967 and 1977. However, their political position remained precarious. Their governments were sometimes dismissed by the Centre, they lacked strong support among Hindus, and the Sikh community itself was internally differentiated by caste and class (Congress gained support among Dalits, both Hindu and Sikh). This context led a section of Akalis in the 1970s to demand greater political autonomy for the region.

This demand was formalized in the **Anandpur Sahib Resolution (1973)**, which asserted regional autonomy and sought to redefine center-state relations towards greater federalism. The resolution also spoke of the aspirations of the Sikh 'qaum' (community/nation) and aimed for the 'bolbala' (dominance/hegemony) of Sikhs, which could be interpreted as a plea for a separate Sikh nation ('Khalistan').

Information about Master Tara Singh:

Master Tara Singh (1885-1967) was a prominent Sikh religious and political leader and an early leader of the Akali movement. He advocated for the formation of a separate Punjab State after independence and was a key figure in Sikh politics during the mid-20th century.

The Anandpur Sahib Resolution had limited mass appeal initially. After the Akali government's dismissal in 1980, the Akali Dal launched a movement focusing on issues like water distribution with neighboring states. However, more extreme elements among religious leaders began advocating for secession and the creation of 'Khalistan'.

Cycle Of Violence

Leadership of the movement shifted from moderate Akalis to extremist elements, escalating into armed insurgency. Militants established their headquarters in the **Golden Temple in Amritsar**, turning the holy shrine into an armed fortress. In June 1984, the Government of India conducted **'Operation Blue Star'**, an army action to flush out the militants from the Golden Temple. While successful in military terms, the operation damaged the temple and deeply hurt the sentiments of Sikhs worldwide, fueling militant and extremist groups.

A tragic consequence was the **assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi** on 31 October 1984 by her Sikh bodyguards, who sought revenge for Operation Blue Star. This triggered widespread violence against the Sikh community in Delhi and other parts of North India, lasting for about a week and resulting in over two thousand Sikh deaths in Delhi alone. The government's slow response and perceived failure to punish perpetrators added to the pain and resentment felt by Sikhs. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh later apologized for the anti-Sikh violence in 2005.

Information about Sant Harchand Singh Longowal:

Sant Harchand Singh Longowal (1932-1985) was a prominent Sikh political and religious leader and President of the Akali Dal. He played a key role in reaching the Punjab Accord with Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi in 1985, seeking to restore peace in Punjab. He was assassinated after signing the accord.

This image shows women observing a wall painting commemorating Indira Gandhi's assassination, highlighting the deep emotional and political impact of this event, which was directly linked to the conflict in Punjab.

Information about Justice Nanavati Commission of Inquiry quote:

This quote from the Nanavati Commission report, which inquired into the 1984 anti-Sikh riots, suggests that the attacks were organized and systematic, with little fear of police action, indicating a potential lack of effective state response or even complicity in the violence against the Sikh community following Indira Gandhi's assassination.

Road To Peace

After coming to power in 1984, Prime Minister **Rajiv Gandhi** initiated dialogue with moderate Akali leaders. In July 1985, he signed the **Rajiv Gandhi - Longowal Accord (Punjab Accord)** with Harchand Singh Longowal, aiming for normalcy in Punjab. The accord included provisions for transferring Chandigarh to Punjab, setting up commissions for border disputes with Haryana and water sharing (Ravi-Beas) among Punjab, Haryana, and Rajasthan, compensation for victims of militancy, and withdrawing the Armed Forces Special Powers Act in Punjab. However, peace was not immediate, and the cycle of violence continued for nearly a decade, involving militancy and counter-insurgency excesses (including human rights violations), fragmentation of the Akali Dal, and periods of President's rule.

Militancy was eventually suppressed by security forces by the mid-1990s, but at great cost to the people of Punjab. Peace returned, and the state held relatively normal elections in 1997, bringing the Akali Dal (Badal)-BJP alliance to power. While religious identities remain important, politics gradually shifted back towards secular lines, focusing on economic development and social change.

Information about Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's quote:

In this quote from his speech in Rajya Sabha in 2005, Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh, while expressing regret and apologizing for the 1984 anti-Sikh violence, reflects on the nature of nationhood and democracy in India. He suggests that being Indian means accommodating diversity and differences, and that while past actions like the 1984 violence were unacceptable and challenging to the idea of India, the ability to confront such events, acknowledge mistakes, and rebuild demonstrates the strength of Indian democracy and its capacity for healing and moving forward, emphasizing the importance of addressing the past and working towards unity and justice.

This image of The Times of India's special mid-day edition on 31 October 1984 highlights the immediate and profound national impact of Indira Gandhi's assassination, an event directly linked to the Punjab crisis.

The North-East

The North-East region, comprising seven states ('seven sisters'), experienced a turning point in regional aspirations in the 1980s. Despite having only 4% of India's population, it accounts for double the share of its area. Connected by a narrow corridor, the region shares borders with China, Myanmar, and Bangladesh, serving as a gateway to Southeast Asia. The region underwent significant political reorganization after 1947, with princely states merging with India and new states being carved out of Assam over time (Nagaland 1963, Manipur/Tripura/Meghalaya 1972, Mizoram/Arunachal Pradesh 1987).

Partition in 1947 made the North-East landlocked, impacting its economy and leading to developmental neglect and political isolation. The region also saw major demographic changes due to migration, both from within India and neighboring countries. The region's isolation, social complexity, and backwardness have contributed to diverse demands, including autonomy, secession, and opposition to 'outsiders'. These issues have often taken political and sometimes violent forms.

This map highlights the North-East region of India, illustrating its geographical location, multiple state divisions, and strategic position sharing borders with several neighboring countries, underscoring the complexity of regional aspirations and security concerns in this area.

Demands For Autonomy

At independence, most of the North-East was part of Assam (except Manipur and Tripura). Demands for political autonomy emerged when non-Assamese groups felt the Assam government was imposing the Assamese language. Protests led to the formation of tribal organizations demanding separate states. Instead of one tribal state, the Central Government gradually created several states out of Assam: Meghalaya, Mizoram, and Arunachal Pradesh, along with upgrading Tripura and Manipur to statehood by 1972. However, autonomy demands continued within Assam, with communities like Bodos, Karbis, and Dimasas seeking separate states, leading to mobilization and sometimes insurgency. Since creating more states wasn't feasible, provisions for autonomous District Councils (Karbis, Dimasas) and Autonomous Councils (Bodos) were used to address their demands within Assam.

Secessionist Movements

While autonomy demands could often be addressed through constitutional provisions, demands for outright **secession** (a separate country) presented a greater challenge. This problem was faced in at least two North-Eastern states: Mizoram and Nagaland.

• Mizoram: After independence, Mizo Hills was an autonomous district within Assam. Some Mizos felt they were never part of British India or the Indian Union. The movement for secession gained popular support after the Assam government's inadequate response to the 1959 famine. Anger led to the formation of the **Mizo National Front (MNF)** under **Laldenga**, launching an armed struggle for independence in 1966. This began a two-decade conflict between Mizo insurgents (fighting a guerrilla war, supported by Pakistan, taking shelter in East Pakistan) and the Indian army (using repressive measures). After twenty years, both sides were exhausted. Laldenga returned from exile and negotiated with the Indian government. A peace agreement was signed in 1986 between Rajiv Gandhi and Laldenga, granting Mizoram full statehood with special powers, and the MNF agreed to end its secessionist struggle. This accord was a turning point, making Mizoram one of the most peaceful and developed states in the region.
• Nagaland: The Naga secessionist movement began earlier than Mizoram, led by **Angami Zapu Phizo**, who declared independence in 1951. Phizo rejected negotiated settlements, and the Naga National Council launched an armed struggle. Despite a section of Nagas signing an agreement with the Government of India, other rebels did not accept it. The problem in Nagaland remains complex and awaits a final resolution, although recent years have seen ceasefires and peace talks.

Information about Laldenga:

Laldenga (1937-1990) was the founder and leader of the Mizo National Front. He led an armed struggle for independent Mizoram for two decades after the 1959 famine experience. He negotiated a peace settlement with Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi in 1986, which granted statehood to Mizoram, and became its Chief Minister.

Information about Angami Zapu Phizo:

Angami Zapu Phizo (1904-1990) was a leader of the movement for an independent Nagaland and president of the Naga National Council. He initiated an armed struggle against the Indian state after independence and spent the later part of his life in exile, refusing negotiated settlements that did not grant full sovereignty.

This photo shows the signing of a ceasefire agreement by the Mizo National Front (MNF), marking a crucial step towards peace and political resolution of the secessionist movement in Mizoram, leading to statehood for the region.

Movements Against Outsiders

Large-scale migration into the North-East has created problems pitting 'local' communities against those seen as 'outsiders' or migrants, who are perceived as encroachers on resources and competitors for jobs and political power. This has led to political and sometimes violent movements against outsiders.

The **Assam Movement (1979-1985)** is a prime example. Assamese people suspected large numbers of illegal Bengali Muslim settlers from Bangladesh, fearing they would be reduced to a minority. Economic issues were also a factor, with widespread poverty despite rich natural resources like oil, tea, and coal, which were perceived as being drained out of the state without benefiting the local population.

In 1979, the All Assam Students' Union (AASU), a non-party student group, led an anti-foreigner movement. The movement protested illegal migration, Bengali/outsider domination, and faulty voter lists including immigrants. It demanded that all outsiders who entered Assam after 1951 be deported. The movement used novel methods and mobilized all sections of Assamese society, involving widespread support but also violent incidents. It also disrupted economic activities like oil transport.

After six years of turmoil, the Rajiv Gandhi government negotiated with AASU leaders, signing the **Assam Accord in 1985**. The accord aimed to identify and deport foreigners who had entered Assam after the Bangladesh war. Following the accord, AASU and Asom Gana Sangram Parishad formed a regional party, **Asom Gana Parishad (AGP)**, which came to power in 1985 promising to resolve the foreigner problem and build a 'Golden Assam'. While the accord brought peace and changed Assam's politics, the issue of immigration remains contentious in Assam and other North-Eastern states, particularly where original inhabitants have become minorities (like in Tripura) or where there is hostility towards Chakma refugees (Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh).

This cartoon highlights the presence of 'terrorism' in various regions like Punjab, Darjeeling, Delhi, and Mizoram, linking it to regional tensions and potentially suggesting that these issues are complex and multifaceted, involving both internal dissent and violent extremism.

Accommodation And National Integration

The cases of regional aspirations show that national integration remains an ongoing process. Regional demands, from statehood to autonomy and sometimes secession, persist. The period since the 1980s highlighted these tensions, testing India's democratic capacity to accommodate diversity. Several lessons can be drawn:

1. Regional aspirations are a normal part of democratic politics, not an abnormality or anti-national phenomenon. Large, diverse democracies like India must regularly address them as part of nation-building.
2. Responding to regional aspirations through **democratic negotiation** is more effective than suppression. Examples like the Punjab Accord, Assam Accord, and Mizoram Accord show that negotiated settlements within the constitutional framework can reduce tensions and resolve problems, as demonstrated by the successful resolution of separatism in Mizoram through political settlement.
3. **Power sharing** is crucial. It's not enough to have formal democratic structures; regional groups need a share in power at the state level. Regions also need a voice in national-level decision-making to prevent alienation and feelings of injustice.
4. **Regional imbalance in economic development** contributes to feelings of discrimination. Addressing the backwardness of some states or regions is necessary to alleviate feelings that government policies have caused disparities and promote inclusive development.
5. The farsightedness of the Constitution makers in creating a **flexible and accommodative federal system** (with special provisions for states like J&K and in the North-East, and provisions like the Sixth Schedule for tribal autonomy) has been crucial. This framework helps address complex problems and encourages regional aspirations within the union rather than pushing towards separatism. Indian politics has largely succeeded in integrating regionalism as a part of democratic functioning.

Information about Rajiv Gandhi:

Rajiv Gandhi (1944-1991) served as Prime Minister of India from 1984 to 1989. He entered active politics after 1980. As PM, he initiated dialogues and reached accords with militant groups and student unions in Punjab, Mizoram, and Assam. He also advocated for economic liberalization and new technologies. His term was marked by efforts to resolve regional conflicts and modernize the country, but also faced challenges, including sending the Indian Army to Sri Lanka at the request of the Sri Lankan government.

Goa’s Liberation

Goa's integration into India provides another example of regional aspirations and democratic resolution. After British rule ended in 1947, Portugal retained control over Goa, Diu, and Daman. The Indian government sought a peaceful withdrawal, supported by a popular movement for freedom within Goa. After patient efforts and a strong local movement, the Government of India sent the army in December 1961, liberating these territories after a brief action. Goa, Diu, and Daman became a Union Territory.

However, a debate arose over Goa's future status. A section, led by the Maharashtrawadi Gomanatak Party (MGP), wanted Goa, a Marathi-speaking area, to merge with Maharashtra. Many Goans, led by the United Goan Party (UGP), wished to retain a separate Goan identity and culture, particularly the Konkani language. In January 1967, the Central Government held a special **'opinion poll'** in Goa, using a referendum-like process to allow the people to decide their future. The majority voted to remain separate from Maharashtra. Consequently, Goa continued as a Union Territory and eventually gained **statehood in 1987**, confirming the principle of respecting distinct regional identities through democratic means.

R.K. Laxman's cartoon from 1967, likely depicting the Opinion Poll in Goa, visually represents the democratic process where the people of Goa were given a choice about their future status, reflecting the principle of self-determination in deciding regional identity and political alignment within the Indian framework.