t.com www.GOALias.blogspot.com www.GOALias.blogspot.com
t.com www.GOALias.blogspot.com www.GOALias.blogspot.com
t.com www.GOALias.blogspot.com www.GOALias.blogspot.com
- No tags were found...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>More Books At<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong><strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong><strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong><strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong><strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong><strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong><strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong><strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong><strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong><strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong><strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong><strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong><strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong><strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.c<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong><strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong><strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>xiii<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>ContentsForeword --- iiiLetter to the Readers --- v<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong><strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Chapter 1Challenges of nation building 2<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Chapter 2Era of one-party dominance 26<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Chapter 3Politics of planned development 46<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Chapter 4India’s external relations 64<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Chapter 5Challenges to and restoration of the congress system 82<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Chapter 6The crisis of democratic order 102<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Chapter 7Rise of popular movements 128<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Chapter 8Regional aspirations 148<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Chapter 9Recent developments in indian politics 172<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong><strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong><strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong><strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>iii<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>FOREWORDThe National Curriculum Framework (NCF) 2005 re<strong>com</strong>mends thatchildren’s life at school must be linked to their life outside the school.<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>This principle marks a departure from the legacy of bookish learningwhich continues to shape our system and causes a gap between theschool, home and <strong>com</strong>munity. The syllabi and textbooks developedon the basis of NCF signify an attempt to implement this basic idea.<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>They also attempt to discourage rote learning and the maintenanceof sharp boundaries between different subject areas. We hope thesemeasures will take us significantly further in the direction of achild-centred system of education outlined in the National Policy on<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Education (1986).The success of this effort depends on the steps that school principalsand teachers will take to encourage children to reflect on their ownlearning and to pursue imaginative activities and questions. We must<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>recognise that, given space, time and freedom, children generatenew knowledge by engaging with the information passed on to themby adults. Treating the prescribed textbook as the sole basis ofexamination is one of the key reasons why other resources and sites<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>of learning are ignored. Inculcating creativity and initiative is possibleif we perceive and treat children as participants in learning, not asreceivers of a fixed body of knowledge.<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>These aims imply considerable change in school routines and mode offunctioning. Flexibility in the daily time-table is as necessary as rigourin implementing the annual calendar so that the required number ofteaching days are actually devoted to teaching. The methods used forteaching and evaluation will also determine how effective this textbook<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>proves for making children’s life at school a happy experience, ratherthan a source of stress or boredom. Syllabus designers have triedto address the problem of curricular burden by restructuring andreorienting knowledge at different stages with greater consideration<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>for child psychology and the time available for teaching. The textbookattempts to enhance this endeavour by giving higher priority and<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>space to opportunities for contemplation and wondering, discussionin small groups, and activities requiring hands-on experience.NCERT appreciates the hard work done by the textbook development<strong>com</strong>mittee responsible for this book. We wish to thank the Chairpersonof the Advisory Group on Social Science, Professor Hari Vasudevan<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>and the Chief Advisors for this book, Shri Yogendra Yadav andProfessor Suhas Palshikar for guiding the work of this <strong>com</strong>mittee.Several teachers contributed to the development of this textbook;we are grateful to their principals for making this possible. We are<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>indebted to the institutions and organisations which have generouslypermitted us to draw upon their resources, material and personnel.We are especially grateful to the members of the National Monitoring<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>ivCommittee, appointed by the Department of Secondary andHigher Education, Ministry of Human Resource Developmentunder the Chairpersonship of Professor Mrinal Miri andProfessor G. P. Deshpande, for their valuable time and contribution.As an organisation <strong>com</strong>mitted to systemic reform and continuousimprovement in the quality of its products, NCERT wel<strong>com</strong>es<strong>com</strong>ments and suggestions which will enable us to undertake furtherrevision and refinement.New Delhi20 December 2006DirectorNational Council of EducationalResearch and Training
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Letter to the readersAs India <strong>com</strong>pletes sixty years as an independent and democraticcountry, it is time to look back and reflect on this period. So muchof the trends and patterns of our politics as well as the strengthsand weaknesses of our democracy have been shaped during thesesix decades. Yet it is surprising how little the younger citizens of ourcountry know about this history. You would have a good idea of thefreedom struggle because you study that in the History textbooks. Youwould also know something about our contemporary politics from themedia. But very few young citizens know much about the period thatconnects the freedom movement to contemporary politics. This is thegap the present book seeks to fill. It tells you the story of the journeyof our democracy during the last sixty years so that you can makesense of the political reality that surrounds all of us.This book is not a chronicle of all or even main events during the pastsix decades. We have tried to weave the history of the last sixty yearsaround some major issues and themes. The first eight chapters of thebook cover a certain period of this history, but in a selective mannerby focussing on one issue or theme that dominated those years. Thefinal chapter offers an overview of various issues that have emergedin the most recent period.Politics is often understood as a power game played by some bigleaders. Politics is, of course, about power. But politics is also abouttaking collective decisions, about sorting out differences, aboutreaching consensus. That is why we simply cannot run our collectiveaffairs without politics. Similarly, big leaders no doubt influencethe course of politics. But politics is much more than a story ofindividual ambitions and frustrations. That is why you will not findmuch emphasis on personalities in this book. You will find somebiographical sketches so as to give you a rich sense of those times.But we do not expect you to memorise these biographical details.In order to give you a feel of the times, we have included manyphotographs, cartoons, maps and other images. As in other books,Unni and Munni are there to share their innocent yet irreverentquestions and <strong>com</strong>ments with you. By now you know that what Unniand Munni say is not the opinion of the textbook. You, and eventhe authors, may or may not agree with Unni and Munni. But youshould, like them, begin to question everything.This book refrains from passing judgement on events and personalitiesof this period. The objective of this book is to equip you with informationand perspectives so that you can take more informed and well thoughtout positions on politics, either as students of Political Science or ascitizens of the country. That is why we tell the story in an open-endedand non-partisan manner. This has not been easy, for there is no way
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>via book like this can side-step all the ‘controversial’ issues. Many ofthe significant issues of this period were and continue to be subjectsof deep political differences.The Team that prepared this book decided to follow certain normsto ensure non-partisan treatment of the subject. Firstly, it presentsmore than one viewpoint when dealing with controversial subjects.Secondly, wherever available, it uses authentic sources like thereports of various Commissions or court judgements, to reconstructcrucial details. Thirdly, it uses a variety of sources from scholarlywritings to different newspapers and magazines, etc. to tell the story.Fourthly, the book avoids detailed discussion of the role of politicalleaders who are still active in politics.Writing this textbook turned out to be particularly challenging forwe do not have sufficient information on this period. Most of thearchival material is still closed to the researchers. There are not manystandard histories of this period that a textbook like this can drawupon. The Textbook Development Committee turned this challengeinto an opportunity. We are grateful to the Team members who sparedtheir valuable time for preparing the drafts of the various chapters.We would like to place on record our gratitude to Professors RekhaChowdhary and Surinder Jodhka for contributing drafts for thesections on Jammu and Kashmir and Punjab respectively.Given the significance and the sensitive nature of the book, it wasdecided to put the drafts through many rounds of scrutiny by agroup of Political Scientists and historians. We decided to requestthree ‘readers’ – Dr. Ramchandra Guha, Professor Sunil Khilnaniand Dr. Mahesh Rangarajan – to read an early draft of this text foraccuracy and non-partisan treatment of the subject. We are verygrateful that all of them accepted our request and took out time toread and <strong>com</strong>ment on the drafts. Their remarks encouraged us; theirsuggestions saved us from many errors. We owe a special debt toRamchandra Guha, since we have liberally drawn upon his book,India after Gandhi. Dr. Philip Oldenberg also read parts of the bookand made valuable <strong>com</strong>ments. We were fortunate in having a groupof eminent scholars, Professors Mrinal Miri, G.P. Deshpande andGopal Guru, who constituted a special sub-<strong>com</strong>mittee of the NationalMonitoring Committee and read the book at least thrice. We wishto thank Professor Krishna Kumar, Director NCERT and ProfessorHari Vasudevan, Chairperson, Advisory Committee for Textbooks, fortheir support, advise and guidance at different stages of this delicateproject. We are also thankful to Professor Yash Pal for his interest inand support to this book.We are thankful to Lokniti Programme of the CSDS, Delhi which forthe last one year provided a home and resource base for the work onthis textbook. Various memebers of the CSDS family who went outof their way to support this work include Sanjeer Alam, Avinash Jha,
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>viiBalaji Madiq and Himanshu Bhattacharya at Lokniti and Ravikantand Mohammad Qureshi at Sarai. We would also like to thank theauthorities of the Philately Bureau, especially Kaveri Banerji andNiraj Kumar and Sandhya R. Kanneganti of Indian Postal Services, forhelping us to access and allowing us to reproduce a large number ofpostal stamps; Milind Champanerkar for helping us in the selection ofthe films; Radhika Menon for critical inputs; Vipul Mudgal, Ritu andDharamveer for helping us to access the rich collection of HindustanTimes Photo Library; Bhaanu Choube and Abhay Chhajalani foropening the archives of Nai Dunia; Rajendra Babu for helping us withclippings and images from The Hindu Library and authorities of theUniversity of Michigan Library and Nehru Memorial museum andLibray, New Delhi.Alex George, Pankaj Pushkar, K. K. Kailash, and M. Manisha formedthe backbone of the team that worked on this book in various ways– doing archival research, hunting for visuals, checking facts. Butfor their multi-faceted support, and especially the untiring devotionof Pankaj Pushkar, this book would not have been what it is. We arethankful to Anupama Roy for her generous help with proof reading.The look and feel of the book is the product of the artistic skillsof Irfaan Khan, the creator of Unni-Munni, graphics and maps byARK Grafix, and the aesthetic sensibility of Shweta Rao who designedthe book. We thank them all for sharing the spirit of this project. Wewould like to place on record our gratitude to Shveta Uppal, ChiefEditor, NCERT, who went beyond the call of her duty in working withthis book, for her exemplary patience and professionalism.This book is a tribute to the maturity of Indian democracy andis intended as a small contribution to enriching the democraticdeliberations in our country. We sincerely hope that this book willbe received in this spirit and will be useful not only for students ofPolitical Science but also to a wider group of young citizens of ourcountry.Ujjwal Kumar SinghAdvisorSuhas Palshikar and Yogendra YadavChief Advisors
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>viiiIf you would like to knowmore, read...Granville Austin.1999. Working a Democratic Constitution: The IndianExperience. Oxford University Press, Delhi.Paul R. Brass.1994 (second edition). The Politics of India sinceIndependence. Cambridge University Press (published in India byFoundation Books), New Delhi.Bipan Chandra, Mridula Mukherjee and Aditya Mukherjee. 2000.India after Independence (1947-2000). Penguin Books, DelhiPartha Chatterjee (ed). 1997. State and Politics in India. OxfordUniversity Press, Delhi.Francine R. Frankel. 2005. India’s Political Economy (1947-2004).Oxford University Press, Delhi.Ramachandra Guha. 2007. India After Gandhi: History of the World’sLargest Democracy. Picador India, Delhi.Niraja Gopal Jayal (ed). 2001. Democracy in India. Oxford UniversityPress. Delhi.Sudipta Kaviraj (ed). 1997. Politics in India. Oxford University Press,Delhi.Sunil Khilnani. 2003 (paperback). The Idea of India. Penguin,London.Rajni Kothari. 1985. Politics in India. Orient Longman, Delhi.Pratap Bhanu Mehta. 2003. The Burden of Democracy. PenguinBooks, Delhi.Achin Vanaik. 1990. The Painful Transition: Bourgeois Democracy inIndia. Verso, London and New York.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>ixTextbook Development CommitteeChairperson, Advisory Committee for Textbooks at the SeniorSecondary LevelHari Vasudevan, Professor, Department of History, University ofCalcutta, KolkataChief AdvisorsSuhas Palshikar, Professor, Department of Political Science,University of Pune, PuneYogendra Yadav, Senior Fellow, Centre for the Study of DevelopingSocieties (CSDS), DelhiAdvisorUjjwal Kumar Singh, Reader, Department of Political Science,University of Delhi, DelhiMembersAditya Nigam, Fellow, CSDS, DelhiAkhil Ranjan Dutta, Lecturer in Political Science, Gauhati University,GuwahatiAlex George, Independent Researcher, Eruvatty, Kerala.Anuradha Sen, Principal, The Srijan School, New DelhiBharani N. Faculty, International Academy of Creative Teaching (IACT),BangaloreDwaipayan Bhattacharya, Fellow, CSSS, KolkataK. Kailash, Lecturer in Political Science, Panjab University, ChandigarhM. Manisha, Sr. Lecturer in Political Science, Loretto College, KolkataManjari Katju, Reader in Political Science, University of Hyderabad,HyderabadPankaj Pushkar, Sr. Lecturer, Lokniti, CSDS, DelhiMalla V.S.V. Prasad, Lecturer, DESSH, NCERT, New DelhiRajeshwari Deshpande, Reader in Political Science, University of Pune, PuneSajal Nag, Professor of History, Assam University, SilcharSandeep Shastri, Director, IACT, BangaloreShailendra Kharat, Lecturer in Political Science, Shinde Sarkar College,Kolhapur, MaharashtraSrilekha Mukherji, PGT, St Paul School, New DelhiMember-coordinatorSanjay Dubey, Reader, DESSH, NCERT, New Delhi
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>request for FeedbackHow did you like this textbook? What was your experience in readingor using this? What were the difficulties you faced? What changeswould you like to see in the next version of this book?Write to us on all these and any other matter related to the textbook.You could be a teacher, a parent, a student or just a general reader.We value any and every feedback.Please write to:Coordinator (Political Science - Politics in India since Independence)DESSH, NCERT, Sri Aurobindo Marg, New Delhi 110 016You could also send an e-mail to politics.ncert@gmail.<strong>com</strong>
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>xiAcknowledgementsWe wish to acknowledge the following for the stamps, cartoons,newspaper clippings, pictures and extracts of texts used in thisbook.Postal stampsThe National Philately Bureau, Department of Post and Telegraph,Government of India for all the postal stamps used throughout thisbook.CartoonsShankar Narayanan and Times of India for cartoons by R. K. Laxmanon pages 18, 70, 71, 82, 85, 93, 98,106, 109, 110, 114, 116, 119,122, 124, 153, 169 and 174. The Children’s Book Trust for cartoonsby Shankar on pages 21, 22, 26, 28, 40, 56 and 62. Laughingwith Kutty, Free Press for cartoons by Kutty on pages 90, 95, 98and 157. Sudhir Dar, Sudhir Tailang and UNDP & Planning Commissionfor cartoons on page 52 and 144. Janaki Abraham for cartoon byAbu on page 103. India Today for cartoons by Atanu Roy on page 122,Ravi Shankar on page 192, Ajit Ninan on pages 172 and 178. HT Bookof Cartoons for cartoons by Rambabu Mathur on page 166 andSudhir Tailang on page 176.PicturesSunil Janah for pictures on pages 2 and 13. The Hindu for pictures onpages 7, 33, 136, 138 and 152. DPA/PIB for pictures on pages 9 and17. Hindustan Times for pictures on pages 49, 120, 128, 129, 134 andthe collage on the cover page. Nehru Memorial Museum and Libraryfor pictures on pages 3, 10 and 64. Sabeena Gadihoke for pictures byHomai Vyarawalla on pages 6, 7, 42 and 69. India Today for picture onpage 139. Raghu Rai for pictures on pages 86 and 166. KumarappaInstitute of Gram Swaraj for picture on page 55. Pankaj Pushkarfor picture on page 144. Robin Shaw Pushp/ Rajkamal Prakashanfor picture on page 43. Narmada Bachao Andolan for picture onpage 141. Outlook Classic and <strong>www</strong>.thesouthasian.org for pictures onthe back cover.Press clippingsThe Hindustan Times for the clippings (from History in the Making:75 years of the Hindustan Times) on pages 4, 51, 59, 69, 75, 77, 83,95, 111, 154, 166, 181, 185 and 187. Times of India for the clippingson page 7, 75, 77, 110, 153, 156, 160, 161, 164 and 169. The Hindufor clippings on pages 32 and 33 and news on page 47. Nai Dunia forthe clippings on pages 33, 71, 102, 110, 111, 159, 166 and 181. ThePioneer for clippings on page 186. The Statesman for clipping on page186. The Indian Express for clipping on page 188.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>xiiPosters/AdvertisementsGCMMF India for Amul advertisements on pages 61, 71, 91, 111,166, 173, 174 and 175. Design and People for posters on pages 131and 140. Anhad/NCDHR for posters on page 133. Zuban for posteron page 137. Uttarakhand Sanskritik Morcha for poster on page 148.Sources of extracts and citations from reports and books. RamchandraGuha, India after Gandhi, Picador India, 2007, for the quotations onpages 25, 29, 30, 67, 68, 72 and 88. Sundeep Dougal, translationof Faiz Ahmend Faiz, Subh-e-azadi on the website http://members.tripod.<strong>com</strong>/~SundeepDougal/Faiz.html. Umair Raja, translation ofAmrita Pritam’s poem “Today I Call Waris Shah” at <strong>www</strong>.chowk.<strong>com</strong>.Text and translation of Sadat Hasan Manto, ‘Kasre-Nafsi’ (HospitalityDelayed), Mushirul Hasan, ed. 2000. Inventing Boundaries: Gender,Politics and the Partition of India. Oxford University Press, New DelhiFanishwarnath Renu, Maila Anchal translation from Indira Junghare,The Soiled Border. Shrilal Shukla, Rag Darbari translation by GillianWright, Penguin Books India, 1992. Translation of Namdeo Dhasal’sMarathi poem in Golpitha, translated by Jayant Karve and EleanorZelliot, in Mulk Raj Anand and Eleanor Zelliot (ed), An Anthology ofDalit Literature, New Delhi, Gyan Books, 1992. Rajni Kothari. Politicsin India, Third reprint, Orient Longman, Delhi, pages 155-156. ParthaChatterjee (ed.) State and Politics in India, Oxford University Press,New Delhi, 1997 for extracts from Rajni Kothari on page 448; DavidButler, Ashok Lahiri, Prannoy Roy on page 149; Sudipta Kaviraj onpage 74; Sanjib Baruah, on page 507. Jawaharlal Nehru’s Speeches,Sept 1957-April 1961, Delhi, GoI, Ministry of Information andBroadcasting, Publication Division, Vol 4, page 381. FrancineR. Frankel, 2005, India’s Political Economy (1947-2004), OxfordUniversity Press, Delhi, page 71; Zoya Hasan, Parties and PartyPolitics in India. Oxford University Press, Delhi, 2004, pages 33-34;Anand Chakravarti, ‘A Village in Chomu Assembly Constituency inRajasthan’ in A.M. Shah (ed), The Grassroots of Democracy, PermanentBlack, Delhi, 2007; Report of the Justice Nanavati Commission ofInquiry, Vol.I, 2005, page 180; National Human Rights Commission,Annual Report 2001-2002, pages 317-318 and Shah Commission,Interim Report, pages 96-101, 120-139.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Credit: Sunil JanahIn a moment ofoptimism, Hindus andHindus and Muslims inKolkata in 1947 markedthe end of <strong>com</strong>munalviolence by jointly flyingthe flags of India andPakistan from truckspatrolling the city.This rare photographcaptured the joy offreedom and the tragedyof partition in India andin Pakistan.In this chapter…The first few years in the life of independent India were full of challenges.Some of the most pressing ones concerned national unity andterritorial integrity of India. We begin the story of politics in India sinceIndependence by looking at how three of these challenges of nationbuildingwere successfully negotiated in the first decade after 1947.• Freedom came with Partition, which resulted in large scale violenceand displacement and challenged the very idea of a secular India.• The integration of the princely states into the Indian union neededurgent resolution.• The internal boundaries of the country needed to be drawn afresh tomeet the aspirations of the people who spoke different languages.In the next two chapters we shall turn to other kinds of challenges facedby the country in this early phase.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>challenges of1nation buildingChallenges for the new nationAt the hour of midnight on 14-15 August 1947, India attained independence.Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of free India, addressed a special sessionof the Constituent Assembly that night. This was the famous ‘tryst with destiny’speech that you are familiar with.This was the moment Indians had been waiting for. You have read in your historytextbooks that there were many voices in our national movement. But there weretwo goals almost everyone agreed upon: one, that after Independence, we shall runour country through democratic government; and two, that the government will berun for the good of all, particularly the poor and the socially disadvantaged groups.Now that the country was independent, the time had <strong>com</strong>e to realise the promise offreedom.This was not going to be easy. India was born in very difficult circumstances.Perhaps no other country by then was born in a situation more difficult than that ofIndia in 1947. Freedom came with the partition of the country. The year 1947 was ayear of unprecedented violence and trauma of displacement. It was in this situationthat independent India started on its journey to achieve several objectives. Yet theturmoil that ac<strong>com</strong>panied independence did not make our leaders lose sight of themultiple challenges that faced the new nation.Credit: PIBchapterPrime Minister JawaharLal Nehru speaking fromthe Red Fort,15 August 1947
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>4 Politics in India since IndependenceHindustan Times, 19 July 1947“Tomorrow we shall befree from the slavery of theBritish domination. Butat midnight India will bepartitioned. Tomorrow willthus be a day of rejoicing aswell as of mourning.Mahatma Gandhi14 August 1947,Kolkata.“Three ChallengesBroadly, independent India faced three kinds of challenges. The firstand the immediate challenge was to shape a nation that was united,yet ac<strong>com</strong>modative of the diversity in our society. India was a landof continental size and diversity. Its people spoke different languagesand followed different cultures and religions. At that time it waswidely believed that a country full of such kinds of diversity couldnot remain together for long. The partition of the country appeared toprove everyone’s worst fears. There were serious questions about thefuture of India: Would India survive as a unified country? Would it doso by emphasising national unity at the cost of every other objective?Would it mean rejecting all regional and sub-national identities? Andthere was an urgent question: How was integration of the territory ofIndia to be achieved?The second challenge was to establish democracy. You havealready studied the Indian Constitution. You know that theConstitution granted fundamental rights and extended the right tovote to every citizen. India adopted representative democracy basedon the parliamentary form of government. These features ensure thatthe political <strong>com</strong>petition would take place in a democratic framework.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Challenges of Nation Building 5A democratic constitution is necessary but not sufficient forestablishing a democracy. The challenge was to develop democraticpractices in accordance with the Constitution.The third challenge was to ensure the development and well-beingof the entire society and not only of some sections. Here again theConstitution clearly laid down the principle of equality and specialprotection to socially disadvantaged groups and religious andcultural <strong>com</strong>munities. The Constitution also set out in the DirectivePrinciples of State Policy the welfare goals that democratic politicsmust achieve. The real challenge now was to evolve effective policiesfor economic development and eradication of poverty.How did independent India respond to these challenges? To whatextent did India succeed in achieving the various objectives set outby the Constitution? This entire book is an attempt to respond tothese questions. The book tells the story of politics in India sinceIndependence so as to equip you to develop your own answers tobig questions like these. In the first three chapters we look at howthe three challenges mentioned above were faced in the early yearsafter Independence.In this chapter, we focus on the first challenge of nationbuildingthat occupied centre-stage in the years immediately afterIndependence. We begin by looking at the events that formed thecontext of Independence. This can help us understand why theissue of national unity and security became a primary challengeat the time of Independence. We shall then see how India chose toshape itself into a nation, united by a shared history and <strong>com</strong>mondestiny. This unity had to reflect the aspirations of people acrossthe different regions and deal with the disparities that existedamong regions and different sections of people. In the next twochapters we shall turn to the challenge of establishing a democracyand achieving economic development with equality and justice.I always wanted a timemachine, so that I cango back and participatein the celebrations of15 August 1947. Butthis looks differentfrom what I thought.These three stamps were issued in 1950 to mark the first Republic Day on 26 January 1950. Whatdo the images on these stamps tell you about the challenges to the new republic? If you were askedto design these stamps in 1950, which images would you have chosen?
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>6 Politics P in India since IndependenceDawn, Karachi, 14 August 1947The Dawn of FreedomFaiz Ahmed FaizThis scarred, marred brightness,this bitten-by-night dawn -The one that was awaited, surely, this is not that dawn.This is not the dawn yearning for whichHad we set out, friends, hoping to findsometime, somewhereThe final destination of stars in the wilderness of the sky.Somewhere, at least, must be a shore for the languidwaves of the night,Somewhere at least must anchor the sadboat of the heart …Translation of an extract from Urdu poem Subh-e-azadiFaiz Ahmed Faiz (1911-1984) Bornin Sialkot; stayed in Pakistan afterPartition. A leftist in his politicalleanings, he opposed the Pakistaniregime and was imprisoned. Collectionsof his poetry include Naksh-e-Fariyadi,Dast-e-Saba and Zindan-Nama.Regarded as one of the greatest poetsof South Asia in the twentieth century.We should begin to work in that spirit and in course of time all theseangularities of the majority and minority <strong>com</strong>munities, the Hindu <strong>com</strong>munityand the Muslim <strong>com</strong>munity – because even as regards Muslims you havePathans, Punjabis, Shias, Sunnis and so on and among the Hindus you haveBrahmins, Vaishnavas, Khatris, also Bengalees, Madrasis, and so on – willvanish. … You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free togo to your mosques or to any other place of worship in this State of Pakistan.You may belong to any religion or caste or creed – that has nothing to do withthe business of the State.Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Presidential Address to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan atKarachi, 11 August 1947.
The Times of India, Bombay, 15 August 1947<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Challenges of Nation Building 7Today I call Waris ShahAmrita PritamToday, I call Waris Shah, “Speak from your grave”And turn, today, the book of love’s next affectionate pageOnce, a daughter of Punjab cried and you wrote a wailing sagaToday, a million daughters, cry to you, Waris ShahRise! O’ narrator of the grieving; rise! look at your PunjabToday, fields are lined with corpses, and blood fills the ChenabSomeone has mixed poison in the five rivers’ flowTheir deadly water is, now, irrigating our lands galoreThis fertile land is sprouting, venom from every poreThe sky is turning red from endless cries of goreThe toxic forest wind, screams from inside its wakeTurning each flute’s bamboo-shoot, into a deadly snake …Translation of an extract from a Punjabi poem “Aaj Akhan Waris Shah Nun”Amrita Pritam (1919–2005):A prominent Punjabi poet andfiction writer. Recipient of SahityaAkademi Award, Padma Shree andJnanapeeth Award. After Partitionshe made Delhi her second home.She was active in writing andediting ‘Nagmani’ a Punjabi monthlymagazine till her last.We have a Muslim minority who are so large in numbers that they cannot,even if they want, go anywhere else. That is a basic fact about which there canbe no argument. Whatever the provocation from Pakistan and whatever theindignities and horrors inflicted on non-Muslims there, we have got to deal withthis minority in a civilised manner. We must give them security and the rights ofcitizens in a democratic State. If we fail to do so, we shall have a festering sorewhich will eventually poison the whole body politic and probably destroy it.Jawaharlal Nehru, Letter to Chief Ministers, 15 October 1947.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>8 Politics in India since IndependencePartition: displacement and rehabilitationOn 14-15 August 1947, not one but two nation-states came into the division of British India into India and Pakistan. The drawingof the border demarcating the territory of each country marked theculmination of political developments that you have read about inthe history textbooks. According to the ‘two-nation theory’ advancedby the Muslim League, India consisted of not one but two ‘people’,Hindus and Muslims. That is why it demanded Pakistan, a separatecountry for the Muslims. The Congress opposed this theory and thedemand for Pakistan. But several political developments in 1940s, thepolitical <strong>com</strong>petition between the Congress and the Muslim Leagueand the British role led to the decision for the creation of Pakistan.Process of PartitionThus it was decided that what was till then known as ‘India’ wouldbe divided into two countries, ‘India’ and ‘Pakistan’. Such a divisionwas not only very painful, but also very difficult to decide and toimplement. It was decided to follow the principle of religious majorities.This basically means that areas where the Muslims were in majoritywould make up the territory of Pakistan. The rest was to stay withIndia.The idea might appear simple, but it presented all kinds ofdifficulties. First of all, there was no single belt of Muslim majorityareas in British India. There were two areas of concentration, onein the west and one in the east. There was no way these two partscould be joined. So it was decided that the new country, Pakistan, will<strong>com</strong>prise two territories, West and East Pakistan separated by a longexpanse of Indian territory. Secondly, not all Muslim majority areaswanted to be in Pakistan. Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan, the undisputedleader of the North Western Frontier Province and known as ‘FrontierGandhi’, was staunchly opposed to the two-nation theory. Eventually,his voice was simply ignored and the NWFP was made to merge withPakistan.Oh, now Iunderstand! Whatwas ‘East’ Bengalhas now be<strong>com</strong>eBangladesh. That iswhy our Bengal iscalled ‘West’ Bengal!The third problem was that two of the Muslim majority provincesof British India, Punjab and Bengal, had very large areas where thenon-Muslims were in majority. Eventually it was decided that thesetwo provinces would be bifurcated according to the religious majorityat the district or even lower level. This decision could not be madeby the midnight of 14-15 August. It meant that a large number ofpeople did not know on the day of Independence whether they were inIndia or in Pakistan. The Partition of these two provinces caused thedeepest trauma of Partition.This was related to the fourth and the most intractable of all theproblems of partition. This was the problem of ‘minorities’ on both
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Challenges of Nation Building 9sides of the border. Lakhs of Hindus and Sikhs in the areas that werenow in Pakistan and an equally large number of Muslims on the Indianside of Punjab and Bengal (and to some extent Delhi and surroundingareas) found themselves trapped. They were to discover that theywere undesirable aliens in their own home, in the land where theyand their ancestors had lived for centuries. As soon as it became clearthat the country was going to be partitioned, the minorities on bothsides became easy targets of attack. No one had quite anticipated thescale of this problem. No one had any plans for handling this. Initially,the people and political leaders kept hoping that this violence wastemporary and would be controlled soon. But very soon the violencewent out of control. The minorities on both sides of the border wereleft with no option except to leave their homes, often at a few hours’notice.Consequences of PartitionThe year 1947 was the year of one of the largest, most abrupt,unplanned and tragic transfer of population that human historyhas known. There were killings and atrocities on both sides of theborder. In the name of religion people of one <strong>com</strong>munity ruthlesslykilled and maimed people of the other <strong>com</strong>munity. Cities like Lahore,Credit: DPA.A train full of ‘refugees’ in 1947.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>10 Politics in India since IndependenceCredit: Nehru Memorial Museum and LibraryHospitality DelayedSaadat Hasan MantoRioters brought the running train to a halt.People belonging to the other <strong>com</strong>munitywere pulled out and slaughtered with swordsand bullets.The remaining passengers were treated tohalwa, fruits and milk.The chief organiser said, ‘Brothers andsisters, news of this train’s arrival wasdelayed. That is why we have not beenable to entertain you lavishly – the way wewanted to.’Source: English translation of Urdu shortstory Kasre-NafsiGandhi in Noakhali (now in Bangladesh) in 1947.Amritsar and Kolkata became divided into‘<strong>com</strong>munal zones’. Muslims would avoidgoing into an area where mainly Hindusor Sikhs lived; similarly the Hindus andSikhs stayed away from areas of Muslimpredominance.Forced to abandon their homes andmove across borders, people went throughimmense sufferings. Minorities on bothsides of the border fled their home andoften secured temporary shelter in ‘refugeecamps’. They often found unhelpful localadministration and police in what was tillrecently their own country. They travelledto the other side of the new border by allsorts of means, often by foot. Even duringthis journey they were often attacked,killed or raped. Thousands of women wereabducted on both sides of the border. Theywere made to convert to the religion of theabductor and were forced into marriage. In many cases women werekilled by their own family members to preserve the ‘family honour’.Many children were separated from their parents. Those who didmanage to cross the border found that they had no home. For lakhsof these ‘refugees’ thecountry’s freedom meantlife in ‘refugee camps’, formonths and sometimesfor years.Writers, poets andfilm-makers in India andPakistan have expressedthe ruthlessness of thekillings and the sufferingof displacement andviolence in their novels,short-stories, poems andfilms. While recountingthe trauma of Partition,they have often used thephrase that the survivorsthemselves used todescribe Partition — asa ‘division of hearts’.The Partition wasnot merely a divisionof properties, liabilities
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Challenges of Nation Building 11and assets, or a political division ofthe country and the administrativeapparatus. What also got divided werethe financial assets, and things liketables, chairs, typewriters, paper-clips,books and also musical instrumentsof the police band! The employees ofthe government and the railways werealso ‘divided’. Above all, it was a violentseparation of <strong>com</strong>munities who hadhitherto lived together as neighbours.It is estimated that the Partition forcedabout 80 lakh people to migrate acrossthe new border. Between five to ten lakhpeople were killed in Partition relatedviolence.Beyond the administrative concernsand financial strains, however, thePartition posed another deeper issue.The leaders of the Indian nationalstruggle did not believe in the two-nationtheory. And yet, partition on religiousbasis had taken place. Did that makeIndia a Hindu nation automatically?Even after large scale migration ofMuslims to the newly created Pakistan,the Muslim population in Indiaaccounted for 12 per cent of the totalpopulation in 1951. So, how would thegovernment of India treat its Muslimcitizens and other religious minorities(Sikhs, Christians, Jains, Buddhists,Parsis and Jews)? The Partition hadalready created severe conflict betweenthe two <strong>com</strong>munities.There were <strong>com</strong>peting politicalinterests behind these conflicts. TheMuslim League was formed to protectthe interests of the Muslims in colonialIndia. It was in the forefront of thedemand for a separate Muslim nation.Similarly, there were organisations,which were trying to organise theHindus in order to turn India into aHindu nation. But most leaders of thenational movement believed that Indiamust treat persons of all religionsLet’s watch a FilmGARAM HAWASalim Mirza, a shoe manufacturerin Agra, increasingly finds himselfa stranger amid the people hehas lived with all his life. He feelslost in the emerging reality afterPartition. His business suffersand a refugee from the other sideof partitioned India occupies hisancestral dwelling. His daughtertoo has a tragic end. He believesthat things would soon be normalagain.But many of his family membersdecide to move to Pakistan. Salimis torn between an impulse tomove out to Pakistan and an urgeto stay back. A decisive moment<strong>com</strong>es when Salim witnesses astudents’ procession demandingfair treatment from the government.His son Sikandar has joined theprocession. Can you imaginewhat Mirza Salim finally did? Whatdo you think you would have donein these circumstances?Year: 1973Director: M.S. SathyuScreenplay: Kaifi AzmiActors: Balraj Sahani, Jalal Aga,Farouque Sheikh, Gita Siddharth
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>12Politics in India since IndependenceMahatma Gandhi’s sacrificeOn the 15th August 1947 Mahatma Gandhi did not participate in anyof the Independence Day celebrations. He was in Kolkata in the areaswhich were torn by gruesome riots between Hindus and Muslims.He was saddened by the <strong>com</strong>munal violence and disheartened thatthe principles of ahimsa (non-violence) and satyagraha (active butnon-violent resistance) that he had lived and worked for, had failedto bind the people in troubled times. Gandhiji went on to persuadethe Hindus and Muslims to give up violence. His presence in Kolkatagreatly improved the situation, and the <strong>com</strong>ing of independence wascelebrated in a spirit of <strong>com</strong>munal harmony, with joyous dancing inthe streets. Gandhiji’s prayer meetings attracted large crowds. But thiswas short lived as riots between Hindus and Muslims erupted onceagain and Gandhiji had to resort to a fast to bring peace.Next month Gandhiji moved to Delhi where large scale violence haderupted. He was deeply concerned about ensuring that Muslims shouldbe allowed to stay in India with dignity, as equal citizens. He was alsoconcerned about the relations between India and Pakistan. He wasunhappy with what he saw as the Indian government’s decision notto honour its financial <strong>com</strong>mitments to Pakistan. With all this in mindhe undertook what turned out to be his last fast in January 1948. Asin Kolkata, his fast had a dramatic effect in Delhi. Communal tensionand violence reduced. Muslims of Delhi and surrounding areas couldsafely return to their homes. The Government of India agreed to givePakistan its dues.Gandhiji’s actions were however not liked by all. Extremists in boththe <strong>com</strong>munities blamed him for their conditions. He was particularlydisliked by those who wanted Hindus to take revenge or who wantedIndia to be<strong>com</strong>e a country for the Hindus, just as Pakistan was forMuslims. They accused Gandhiji of acting in the interests of the Muslimsand Pakistan. Gandhiji thought that these people were misguided. Hewas convinced that any attempt to make India into a country only forthe Hindus would destroy India. His steadfast pursuit of Hindu-Muslimunity provoked Hindu extremists so much that they made severalattempts to assassinate Gandhiji. Despite this he refused to acceptarmed protection and continued to meet everyone during his prayermeetings. Finally, on 30 January 1948, one such extremist, NathuramVinayak Godse, walked up to Gandhiji during his evening prayer inDelhi and fired three bullets at him, killing him instantly. Thus ended alife long struggle for truth, non-violence, justice and tolerance.Gandhiji’s death had an almost magical effect on the <strong>com</strong>munalsituation in the country. Partition-related anger and violence suddenlysubsided. The Government of India cracked down on organisationsthat were spreading <strong>com</strong>munal hatred. Organisations like the RashtriyaSwayamsewak Sangh were banned for some time. Communal politicsbegan to lose its appeal.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Challenges of Nation Building 13 13Credit: Sunil JanahThe news of Gandhi Ji’s assasination drew a crowd in Kolkata.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>14 Politics in India since Independenceequally and that India should not be a country that gave superiorstatus to adherents of one faith and inferior to those who practicedanother religion. All citizens would be equal irrespective of theirreligious affiliation. Being religious or a believer would not be a testof citizenship. They cherished therefore the ideal of a secular nation.This ideal was enshrined in the Indian Constitution.Shweta noticed that her Nana (maternal grandfather) would get veryquiet whenever anyone mentioned Pakistan. One day she decided toask him about it. Her Nana told her about how he moved from Lahore toLudhiana during Partition. Both his parents were killed. Even he wouldnot have survived, but a neighbouring Muslim family gave him shelterand kept him in hiding for several days. They helped him find somerelatives and that is how he managed to cross the border and start anew life.Have you heard a similar story? Ask your grandparents or anyone ofthat generation about their memories of Independence Day, about thecelebration, about the trauma of Partition, about the expectations theyhad from independence.Write down at least two of these stories.Let’s re-searchIntegration of Princely StatesBritish India was divided into what were called the British IndianProvinces and the Princely States. The British Indian Provinces weredirectly under the control of the British government. On the other hand,several large and small states ruled by princes, called the PrincelyStates, enjoyed some form of control over their internal affairs as longas they accepted British supremacy. This was called paramountcy orsuzerainty of the British crown. Princely States covered one-third ofthe land area of the British Indian Empire and one out of four Indianslived under princely rule.The problemJust before Independence it was announced by the British that withthe end of their rule over India, paramountcy of the British crownover Princely States would also lapse. This meant that all thesestates, as many as 565 in all, would be<strong>com</strong>e legally independent. TheBritish government took the view that all these states were free to joineither India or Pakistan or remain independent if they so wished. Thisdecision was left not to the people but to the princely rulers of thesestates. This was a very serious problem and could threaten the veryexistence of a united India.The problems started very soon. First of all, the ruler of Travancoreannounced that the state had decided on Independence. The Nizam
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Challenges of Nation Building 15Note: Thisillustration is nota map drawn toscale and shouldnot be taken tobe an authenticdepiction ofIndia’s externalboundaries.Can’t we end thePartition of Indiaand Pakistan theway they did inGermany? I wantto have breakfastin Amritsar andlunch in Lahore!Isn’t it better thatwe now learn tolive and respecteach other asindependentnations?
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>16 Politics in India since Independence“We are at a momentousstage in the history of India.By <strong>com</strong>mon endeavour, wecan raise the country tonew greatness, while lackof unity will expose us tounexpected calamities. Ihope the Indian States willrealise fully that if we donot cooperate and worktogether in the generalinterest, anarchy and chaoswill overwhelm us all, greatand small, and lead us tototal ruin...“Sardar PatelLetter to Princely rulers,1947.of Hyderabad made a similar announcement the next day. Rulers likethe Nawab of Bhopal were averse to joining the Constituent Assembly.This response of the rulers of the Princely States meant that afterIndependence there was a very real possibility that India would getfurther divided into a number of small countries. The prospects ofdemocracy for the people in these states also looked bleak. This was astrange situation, since the Indian Independence was aimed at unity,self-determination as well as democracy. In most of these princelystates, governments were run in a non-democratic manner and therulers were unwilling to give democratic rights to their populations.Government’s approachThe interim government took a firm stance against the possibledivision of India into small principalities of different sizes. The MuslimLeague opposed the Indian National Congress and took the view thatthe States should be free to adopt any course they liked. Sardar Patelwas India’s Deputy Prime Minister and the Home Minister duringthe crucial period immediately following Independence. He played ahistoric role in negotiating with the rulers of princely states firmly butdiplomatically and bringing most of them into the Indian Union. Itmay look easy now. But it was a very <strong>com</strong>plicated task which requiredskilful persuasion. For instance, there were 26 small states in today’sOrissa. Saurashtra region of Gujarat had 14 big states, 119 smallstates and numerous other different administrations.The government’s approach was guided by three considerations.Firstly, the people of most of the princely states clearly wanted tobe<strong>com</strong>e part of the Indian union. Secondly, the government wasprepared to be flexible in giving autonomy to some regions. The ideawas to ac<strong>com</strong>modate plurality and adopt a flexible approach in dealingwith the demands of the regions. Thirdly, in the backdrop of Partitionwhich brought into focus the contest over demarcation of territory,the integration and consolidation of the territorial boundaries of thenation had assumed supreme importance.Before 15 August 1947, peaceful negotiations had brought almostall states whose territories were contiguous to the new boundaries ofIndia, into the Indian Union. The rulers of most of the states signeda document called the ‘Instrument of Accession’ which meant thattheir state agreed to be<strong>com</strong>e a part of the Union of India. Accession ofthe Princely States of Junagadh, Hyderabad, Kashmir and Manipurproved more difficult than the rest. The issue of Junagarh was resolvedafter a plebiscite confirmed people’s desire to join India. You will readabout Kashmir in Chapter Eight. Here, let us look at the cases ofHyderabad and Manipur.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Challenges of Nation Building 17Credit: PIBSardar Patel with the Nizam of HyderabadHyderabadHyderabad, the largest of the Princely States wassurrounded entirely by Indian territory. Some parts ofthe old Hyderabad state are today parts of Maharashtra,Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. Its ruler carried the title,‘Nizam’, and he was one of the world’s richest men. TheNizam wanted an independent status for Hyderabad. Heentered into what was called the Standstill Agreement withIndia in November 1947 for a year while negotiations withthe Indian government were going on.In the meantime, a movement of the people ofHyderabad State against the Nizam’s rule gathered force.The peasantry in the Telangana region in particular, wasthe victim of Nizam’s oppressive rule and rose against him.Women who had seen the worst of this oppression joinedthe movement in large numbers. Hyderabad town was thenerve centre of this movement. The Communists and theHyderabad Congress were in the forefront of the movement.The Nizam responded by unleashing a para-military forceknown as the Razakars on the people. The atrocities and<strong>com</strong>munal nature of the Razakars knew no bounds. TheySardar Vallabhbhai Patel(1875-1950): Leader ofthe freedom movement;Congress leader; follower ofMahatma Gandhi; DeputyPrime Minister and first HomeMinister of independent India;played an important role inthe integration of PrincelyStates with India; memberof important <strong>com</strong>mittees ofthe Constituent Assemblyon Fundamental Rights,Minorities, ProvincialConstitution, etc.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>18 Politics in India since Independencemurdered, maimed, raped and looted, targeting particularly the non-Muslims. The central government had to order the army to tackle thesituation. In September 1948, Indian army moved in to control theNizam’s forces. After a few days of intermittent fighting, the Nizamsurrendered. This led to Hyderabad’s accession to India.I wonder whathappened to allthose hundredsof kings, queens,princes andprincesses. Howdid they livetheir lives afterbe<strong>com</strong>ing justordinary citizens?ManipurA few days before Independence, the Maharaja of Manipur,Bodhachandra Singh, signed the Instrument of Accession with theIndian government on the assurance that the internal autonomy ofManipur would be maintained. Under the pressure of public opinion,the Maharaja held elections in Manipur in June 1948 and the statebecame a constitutional monarchy. Thus Manipur was the first partof India to hold an election based on universal adult franchise.In the Legislative Assembly of Manipur there were sharpdifferences over the question of merger of Manipur with India. Whilethe state Congress wanted the merger, other political parties wereopposed to this. The Government of India succeeded in pressurisingthe Maharaja into signing a Merger Agreement in September 1949,without consulting the popularly elected Legislative Assembly ofManipur. This caused a lot of anger and resentment in Manipur, therepercussions of which are still being felt.Credit: R. K. Laxman in the Times of IndiaThis cartoon<strong>com</strong>ments on therelation betweenthe people andthe rulers in thePrincely States,and also onPatel’s approachto resolving thisissue.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Challenges of Nation Building 19Reorganisation of StatesThe process of nation-building did not <strong>com</strong>e to an end with Partitionand integration of Princely States. Now the challenge was to draw theinternal boundaries of the Indian states. This was not just a matterof administrative divisions. The boundaries had to be drawn in a wayso that the linguistic and cultural plurality of the country could bereflected without affecting the unity of the nation.During colonial rule, the state boundaries were drawn either onadministrative convenience or simply coincided with the territoriesannexed by the British government or the territories ruled by theprincely powers.Our national movement had rejected these divisions as artificialand had promised the linguistic principle as the basis of formationof states. In fact after the Nagpur session of Congress in 1920 theprinciple was recognised as the basis of the reorganisation of theIndian National Congress party itself. Many Provincial CongressCommittees were created by linguistic zones, which did not followthe administrative divisions of British India.Things changed after Independence and Partition. Our leadersfelt that carving out states on the basis of language might lead todisruption and disintegration. It was also felt that this would drawattention away from other social and economic challenges that thecountry faced. The central leadership decided to postpone matters.The need for postponement was also felt because the fate of thePrincely States had not been decided. Also, the memory of Partitionwas still fresh.This decision of the national leadership was challenged by the localleaders and the people. Protests began in the Telugu speaking areas ofthe old Madras province, which included present day Tamil Nadu, partsof Andhra Pradesh, Kerala and Karnataka. The Vishalandhra movement(as the movement for a separate Andhra was called) demanded thatthe Telugu speaking areas should be separated from the Madrasprovince of which they were a part and be made into a separate Andhraprovince. Nearly all the political forces in the Andhra region were infavour of linguistic reorganisation of the then Madras province.The movement gathered momentum as a result of the Centralgovernment’s vacillation. Potti Sriramulu, a Congress leader and aveteran Gandhian, went on an indefinite fast that led to his death after56 days. This caused great unrest and resulted in violent outbursts inAndhra region. People in large numbers took to the streets. Many wereinjured or lost their lives in police firing. In Madras, several legislatorsresigned their seats in protest. Finally, the Prime Minister announcedthe formation of a separate Andhra state in December 1952.“..if lingusiticprovinces are formed, itwill also give a fillip tothe regional languages. Itwould be absurd to makeHindustani the mediumof instruction in all theregions and it is still moreabsurd to use English forthis purpose.“Mahatma GandhiJanuary1948
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>20 Politics in India since IndependenceNote: This illustration is not a map drawn to scale and should not be taken to bean authentic depiction of India’s external boundaries.Read the map and answer the following questions:1. Name the original state from which the following states were carved out:GujaratHaryanaMeghalayaChhattisgarh2. Name two states that were affected by the Partition of the country.3. Name two states today that were once a Union Territory.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Challenges of Nation Building 21Credit: Shankar“Struggle for Survival” (Published in 1953) captures contemporary impressionof the demand for linguistic statesThe formation of Andhra Pradesh spurred the strugglefor making of other states on linguistic lines in otherparts of the country. These struggles forced the CentralGovernment into appointing a States ReorganisationCommission in 1953 to look into the question of redrawingof the boundaries of states. The Commission in its reportaccepted that the boundaries of the state should reflectthe boundaries of different languages. On the basis ofits report the States Reorganisation Act was passed in1956. This led to the creation of 14 states and six unionterritories.Now, isn’t this very interesting? Nehru and otherleaders were very popular, and yet the people did nothesitate to agitate for linguistic states against thewishes of the leaders!Potti Sriramulu(1901-1952): Gandhianworker; left governmentjob to participate inSalt Satyagraha; alsoparticipated in individualSatyagraha; went on afast in 1946 demandingthat temples in Madrasprovince be opened todalits; undertook a fastunto death from 19 October1952 demanding separatestate of Andhra Pradesh;died during the fast on15 December 1952.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>22 Politics in India since IndependenceCredit: Shankar“Coaxing the Genie back” (Published in 1956) asked if the State Reorganisation Commissioncould contain the genie of linguism.One of the most important concerns in the early yearswas that demands for separate states would endangerthe unity of the country. It was felt that linguisticstates may foster separatism and create pressures onthe newly founded nation. But the leadership, underpopular pressure, finally made a choice in favour oflinguistic states. It was hoped that if we accept theregional and linguistic claims of all regions, the threat ofdivision and separatism would be reduced. Besides, theac<strong>com</strong>modation of regional demands and the formationof linguistic states were also seen as more democratic.Now it is more than fifty years since the formation oflinguistic states. We can say that linguistic states andthe movements for the formation of these states changedthe nature of democratic politics and leadership in somebasic ways. The path to politics and power was nowopen to people other than the small English speakingelite. Linguistic reorganisation also gave some uniformbasis to the drawing of state boundaries. It did not lead
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Challenges of Nation Building 23to disintegration of the country as many had feared earlier. On thecontrary it strengthened national unity.Above all, the linguistic states underlined the acceptance of theprinciple of diversity. When we say that India adopted democracy, itdoes not simply mean that India embraced a democratic constitution,nor does it merely mean that India adopted the format of elections. Thechoice was larger than that. It was a choice in favour of recognisingand accepting the existence of differences which could at timesbe oppositional. Democracy, in other words, was associated withplurality of ideas and ways of life. Much of the politics in the laterperiod was to take place within this framework.Fast Forward Creation of new statesThe acceptance of the principle of linguistic states did not mean, however, that all statesimmediately became linguistic states. There was an experiment of ‘bilingual’ Bombay state,consisting of Gujarati and Marathi speaking people. After a popular agitation, the states ofMaharashtra and Gujarat were created in 1960.In Punjab also, there were two linguistic groups: Hindi speaking and Punjabi speaking. ThePunjabi speaking people demanded a separate state. But it was not granted with other statesin 1956. Statehood for Punjab came ten years later, in 1966, when the territories of today’sHaryana and Himachal Pradesh were separated from the larger Punjab state.Another major reorganisation of states took place in the north east in 1972. Meghalaya wascarved out of Assam in 1972. Manipur and Tripura too emerged as separate states in the sameyear. The states of Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram came into being in 1987. Nagaland hadbe<strong>com</strong>e a state much earlier in 1963.Language did not, however, remain the sole basis of organisation of states. In later yearssub-regions raised demands for separate states on the basis of a separate regional culture or<strong>com</strong>plaints of regional imbalance in development. Three such states, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarhand Uttaranchal, were created in 2000. The story of reorganisation has not <strong>com</strong>e to an end.There are many regions in the country where there are movements demanding separate andsmaller states. These include Telangana in Andhra Pradesh, Vidarbha in Maharashtra, HaritPradesh in the western region of Uttar Pradesh and the northern region of West Bengal.The US has one-fourthof our population but 51states. Why can’t Indiahave more than 100states?
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Challenges of Nation Building 256. What are the reasons being used by Nehru for keeping India secular?Do you think these reasons were only ethical and sentimental? Or werethere some prudential reasons as well?7. Bring out two major differences between the challenge of nationbuilding for eastern and western regions of the country at the time ofIndependence.8. What was the task of the States Reorganisation Commission? Whatwas its most salient re<strong>com</strong>mendation?9. It is said that the nation is to a large extent an “ imagined <strong>com</strong>munity”held together by <strong>com</strong>mon beliefs, history, political aspirations andimaginations. Identify the features that make India a nation.10. Read the following passage and answer the questions below:“In the history of nation-building only the Soviet experiment bears<strong>com</strong>parison with the Indian. There too, a sense of unity had to be forgedbetween many diverse ethnic groups, religious, linguistic <strong>com</strong>munitiesand social classes. The scale – geographic as well as demographic– was <strong>com</strong>parably massive. The raw material the state had to work withwas equally unpropitious: a people divided by faith and driven by debtand disease.” — RAMACHANDRA GUHA(a) List the <strong>com</strong>monalities that the author mentions between Indiaand Soviet Union and give one example for each of these fromIndia.(b) The author does not talk about dissimilarities between the twoexperiments. Can you mention two dissimilarities?(c) In retrospect which of these two experiment worked better andwhy?LET US DO IT TOGETHER• Read a novel/ story on Partition by an Indian and a Pakistani/Bangladeshi writer. What are the <strong>com</strong>monalities of the experienceacross the border?• Collect all the stories from the ‘Let’s Re-search’ suggestion inthis chapter. Prepare a wallpaper that highlights the <strong>com</strong>monexperiences and has stories on the unique experiences.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Credit: ShankarThis famous sketchby Shankar appearedon the cover of hisDon’t SpareMe, Shankar. Theoriginal sketch wasdrawn in the context ofIndia’s China policy. Butthis cartoon capturesthe dual role of theCongress during the eraof one-party dominance.In this chapter…The challenge of nation-building, covered in the last chapter, wasac<strong>com</strong>panied by the challenge of instituting democratic politics. Thus,electoral <strong>com</strong>petition among political parties began immediately afterIndependence. In this chapter, we look at the first decade of electoralpolitics in order to understand• the establishment of a system of free and fair elections;• the domination of the Congress party in the years immediatelyafter Independence; and• the emergence of opposition parties and their policies.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>era of one-partydominancechapter2Challenge of building democracyYou now have an idea of the difficult circumstances in whichindependent India was born. You have read about the seriouschallenge of nation-building that confronted the country right in thebeginning. Faced with such serious challenges, leaders in many othercountries of the world decided that their country could not affordto have democracy. They said that national unity was their firstpriority and that democracy will introduce differences and conflicts.Therefore many of the countries that gained freedom from colonialismexperienced non-democratic rule. It took various forms: nominaldemocracy but effective control by one leader, one party rule or directarmy rule. Non-democratic regimes always started with a promise ofrestoring democracy very soon. But once they established themselves,it was very difficult to dislodge them.The conditions in India were not very different. But the leaders ofthe newly independent India decided to take the more difficult path.Any other path would have been surprising, for our freedom strugglewas deeply <strong>com</strong>mitted to the idea of democracy. Our leaders wereconscious of the critical role of politics in any democracy. They did notsee politics as a problem; they saw it as a way of solving the problems.Every society needs to decide how it will govern and regulate itself.There are always different policy alternatives to choose from. Thereare different groups with different and conflicting aspirations. Howdo we resolve these differences? Democratic politics is an answer tothis question. While <strong>com</strong>petition and power are the two most visiblethings about politics, the purpose of political activity is and should bedeciding and pursuing public interest. This is the route our leadersdecided to take.Last year you studied how our Constitution was drafted. Youwould remember that the Constitution was ready and signed on26 November 1949 and it came into effect on 26 January 1950. At thattime the country was being ruled by an interim government. It wasnow necessary to install the first democratically elected governmentof the country. The Constitution had laid down the rules, now themachine had to be put in place. Initially it was thought that this wasonly a matter of a few months. The Election Commission of India wasset up in January 1950. Sukumar Sen became the first Chief ElectionCommissioner. The country’s first general elections were expectedsometime in 1950 itself.“In India,….…hero-worship, plays a partin its politics unequalledin magnitude by the partit plays in the politics ofany other country….But inpolitics, .. ..hero-worship is asure road to degradation andeventual dictatorship.Dr. BabasahebAmbedkarSpeech in ConstituentAssembly25 November 1949What’s so specialabout our being ademocracy? Sooneror later every countryhas be<strong>com</strong>e ademocracy, isn’t it?“
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>28 Politics in India since IndependenceThat was a gooddecision. But whatabout men who stillrefer to a woman asMrs. Somebody, as ifshe does not have aname of her own?But the Election Commission discovered that it was not going tobe easy to hold a free and fair election in a country of India’s size.Holding an election required delimitation or drawing the boundariesof the electoral constituencies. It also required preparing the electoralrolls, or the list of all the citizens eligible to vote. Both these tasks tooka lot of time. When the first draft of the rolls was published, it wasdiscovered that the names of nearly 40 lakh women were not recordedin the list. They were simply listed as “wife of …” or “daughter of …”.The Election Commission refused to accept these entries and ordereda revision if possible and deletion if necessary. Preparing for the firstgeneral election was a mammoth exercise. No election on this scalehad ever been conducted in the world before. At that time therewere 17 crore eligible voters, who had to elect about 3,200 MLAs and489 Members of Lok Sabha. Only 15 per cent of these eligible voterswere literate. Therefore the Election Commission had to think of somespecial method of voting. The Election Commission trained over 3lakh officers and polling staff to conduct the elections.It was not just the size of the country and the electorate that madethis election unusual. The first general election was also the first bigtest of democracy in a poor and illiterate country. Till then democracyhad existed only in the prosperous countries, mainly in Europe andNorth America, where nearly everyone was literate. By that timemany countries in Europe had not given voting rights to all women.In this context India’s experiment with universal adult franchiseCredit: ShankarA cartoonist’s impression of the election <strong>com</strong>mittee formed by the Congress to choose partycandidates in 1952. On the <strong>com</strong>mittee, besides Nehru: Morarji Desai, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai,Dr B.C. Roy, Kamaraj Nadar, Rajagopalachari, Jagjivan Ram, Maulana Azad, D.P. Mishra,P.D. Tandon and Govind Ballabh Pant.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Era of One-party Dominance 29Changing methods of votingA sample of theballot paperused fromthe third tothe thirteenthgeneralelections to LokSabhaThese days we use an Electronic Voting Machine (EVM) to record voters’preferences. But that is not how we started. In the first general election, itwas decided to place inside each polling booth a box for each candidate withthe election symbol of that candidate. Each voter was given a blank ballotpaper which they had to drop into the box of the candidate they wanted tovote for. About 20 lakh steel boxes were used for this purpose.A presiding officer from Punjab described how heprepared the ballot boxes—“Each box had to haveits candidate’s symbol, both inside and outside it, andoutside on either side, had to be displayed the nameof the candidate in Urdu, Hindi and Punjabi along withthe number of the constituency, the polling station andthe polling booth. The paper seal with the numericaldescription of the candidate, signed by the presidingofficer, had to be inserted in the token frame and itswindow closed by its door which had to be fixed in its placeat the other end by means of a wire. All this had to bedone on the day previous to the one fixed for polling. To fixsymbols and labels the boxes had first to be rubbed withsandpaper or a piece of brick. I found that it took aboutfive hours for six persons, including my two daughters, to<strong>com</strong>plete this work. All this was done at my house.”Electronic VotingMachineAfter the first two elections this method was changed. Now the ballot papercarried the names and symbols of all the candidates and the voter was requiredto put a stamp on the name of the candidate they wanted to vote for. This methodworked for nearly forty years. Towards the end of 1990s the Election Commissionstarted using the EVM. By 2004 the entire country had shifted to the EVM.Ask the elders in your family and neighbourhood about theirexperience of participating in elections.• Did anyone vote in the first or second general election? Who didthey vote for and why?• Is there someone who has used all the three methods of voting?Which one did they prefer?• In which ways do they find the elections of those days differentfrom the present ones?Let’s re-search
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>30 Politics in India since IndependenceMaulana Abul KalamAzad (1888-1958):original name — AbulKalam MohiyuddinAhmed; scholar ofIslam; freedom fighterand Congress leader;proponent of Hindu-Muslim unity; opposedto Partition; member ofConstituent Assembly;Education Minister inthe first cabinet of freeIndia.appeared very bold and risky. An Indian editor called it “thebiggest gamble in history”. Organiser, a magazine, wrotethat Jawaharlal Nehru “would live to confess the failureof universal adult franchise in India”. A British member ofthe Indian Civil Service claimed that “a future and moreenlightened age will view with astonishment the absurd farceof recording the votes of millions of illiterate people”.The elections had to be postponed twice and finally heldfrom October 1951 to February 1952. But this election isreferred to as the 1952 election since most parts of thecountry voted in January 1952. It took six months forthe campaigning, polling and counting to be <strong>com</strong>pleted.than four candidates for each seat. The level of participationwas encouraging — more than half the eligible voters turnedout to vote on the day of elections. When the results weredeclared these were accepted as fair even by the losers.The Indian experiment had proved the critics wrong. TheTimes of India held that the polls have “confounded all thosesceptics who thought the introduction of adult franchisetoo risky an experiment in this country”. The HindustanTimes claimed that “there is universal agreement that theIndian people have conducted themselves admirably in thelargest experiment in democratic elections in the history ofthe world”. Observers outside India were equally impressed.India’s general election of 1952 became a landmark in thehistory of democracy all over the world. It was no longerpossible to argue that democratic elections could not be heldin conditions of poverty or lack of education. It proved thatdemocracy could be practiced anywhere in the world.Congress dominance in the first threegeneral electionsThe results of the first general election did not surprise anyone. TheIndian National Congress was expected to win this election. TheCongress party, as it was popularly known, had inherited the legacyof the national movement. It was the only party then to have anorganisation spread all over the country. And finally, in JawaharlalNehru, the party had the most popular and charismatic leader inIndian politics. He led the Congress campaign and toured throughthe country. When the final results were declared, the extent of thevictory of the Congress did surprise many. The party won 364 of the489 seats in the first Lok Sabha and finished way ahead of any otherchallenger. The Communist Party of India that came next in terms ofseats won only 16 seats. The state elections were held with the Lok
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Era of One-party Dominance 31Note: This illustration is not a map drawn to scale and should not be taken to bean authentic depiction of India’s external boundaries.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>32 Politics in India since IndependenceCredit: The HinduRajkumari Amrit Kaur(1889-1964): A Gandhianand Freedom fighter;belonged to the royalfamily of Kapurthala;inherited Christianreligion from her mother;member of ConstituentAssembly; Minister forHealth in independentIndia’s first ministry;continued as HealthMinister till 1957.Sabha elections. The Congress scored big victoryin those elections as well. It won a majority ofseats in all the states except Travancore-Cochin(part of today’s Kerala), Madras and Orissa.Finally even in these states the Congress formedthe government. So the party ruled all over thecountry at the national and the state level. Asexpected, Jawaharlal Nehru became the PrimeMinister after the first general election.A look at the electoral map on the last pagewould give you a sense of the dominance ofthe Congress during the period 1952-1962.In the second and the third general elections,held in 1957 and 1962 respectively, theCongress maintained the same position inthe Lok Sabha by winning three-fourth ofthe seats. None of the opposition partiescould win even one-tenth of the numberof seats won by the Congress. In the stateassembly elections, the Congress did notget majority in a few cases. The mostsignificant of these cases was in Kerala in 1957when a coalition led by the CPI formed the government. Apartfrom exceptions like this, the Congress controlled the nationaland all the state governments.The extent of the victory of the Congress was artificiallyboosted by our electoral system. The Congress won three out ofevery four seats but it did not get even half of the votes. In 1952,for example, the Congress obtained 45 per cent of the total votes.But it managed to win 74 per cent of the seats. The SocialistParty, the second largest party in terms of votes, secured morethan 10 per cent of the votes all over the country. But it couldnot even win three per cent of the seats. How did this happen?For this you need to recall the discussion about the first-pastthe-postmethod in your textbook ‘Constitution at Work’ lastyear.In this system of election, that has been adopted in ourcountry, the party that gets more votes than others tends to getmuch more than its proportional share. That is exactly whatworked in favour of the Congress. If we add up the votes of allthe non-Congress candidates it was more than the votes of theCongress. But the non-Congress votes were divided betweendifferent rival parties and candidates. So the Congress was stillway ahead of the opposition and managed to win.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Era of One-party Dominance 33Communist victory in KeralaAs early as in 1957, the Congress party had the bitter taste of defeat in Kerala.In the assembly elections held in March 1957, the Communist Party won thelargest number of seats to the Kerala legislature. The party won 60 of the126 seats and had the support of five independents. The governor invitedE. M. S. Namboodiripad, the leader of the Communist legislature party, to formthe ministry. For the first time in the world, a Communist party governmenthad <strong>com</strong>e to power through democratic elections.On losing power in the State, the Congress party began a ‘liberation struggle’against the elected government. The CPI had <strong>com</strong>e to power on the promise ofcarrying out radical and progressive policy measures. The Communists claimedthat the agitation was led by vested interests and religious organisations.In 1959 the Congress government atthe Centre dismissed the Communistgovernment in Kerala under Article 356of the Constitution. This decision provedvery controversial and was widely citedas the first instance of the misuse ofconstitutional emergency powers.Credit: HinduE.M.S. Namboodiripad, leading a procession ofCommunist Party workers, after his ministry wasdismissed from office in Trivandrum in August1959.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>34 Politics in India since IndependenceSocialist PartyThe origins of the Socialist Party can be tracedback to the mass movement stage of the IndianNational Congress in the pre-independence era.The Congress Socialist Party (CSP) was formedwithin the Congress in 1934 by a group of youngleaders who wanted a more radical and egalitarianCongress. In 1948, the Congress amended itsconstitution to prevent its members from having adual party membership. This forced the Socialiststo form a separate Socialist Party in 1948. TheParty’s electoral performance caused muchdisappointment to its supporters. Although theParty had presence in most of the states of India,it could achieve electoral success only in a fewpockets.Acharya NarendraDev (1889-1956):Freedom fighter andfounding President ofthe Congress SocialistParty; jailed severaltimes during thefreedom movement;active in peasants’movement; a scholarof Buddhism; afterindependence led theSocialist Party andlater the Praja SocialistParty.The socialists believed inthe ideology of democraticsocialism which distinguishedthem both from the Congressas well as from theCommunists. They criticisedthe Congress for favouringcapitalists and landlords andfor ignoring the workers andthe peasants. But the socialists faced a dilemma whenin 1955 the Congress declared its goal to be the socialistpattern of society. Thus it became difficult for the socialiststo present themselves as an effective alternative to theCongress. Some of them, led by Rammanohar Lohia,increased their distance from and criticism of the Congressparty. Some others like Asoka Mehta advocated a limitedcooperation with the Congress.The Socialist Party went through many splits and reunionsleading to the formation of many socialist parties. Theseincluded the Kisan Mazdoor Praja Party, the Praja SocialistParty and Samyukta Socialist Party. Jayaprakash Narayan,Achyut Patwardhan, Asoka Mehta, Acharya Narendra Dev,Rammanohar Lohia and S.M. Joshi were among the leadersof the socialist parties. Many parties in contemporary India,like the Samajwadi Party, the Rashtriya Janata Dal, JanataDal (United) and the Janata Dal (Secular) trace their originsto the Socialist Party.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Era of One-party Dominance 35Nature of Congress dominanceIndia is not the only country to have experienced thedominance of one party. If we look around the world,we find many other examples of one-party dominance.But there is a crucial difference between these andthe Indian experience. In the rest of the cases thedominance of one party was ensured by <strong>com</strong>promisingdemocracy. In some countries like China, Cuba andSyria the constitution permits only a single party torule the country. Some others like Myanmar, Belarus,Egypt, and Eritrea are effectively one-party states dueto legal and military measures. Until a few years ago,Mexico, South Korea and Taiwan were also effectivelyone-party dominant states. What distinguished the dominance of theCongress party in India from all these cases was it happened underdemocratic conditions. Many parties contested elections in conditionsof free and fair elections and yet the Congress managed to win electionafter election. This was similar to the dominance the African NationalCongress has enjoyed in South Africa after the end of apartheid.Founded in 1929, as NationalRevolutionary Party and later renamedas the Institutional RevolutionaryParty, the PRI (in Spanish), exercisedpower in Mexico for almost sixdecades. It represented the legacyof the Mexican revolution. OriginallyPRI was a mixture of various interestsincluding political and military leaders, labour and peasantorganisations and numerous political parties. Over a periodof time, Plutarco Elías Calles, the founder of PRI, was ableto capture the organisation and thereby the government.Elections were held at regular intervals and it was thePRI which won every time. Other parties existed in nameonly so as to give the ruling party greater legitimacy. Theelectoral laws were operated in a manner so as to ensurethat the PRI always won. Elections were often rigged andmanipulated by the ruling party. Its rule was describedas ‘the perfect dictatorship’. Finally the party lost in thePresidential elections held in 2000. Mexico is no longera one-party dominated country. But the tactics adoptedby the PRI during the period of its dominance had a longtermeffect on the health of democracy. The citizens haveyet to develop full confidence in the free and fair natureof elections.Babasaheb Bhimrao RamjiAmbedkar (1891-1956): Leader ofthe anti-caste movement and thestruggle for justice to the Dalits;scholar and intellectual; founderof Independent Labour Party; laterfounded the Scheduled CastesFederation; planned the formationof the Republican Party of India;Member of Viceroy’s ExecutiveCouncil during the SecondWorld War; Chairman, DraftingCommittee of the ConstituentAssembly; Minister in Nehru’sfirst cabinet after Independence;resigned in 1951 due to differencesover the Hindu Code Bill; adoptedBuddhism in 1956, with thousandsof followers.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>36 Politics in India since IndependenceRafi Ahmed Kidwai(1894-1954):Congress leader fromU.P.; Minister in U.P.in 1937 and againin 1946; Minister forCommunications inthe first ministry offree India; Food andAgriculture Minister,1952-54.Earlier we hadcoalition in aparty, now wehave coalition ofparties. Does itmean that we havehad a coalitiongovernment since1952?The roots of this extraordinary success of the Congressparty go back to the legacy of the freedom struggle. Congresswas seen as inheritor of the national movement. Manyleaders who were in the forefront of that struggle were nowcontesting elections as Congress candidates. The Congresswas already a very well-organised party and by the time theother parties could even think of a strategy, the Congresshad already started its campaign. In fact, many partieswere formed only around Independence or after that. Thus,the Congress had the ‘first off the blocks’ advantage. Bythe time of Independence the party had not only spreadacross the length and breadth of the country as we hadseen in the maps but also had an organisational networkdown to the local level. Most importantly, as the Congresswas till recently a national movement, its nature was allinclusive.All these factors contributed to the dominance ofthe Congress party.Congress as social and ideological coalitionYou have already studied the history of how Congress evolvedfrom its origins in 1885 as a pressure group for the newlyeducated, professional and <strong>com</strong>mercial classes to a massmovement in the twentieth century. This laid the basis forits eventual transformation into a mass political party andits subsequent domination of the political system. Thus the Congressbegan as a party dominated by the English speaking, upper caste,upper middle-class and urban elite. But with every civil disobediencemovement it launched, its social base widened. It brought togetherdiverse groups, whose interests were often contradictory. Peasantsand industrialists, urban dwellers and villagers, workers and owners,middle, lower and upper classes and castes, all found space in theCongress. Gradually, its leadership also expanded beyond the uppercaste and upper class professionals to agriculture based leaders witha rural orientation. By the time of Independence, the Congress wastransformed into a rainbow-like social coalition broadly representingIndia’s diversity in terms of classes and castes, religions and languagesand various interests.Many of these groups merged their identity within the Congress.Very often they did not and continued to exist within the Congressas groups and individuals holding different beliefs. In this sense theCongress was an ideological coalition as well. It ac<strong>com</strong>modated therevolutionary and pacifist, conservative and radical, extremist andmoderate and the right, left and all shades of the centre. The Congresswas a ‘platform’ for numerous groups, interests and even politicalparties to take part in the national movement. In pre-Independencedays, many organisations and parties with their own constitution andorganisational structure were allowed to exist within the Congress.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Era of One-party Dominance 37The Communist Party of IndiaIn the early 1920s <strong>com</strong>munist groups emergedin different parts of India taking inspirationfrom the Bolshevik revolution in Russiaand advocating socialism as the solution toproblems affecting the country. From 1935,the Communists worked mainly from withinthe fold of the Indian National Congress.A parting of ways took place in December1941, when the Communists decided tosupport the British in their war against NaziGermany. Unlike other non-Congress partiesthe CPI had a well-oiled party machinery anddedicated cadre at the time of Independence.However, Independence raised differentvoices in the party. The basic question thattroubled the party was the nature of Indianindependence. Was Indiareally free or was freedoma sham?Soon after Independence,the party thought thatthe transfer of powerin 1947 was not trueindependence and encouraged violent uprisingsin Telangana. The Communists failed to generatepopular support for their position and were crushedby the armed forces. This forced them to rethink theirposition. In 1951 the Communist Party abandoned thepath of violent revolution and decided to participatein the approaching general elections. In the firstgeneral election, CPI won 16 seats and emerged asthe largest opposition party. The party’s support wasmore concentrated in Andhra Pradesh, West Bengal,Bihar and Kerala.A. K. Gopalan, S.A. Dange, E.M.S. Namboodiripad,P.C. Joshi, Ajay Ghosh and P. Sundarraya wereamong the notable leaders of the CPI. The Party wentthrough a major split in 1964 following the ideologicalrift between Soviet Union and China. The pro-Sovietfaction remained as the CPI, while the opponentsformed the CPI(M). Both these parties continue toexist to this day.A.K. Gopalan(1904-1977): Communistleader from Kerala,worked as a Congressworker initially; joinedthe Communist Party in1939; after the split inthe Communist Partyin 1964, joined theCPI (M) and workedfor strengthening theparty; respected as aparliamentarian; Memberof Parliament from 1952.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>38 Politics in India since IndependenceLet’s watch a FilmSIMHASANThis Marathi film, based on ArunSadhu’s two novels ‘Simhasan’and ‘Mumbai Dinank’, depictsthe tussle for the post of ChiefMinister in Maharashtra. The storyis told through journalist DiguTipnis as the silent ‘Sutradhar’. Ittries to capture the intense powerstruggle within the ruling partyand the secondary role of theOpposition.Finance Minister, VishwasraoDabhade is making all-out effortsto unseat the incumbent ChiefMinister. Both contenders aretrying to woo trade union leaderD’Casta to obtain his support. Inthis factional fight, other politicianstoo seek to obtain maximumadvantage while bargaining withboth sides. Smuggling in Mumbaiand the grim social reality in ruralMaharashtra form the sub-plots inthis film.Year: 1981Director: Jabbar PatelScreenplay: Vijay TendulkarCast: Nilu Phule, Arun Sarnaik,Dr.Shreeram Lagoo, SatishDubashi, Datta Bhat, MadhukarToradmal, Madhav Watve, MohanAgasheSome of these, like the CongressSocialist Party, later separated fromthe Congress and became oppositionparties. Despite differences regardingthe methods, specific programmes andpolicies the party managed to containif not resolve differences and build aconsensus.Tolerance and managementof factionsThis coalition-like character of theCongress gave it an unusual strength.Firstly, a coalition ac<strong>com</strong>modates allthose who join it. Therefore, it hasto avoid any extreme position andstrike a balance on almost all issues.Compromise and inclusiveness are thehallmarks of a coalition. This strategyput the opposition in a difficulty.Anything that the opposition wantedto say, would also find a place inthe programme and ideology of theCongress. Secondly, in a party thathas the nature of a coalition, there is agreater tolerance of internal differencesand ambitions of various groupsand leaders are ac<strong>com</strong>modated. TheCongress did both these things duringthe freedom struggle and continueddoing this even after Independence.That is why, even if a group was nothappy with the position of the partyor with its share of power, it wouldremain inside the party and fight theother groups rather than leaving theparty and be<strong>com</strong>ing an ‘opposition’.These groups inside the party arecalled factions. The coalitional natureof the Congress party tolerated andin fact encouraged various factions.Some of these factions were basedon ideological considerations butvery often these factions were rootedin personal ambitions and rivalries.Instead of being a weakness, internalfactionalism became a strength of
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Era of One-party Dominance 39Bharatiya Jana SanghThe Bharatiya Jana Sangh wasformed in 1951 with Shyama PrasadMukherjee as its founder-President. Itslineage however can be traced backto the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh(RSS) and the Hindu Mahasabhabefore Independence.The Jana Sangh was different fromother parties in terms of ideology andprogrammes. It emphasised the ideaof one country, one culture and onenation and believed that the countrycould be<strong>com</strong>e modern, progressiveand strong on the basis of Indianculture and traditions. Theparty called for a reunionof India and Pakistan inAkhand Bharat. The partywas in forefront of theagitation to replace Englishwith Hindi as the officiallanguage of India andwas also opposed to thegranting of concessionsto religious and culturalminorities. The party wasa consistent advocate of India developing nuclearweapons especially after China carried out its atomictests in 1964.In the 1950s Jana Sangh remained on the marginsof the electoral politics and was able to secure only 3Lok Sabha seats in 1952 elections and 4 seats in 1957general elections to Lok Sabha. In the early years itssupport came mainly from the urban areas in the Hindispeaking states like Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Delhiand Uttar Pradesh. The party’s leaders included ShyamaPrasad Mukherjee, Deen Dayal Upadhyaya and BalrajMadhok. The Bharatiya Janata Party traces its roots tothe Bharatiya Jana Sangh.Deen DayalUpadhyaya(1916-1968): FulltimeRSS workersince 1942; foundermember of theBharatiya JanaSangh; GeneralSecretary andlater President ofBharatiya JanaSangh; initiated theconcept of integralhumanism.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>40 Politics in India since Independencethe Congress. Since there was room within the party for variousfactions to fight with each other, it meant that leaders representingdifferent interests and ideologies remained within the Congressrather than go out and form a new party.Credit: ShankarI thought factionswere a disease thatneeded to be cured.You make it soundas if factions arenormal and good.Most of the state units of the Congress were made up ofnumerous factions. The factions took different ideological positionsmaking the Congress appear as a grand centrist party. The otherparties primarily attempted to influence these factions and therebyindirectly influenced policy and decision making from the “margins”.They were far removed from the actual exercise of authority. Theywere not alternatives to the ruling party; instead they constantlypressurised and criticised, censured and influenced the Congress.The system of factions functioned as balancing mechanism withinthe ruling party. Political <strong>com</strong>petition therefore took place within theCongress. In that sense, in the first decade of electoral <strong>com</strong>petitionthe Congress acted both as the ruling party as well as the opposition.That is why this period of Indian politics has been described as the‘Congress system’.Emergence of opposition partiesAs we have noted above, it is not that India didnot have opposition parties during this period.While discussing the results of the elections,we have already <strong>com</strong>e across the names ofmany parties other than the Congress. Eventhen India had a larger number of diverseand vibrant opposition parties than manyother multi-party democracies. Some ofthese had <strong>com</strong>e into being even before the firstgeneral election of 1952. Some of these partiesplayed an important part in the politics of thecountry in the ’sixties and ’seventies. Theroots of almost all the non-Congress parties oftoday can be traced to one or the other of theopposition parties of the 1950s.“Tug of War” (29 August 1954) is a cartoonist’simpression of the relative strength of the oppositionand the government. Sitting on the tree are Nehruand his cabinet colleagues. Trying to topple thetree are opposition leaders A. K. Gopalan, AcharyaKripalani, N.C. Chatterjee, Srikantan Nair andSardar Hukum Singh.All these opposition parties succeeded ingaining only a token representation in theLok Sabha and state assemblies during thisperiod. Yet their presence played a crucial rolein maintaining the democratic character of thesystem. These parties offered a sustained andoften principled criticism of the policies andpractices of the Congress party. This kept theruling party under check and often changedthe balance of power within the Congress. Bykeeping democratic political alternative alive,
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Era of One-party Dominance 41Swatantra PartySwatantra Party was formed in August1959 after the Nagpur resolution of theCongress which called for land ceilings,take-over of food grain trade by the stateand adoption of cooperative farming. Theparty was led by old Congressmen like C.Rajagopalachari, K.M.Munshi, N.G.Rangaand Minoo Masani. The party stood outfrom the others in terms of its position oneconomic issues.The Swatantra Party wanted thegovernment to be less and less involvedin controlling the economy. It believedthat prosperity could <strong>com</strong>e only throughindividual freedom.It was critical of thedevelopment strategyof state interventionin the economy,centralised planning,nationalisation and thepublic sector. It insteadfavoured expansion of afree private sector. The Swatantra Party was againstland ceilings in agriculture, and opposed cooperativefarming and state trading. It was also opposed to theprogressive tax regime and demanded dismantlingof the licensing regime. It was critical of the policy ofnon-alignment and maintaining friendly relations withthe Soviet Union and advocated closer ties with theUnited States. The Swatantra Party gained strengthin different parts of the Country by way of merger withnumerous regional parties and interests. It attractedthe landlords and princes who wanted to protecttheir land and status that was being threatened bythe land reforms legislation. The industrialists andbusiness class who were against nationalisation andthe licensing policies also supported the party. Itsnarrow social base and the lack of a dedicated cadreof party members did not allow it to build a strongorganisational network.C. Rajagopalachari(1878-1972): A senior leaderof Congress and literarywriter; close associate ofMahatma Gandhi; memberof Constituent Assembly; firstIndian to be the GovernorGeneral of India (1948-1950); minister in UnionCabinet; later became ChiefMinister of Madras state;first recipient of the BharatRatna Award; founder of theSwatantra Party (1959).
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>42 Politics in India since Independence“……Tandon’selection is considered(by Congress members)more important than mypresence in the Govt or theCongress….. .. .. … ..I have<strong>com</strong>pletely exhausted myutility both in the Congressand Govt.“Jawaharlal Nehruin a letter to Rajaji, afterthe election of Tandonas Congress presidentagainst his wishes.these parties prevented the resentment with the system from turninganti-democratic. These parties also groomed the leaders who were toplay a crucial role in the shaping of our country.In the early years there was a lot of mutual respect betweenthe leaders of the Congress and those of the opposition. Theinterim government that ruled the country after the declaration ofIndependence and the first general election included oppositionleaders like Dr. Ambedkar and Shyama Prasad Mukherjee in thecabinet. Jawaharlal Nehru often referred to his fondness for theSocialist Party and invited socialist leaders like Jayaprakash Narayanto join his government. This kind of personal relationship with andrespect for political adversaries declined after the party <strong>com</strong>petitiongrew more intense.Thus this first phase of democratic politics in our country wasquite unique. The inclusive character of the national movement ledby the Congress enabled it to attract different sections, groups andinterests making it a broad based social and ideological coalition. TheNehru’s Cabinet after the swearing-in of Chakravarti Rajagopalachari as Governor-General in 1948.Sitting from left to right: Rafi Ahmad Kidwai, Baldev Singh, Maulana Azad, Prime Minister Nehru,Chakravarti Rajagopalachari, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, Rajkumari Amrit Kaur, Mr. John Matthaiand Jagjivan Ram. Standing from left to right: Mr. Gadgil, Mr. Neogi, Dr. Ambedkar, ShyamaPrasad Mukherji, Mr. Gopalaswamy Iyengar and Mr. Jayramdas Daulatram.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Era of One-party Dominance 43Party <strong>com</strong>petition in a Bihar villageWhen two buffalos fight, the grass beneath them gets crushed. TheCongress and Socialist parties are fighting with each other. Both ofthem are seeking new members. The poor people will be groundbetween the two grindstones!“No, the poor people won’t be crushed. In fact, they’ll benefit”, wassomeone’s reply. “Things aren’t ac<strong>com</strong>plished by one party alone. Itis the <strong>com</strong>petition and rivalry between two groups that benefits thepublic...”The news of Socialist Party meeting had agitated the Santhals. Thenews of the opening of the hospital hadn’t made much impression onthem – nor did they ever bother much about the fights and quarrels, Fanishwarnath Renuor the friendly gatherings of the villagers. But this meeting was for thetillers of the soil. .... “To whom does the land belong? To the tiller!He who tills will sow! He who sows will harvest! He who works will eat, <strong>com</strong>e what may!”Kalicharan lectured....There was turmoil in the District Office of the Congress Party too. They were about to elect aParty Chairman. There were four candidates — two real contenders and two dummy candidates.It was a contest between Rajputs and Bhumihars The wealthy businessmen and zamindarsfrom both the castes were cruising all over the district in their motorcars, campaigning. Allkinds of mudslinging was going on between them. The Seth who owned the Katihar cotton millwas representing the Bhumihar party, and the owner of Farbigang jute mill was representingthe Rajputs …. You should see the money they’re flashing around.Translated extracts from Fanishwarnath Renu’s novel “Maila Anchal”. The novel is set inPurnia district in North East Bihar in the early years after Independence.key role of the Congress in the freedomstruggle thus gave it a head start overothers. As the ability of the Congressto ac<strong>com</strong>modate all interests and allaspirants for political power steadilydeclined, other political parties startedgaining greater significance. Thus,Congress dominance constitutes onlyone phase in the politics of the country.We shall <strong>com</strong>e to the other phases inlater parts of this textbook.Shyama Prasad Mukherjee(1901-1953): Leader ofHindu Mahasabha; founderof Bharatiya Jana Sangh;Minister in Nehru’s first cabinetafter Independence; resignedin 1950 due to differencesover relations with Pakistan;Member of ConstituentAssembly and later, the first Lok Sabha;was opposed to India’s policy of autonomyto Jammu & Kashmir; arrested during JanaSangh’s agitation against Kashmir policy; diedduring detention.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>44 Politics in India since Independence1. Choose the correct option to fill in the blanks.(a) The First General Elections in 1952 involved simultaneouselections to the Lok Sabha and ………………….(The President ofIndia/ State Assemblies/ Rajya Sabha/ The Prime Minister)(b) The party that won the second largest number of Lok Sabha seatsin the first elections was the………………….(Praja Socialist Party/Bharatiya Jana Sangh/ Communist Party of India/Bharatiya JanataParty)(c) One of the guiding principles of the ideology of the SwatantraParty was………………….(Working class interests/ protection ofPrincely States / economy free from State control / Autonomy ofStates within the Union)EXERCISES2. Match the following leaders listed in List A with the parties in List B.List A List B(a) S. A. Dange i. Bharatiya Jana Sangh(b) Shyama Prasad Mukherjee ii. Swatantra Party(c) Minoo Masani iii. Praja Socialist Party(d) Asoka Mehta iv. Communist Party of India3. Four statements regarding one- party dominance are given below. Markeach of them as true or false.(a) One-party dominance is rooted in the absence of strong alternativepolitical parties.(b) One-party dominance occurs because of weak public opinion.(c) One-party dominance is linked to the nation’s colonial past.(d) One-party dominance reflects the absence of democratic ideals ina country.4. If Bharatiya Jana Sangh or the Communist Party of India had formed thegovernment after the first election, in which respects would the policiesof the government have been different? Specify three differences eachfor both the parties.5. In what sense was the Congress an ideological coalition? Mention thevarious ideological currents present within the Congress.6. Did the prevalence of a ‘one party dominant system’ affect adverselythe democratic nature of Indian politics?7. Bring out three differences each between Socialist parties and theCommunist party and between Bharatiya Jana Sangh and SwatantraParty.8. What would you consider as the main differences between Mexico andIndia under one party domination?
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Era of One-party Dominance 459. Take a political map of India (with State outlines) and mark:(a) two states where Congress was not in power at some pointduring 1952-67.(b) two states where the Congress remained in power throughthis period.10. Read the following passage and answer the questions below:“Patel, the organisational man of the Congress, wanted to purge theCongress of other political groups and sought to make of it a cohesiveand disciplined political party. He …. sought to take the Congress awayfrom its all-embracing character and turn it into a close-knit party ofdisciplined cadres. Being a ‘realist’ he looked more for discipline thanfor <strong>com</strong>prehension. While Gandhi took too romantic a view of “carryingon the movement,” Patel’s idea of transforming the Congress intostrictly political party with a single ideology and tight discipline showedan equal lack of understanding of the eclectic role that the Congress,as a government, was to be called upon to perform in the decades tofollow.” — RAJNI KOTHARI(a) Why does the author think that Congress should not have beena cohesive and disciplined party?(b) Give some examples of the eclectic role of the Congress partyin the early years.(c) Why does the author say that Gandhi’s view aboutCongress’ future was romantic?LET US DO IT TOGETHERMake a chart of elections and governments in your State since 1952.The chart could have the following columns: year of election, name ofthe winning party, name of ruling party or parties, name of the ChiefMinister(s).
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Stamps like these,issued mostly between1955 and 1968,depicted a vision ofplanned development.Left to right, top tobottom: DamodarValley, BhakraDam, ChittaranjanLo<strong>com</strong>otives, GauhatiRefinery, Tractor, SindriFertilisers, Bhakra Dam,Electric Train, WheatRevolution, HirakudDam, Hindustan AircraftFactoryIn this chapter…In the last two chapters we have studied how the leaders of independentIndia responded to the challenges of nation-building and establishingdemocracy. Let us now turn to the third challenge, that of economicdevelopment to ensure well-being of all. As in the case of the first twochallenges, our leaders chose a path that was different and difficult. Inthis case their success was much more limited, for this challenge wastougher and more enduring.In this chapter, we study the story of political choices involved in someof the key questions of economic development.• What were the key choices and debates about development?• Which strategy was adopted by our leaders in the first twodecades? And why?• What were the main achievements and limitations of this strategy?• Why was this development strategy abandoned in later years?
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>politics of planneddevelopmentchapter3As the global demand for steel increases, Orissa, which has one ofthe largest reserves of untapped iron ore in the country, is beingseen as an important investment destination. The State governmenthopes to cash in on this unprecedented demand for iron ore andhas signed Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with bothinternational and domestic steel makers. The government believesthat this would bring in necessary capital investment and proivde alot of employment opportunities. The iron ore resources lie in someof the most underdeveloped and predominantly tribal districts of thestate. The tribal population fears that the setting up of industrieswould mean displacement from their home and livelihood. Theenvironmentalists fear that mining and industry wouldpollute the environment. The central government feelsthat if the industry is not allowed it would set a badexample and discourage investments in the country.Can you identify the various interests involved in thiscase? What are their key points of conflict? Do you thinkthere are any <strong>com</strong>mon points on which everyone canagree? Can this issue be resolved in a way which satisfiesall the various interests? As you ask these questions, youwould find yourself facing yet bigger questions. Whatkind of development does Orissa need? Indeed, whoseneed can be called Orissa’s need?Political contestationThese questions cannot be answered by an expert.Decisions of this kind involve weighing the interests ofone social group against another, present generationagainst future generations. In a democracy such majordecisions should be taken or at least approved by thepeople themselves. It is important to take advice fromexperts on mining, from environmentalists and fromeconomists. Yet the final decision must be a politicaldecision, taken by people’s representatives who are intouch with the feelings of the people.After Independence our country had to make a seriesof major decisions like this. Each of these decisionscould not be made independent of other such decisions.All these decisions were bound together by a sharedvision or model of economic development. AlmostOrissa villagers protestagainst POSCO plantStaff ReporterBHUBANESWAR: People facingdisplacement by the proposedPOSCO-India steel plant inJagatsinghpur district stageda demonstration outside theKorean <strong>com</strong>pany’s office here onThursday. They were demandingcancellation of the memorandum ofunderstanding signed between the<strong>com</strong>pany and the Orissa governmentone year ago.More than 100 men and womenfrom the gram panchayats ofDhinkia, Nuagaon and Gadakujangatried to enter the office premisesbut the police prevented them.Raising slogans, the protesterssaid the <strong>com</strong>pany should not beallowed to set up its plant at the costof their lives and livelihood. Thedemonstration was organised by theRashtriya Yuva Sangathan and theNabanirman Samiti.The Hindu, 23 June 2006
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>48 Politics in India since IndependenceWhat is Left and what is Right?In the politics of most countries, you will always<strong>com</strong>e across references to parties and groupswith a Left or Right ideology or leaning. These termscharacterise the position of the concerned groups orparties regarding social change and role of the statein effecting economic redistribution. Left often refersto those who are in favour of the poor, downtroddensections and support government policies for thebenefit of these sections. The Right refers to thosewho believe that free <strong>com</strong>petition and market economyalone ensure progress and that the government shouldnot unnecessarily intervene in the economy.Can you tell which of the parties in the 1960s wereRightist and which were the Left parties? Wherewould you place the Congress party of that time?everyone agreed that the developmentof India should mean both economicgrowth and social and economicjustice. It was also agreed that thismatter cannot be left to businessmen,industrialists and farmers themselves,that the government should play a keyrole in this. There was disagreement,however, on the kind of role that thegovernment must play in ensuringgrowth with justice. Was it necessaryto have a centralised institution toplan for the entire country? Shouldthe government itself run some keyindustries and business? How muchimportance was to be attached to theneeds of justice if it differed from therequirements of economic growth?Each of these questions involvedcontestation which has continued eversince. Each of the decision had politicalconsequence. Most of these issues involved political judgement andrequired consultations among political parties and approval of thepublic. That is why we need to study the process of development as apart of the history of politics in India.I thought theconnection was simpler!All big decisions involvebig money and that iswhy politicians takethese decisions.Ideas of developmentVery often this contestation involves the very idea of development. Theexample of Orissa shows us that it is not enough to say that everyonewants development. For ‘development’ has different meanings fordifferent sections of the people. Development would mean differentthings for example, to an industrialist who is planning to set up asteel plant, to an urban consumer of steel and to the Adivasi wholives in that region. Thus any discussion on development is bound togenerate contradictions, conflicts and debates.The first decade after Independence witnessed a lot of debate aroundthis question. It was <strong>com</strong>mon then, as it is even now, for people to referto the ‘West’ as the standard for measuring development. ‘Development’was about be<strong>com</strong>ing more ‘modern’ and modern was about be<strong>com</strong>ingmore like the industrialised countries of the West. This is how <strong>com</strong>monpeople as well as the experts thought. It was believed that every countrywould go through the process of modernisation as in the West, whichinvolved the breakdown of traditional social structures and the riseof capitalism and liberalism. Modernisation was also associated withthe ideas of growth, material progress and scientific rationality. Thiskind of idea of development allowed everyone to talk about differentcountries as developed, developing or underdeveloped.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Politics of Planned Development 49On the eve of Independence, India had before it, two modelsof modern development: the liberal-capitalist model as in much ofEurope and the US and the socialist model as in the USSR. You havealready studied these two ideologies and read about the ‘cold war’between the two super powers. There were many in India then whowere deeply impressed by the Soviet model of development. Theseincluded not just the leaders of the Communist Party of India, butalso those of the Socialist Party and leaders like Nehru within theCongress. There were very few supporters of the American stylecapitalist development.This reflected a broad consensus that had developed duringthe national movement. The nationalist leaders were clear that theeconomic concerns of the government of free India would have tobe different from the narrowly defined <strong>com</strong>mercial functions of thecolonial government. It was clear, moreover, that the task of povertyalleviation and social and economic redistribution was being seenprimarily as the responsibility of the government. There were debatesamong them. For some, industrialisation seemed to be the preferredpath. For others, the development of agriculture and in particularalleviation of rural poverty was the priority.Are you sayingwe don’t haveto be westernin order to bemodern? Is thatpossible?PlanningDespite the various differences, there was a consensus on one point:that development could not be left to private actors, that there was theneed for the government to develop a design or plan for development.In fact the idea of planning as a process of rebuilding economy earneda good deal of public support in the 1940s and 1950s all over theworld. The experience of Great Depression in Europe, the inter-warCredit: Hindustan TimesNehruaddressingthe staff ofthe PlanningCommission
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>50 Politics in India since IndependenceCredit:NinanI wonder if the PlanningCommission hasactually followed theseobjectives in practice.Planning CommissionDo you recall any reference to the Planning Commission in your bookConstitution at Work last year? Actually there was none, for the PlanningCommission is not one of the many <strong>com</strong>missions and other bodies set up bythe Constitution. The Planning Commission was set up in March, 1950 by asimple resolution of the Government of India. It has an advisory role and itsre<strong>com</strong>mendations be<strong>com</strong>e effective only when the Union Cabinet approvedthese. The resolution which set up the Commission defined the scope of itswork in the following terms :“The Constitution of India has guaranteed certain Fundamental Rights to thecitizens of India and enunciated certain Directive Principles of State Policy,in particular, that the State shall strive to promote the welfare of the peopleby securing and protecting….a social order in which justice, social, economicand political, shall …….. …. direct its policy towards securing, among otherthings,(a) that the citizens, men and women equally, have the right to anadequate means of livelihood ;(b) that the ownership and control of the material resources of the<strong>com</strong>munity are so distributed as best to subserve the <strong>com</strong>mon good;and(c) that the operation of the economic system does not result inthe concentration of wealth and means of production to the <strong>com</strong>mondetriment.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Politics of Planned Development 51reconstruction of Japan and Germany, and most of all the spectaculareconomic growth against heavy odds in the Soviet Union in the 1930sand 1940s contributed to this consensus.Thus the Planning Commission was not a sudden invention. In fact,it has a very interesting history. We <strong>com</strong>monly assume that privateinvestors, such as industrialists and big business entrepreneurs,are averse to ideas of planning: they seek an open economy withoutany state control in the flow of capital. That was not what happenedhere. Rather, a section of the big industrialists got together in 1944and drafted a joint proposal for setting up a planned economy in thecountry. It was called the Bombay Plan. The Bombay Plan wantedthe state to take major initiatives in industrial and other economicinvestments. Thus, from left to right, planning for development wasthe most obvious choice for the country after Independence. Soonafter India became independent, the Planning Commission came intobeing. The Prime Minister was its Chairperson. It became the mostinfluential and central machinery for deciding what path and strategyIndia would adopt for its development.The Early InitiativesAs in the USSR, the Planning Commission of India opted for five yearplans (FYP). The idea is very simple: the Government of India preparesa document that has a plan for all its in<strong>com</strong>e and expenditure for thenext five years. Accordingly the budget of the central and all the Stategovernments is divided into two parts: ‘non-plan’ budget that is spenton routine items on a yearly basis and ‘plan’ budget that is spent on afive year basis as per the priorities fixed by the plan. A five year planhas the advantage of permitting the government to focus on the largerpicture and make long-term intervention in the economy.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Politics of Planned Development 53Agricultural sector was hit hardest by Partition and needed urgentattention. Huge allocations were made for large-scale projects likethe Bhakhra Nangal Dam. The Plan identified the pattern of landdistribution in the country as the principal obstacle in the way ofagricultural growth. It focused on land reforms as the key to thecountry’s development.One of the basic aims of the planners was to raise the level ofnational in<strong>com</strong>e, which could be possible only if the people savedmore money than they spent. As the basic level of spending wasvery low in the 1950s, it could not be reduced any more. So theplanners sought to push savings up. That too was difficult as thetotal capital stock in the country was rather low <strong>com</strong>pared to thetotal number of employable people. Nevertheless, people’s savingsdid rise in the first phase of the planned process until the end ofthe Third Five Year Plan. But, the rise was not as spectacular aswas expected at the beginning of the First Plan. Later, from theearly 1960s till the early 1970s, the proportion of savings in thecountry actually dropped consistently.Rapid IndustrialisationThe Second FYP stressed on heavy industries. It was draftedby a team of economists and planners under the leadership ofP. C. Mahalanobis. If the first plan had preached patience, thesecond wanted to bring about quick structural transformation bymaking changes simultaneously in all possible directions. Beforethis plan was finalised, the Congress party at its session held atAvadi near the then Madras city, passed an important resolution.It declared that ‘socialist pattern of society’ was its goal. This wasreflected in the Second Plan. The government imposed substantialtariffs on imports in order to protect domestic industries. Suchprotected environment helped both public and private sectorindustries to grow. As savings and investment were growing in thisperiod, a bulk of these industries like electricity, railways, steel,machineries and <strong>com</strong>munication could be developed in the publicsector. Indeed, such a push for industrialisation marked a turningpoint in India’s development.It, however, had its problems as well. India was technologicallybackward, so it had to spend precious foreign exchange to buytechnology from the global market. That apart, as industry attractedmore investment than agriculture, the possibility of food shortageloomed large. The Indian planners found balancing industry andagriculture really difficult. The Third Plan was not significantlydifferent from the Second. Critics pointed out that the planstrategies from this time around displayed an unmistakable“urban bias”. Others thought that industry was wrongly givenpriority over agriculture. There were also those who wanted focuson agriculture-related industries rather than heavy ones.Tenth Five Year PlandocumentP.C. Mahalanobis(1893-1972):Scientist andstatistician ofinternational repute;founder of IndianStatistical Institute(1931); architect ofthe Second Plan;supporter of rapidindustrialisation andactive role of thepublic sector.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>54 Politics in India since IndependenceDecentralised planningIt is not necessary that all planning always has tobe centralised; nor is it that planning is only aboutbig industries and large projects. The ‘Keralamodel’ is the name given to the path of planningand development charted by the State of Kerala.There has been a focus in this model on education,health, land reform, effective food distribution, andpoverty alleviation. Despite low per capita in<strong>com</strong>es,and a relatively weak industrial base, Keralaachieved nearly total literacy, long life expectancy,low infant and female mortality, low birth ratesand high access to medical care. Between 1987and 1991, the government launched the NewDemocratic Initiative which involved campaignsfor development (including total literacy especiallyin science and environment) designed to involvepeople directly in development activities throughvoluntary citizens’ organisations. The State hasalso taken initiative to involve people in makingplans at the Panchayat, block and district level.Key ControversiesThe strategy of development followedin the early years raised severalimportant questions. Let us examinetwo of these disputes that continueto be relevant.Agriculture versus industryWe have already touched upon a bigquestion: between agriculture andindustry, which one should attractmore public resources in a backwardeconomy like that of India? Manythought that the Second Plan lackedan agrarian strategy for development,and the emphasis on industrycaused agriculture and rural Indiato suffer. Gandhian economistslike J. C. Kumarappa proposed analternative blueprint that put greateremphasis on rural industrialisation.Chaudhary Charan Singh, a Congressleader who later broke from theparty to form Bharatiya Lok Dal,
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Politics of Planned Development 55J.C. Kumarappa(1892-1960): Original nameJ.C. Cornelius; economist andchartered accountant; studiedin England and USA; followerof Mahatma Gandhi; tried toapply Gandhian principles toeconomic policies; author of‘Economy of Permanence’;participated in planningprocess as member of thePlanning Commissionforcefully articulated the case forkeeping agriculture at the centre ofplanning for India. He said that theplanning was leading to creation ofprosperity in urban and industrialsection at the expense of thefarmers and rural population.Others thought that withouta drastic increase in industrialproduction, there could be noescape from the cycle of poverty.They argued that Indian planningdid have an agrarian strategyto boost the production of foodgrains.The state made laws forland reforms and distribution ofresources among the poor in thevillages. It also proposed programmesof <strong>com</strong>munity developmentand spent large sums on irrigationprojects. The failure was not that ofpolicy but its non-implementation,because the landowning classesLet’s watch a FilmPATHER PANCHALIThis film tells the story of a poorfamily in a Bengal village and itsstruggle to survive. Durga, thedaughter of Harihar and Sarbajaya,with her younger brother, Apu,goes on enjoying life oblivious ofthe struggles and the poverty. Thefilm revolves around the simplelife and the efforts of the motherof Durga and Apu to maintainthe family.Pather Panchali (Song of the LittleRoad) narrates the desires anddisappointments of the poor familythrough the tale of the youngsters.Finally, during monsoon, Durgafalls ill and dies while her fatheris away. Harihar returns with gifts,including a sari for Durga…..The film won numerous awardsnationally and internationally,including the President’s Gold andSilver medals for the year 1955.Year: 1955Director: Satyajit RayStory: BibhutibhushanBandyopadhyayScreenplay: Satyajit RayActors: Kanu Bannerjee, KarunaBannerjee, Subir Bannerjee, UmaDas Gupta Durga, Chunibala Devi
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>56 Politics in India since Independencehad lot of social and political power. Besides, they also argue thateven if the government had spent more money on agriculture it wouldnot have solved the massive problem of rural poverty.Public versus private sectornot accept the capitalist model of development in which developmentwas left entirely to the private sector, nor did it follow the socialistmodel in which private property was abolished and all the productionwas controlled by the state. Elements from both these models weretaken and mixed together in India. That is why it was described as‘mixed economy’. Much of the agriculture, trade and industry were leftin private hands. The state controlled key heavy industries, providedindustrial infrastructure, regulated trade and made some crucialinterventions in agriculture.A mixed model like this was open to criticism from both the leftand the right. Critics argued that the planners refused to providethe private sector with enough space and the stimulus to grow.The enlarged public sector produced powerful vested interests thatCredit: ShankarAstride the PublicSector are CentralMinisters Lal BahadurShastri, Ajit PrasadJain, Kailash NathKatju, Jagjivan Ram,T. T. Krishnamachari,Swaran Singh,Gulzari Lal Nanda andB. K. Keskar
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Politics of Planned Development 57created enough hurdles for private capital, especially by way ofinstalling systems of licenses and permits for investment. Moreover,the state’s policy to restrict import of goods that could be producedin the domestic market with little or no <strong>com</strong>petition left the privatesector with no incentive to improve their products and make themcheaper. The state controlled more things than were necessary andthis led to inefficiency and corruption.Then there were critics who thought that the state did not doenough. They pointed out that the state did not spend any significantamount for public education and healthcare. The state intervenedonly in those areas where the private sector was not prepared to go.Thus the state helped the private sector to make profit. Also, insteadof helping the poor, the state intervention ended up creating a new‘middle class’ that enjoyed the privileges of high salaries withoutmuch accountability. Poverty did not decline substantially during thisperiod; even when the proportion of the poor reduced, their numberskept going up.Major Out<strong>com</strong>esOf the three objectives that were identified in independent India,discussed in the first three chapters here, the third objective provedmost difficult to realise. Land reforms did not take place effectively inmost parts of the country; political power remained in the hands ofthe landowning classes; and big industrialists continued to benefitand thrive while poverty did not reduce much. The early initiativesfor planned development were at best realising the goals of economicdevelopment of the country and well-being of all its citizens. Theinability to take significant steps in this direction in the very firststage was to be<strong>com</strong>e a political problem. Those who benefited fromunequal development soon became politically powerful and made iteven more difficult to move in the desired direction.FoundationsAn assessment of the out<strong>com</strong>es of this early phase of planneddevelopment must begin by acknowledging the fact that in this periodthe foundations of India’s future economic growth were laid. Some ofthe largest developmental projects in India’s history were undertakenduring this period. These included mega-dams like Bhakhra-Nangaland Hirakud for irrigation and power generation. Some of the this period. Infrastructure for transport and <strong>com</strong>munication wasimproved substantially. Of late, some of these mega projects have<strong>com</strong>e in for a lot of criticism. Yet much of the later economic growth,including that by the private sector, may not have been possible inthe absence of these foundations.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>58 Politics in India since IndependenceGovernment Campaign reaches the village“In a way the advertisement stuck or written on walls gave an accurate introduction to thevillager’s problems and how to solve them. For example, the problem was that India was afarming nation, but farmers refused to produce more grain out of sheer perversity. The solutionwas to give speeches to farmers and show them all sorts of attractive pictures. These advisedthem that if they didn’t want to grow more grain for themselves then they should do so for thenation. As a result the posters were stuck in various places to induce farmers to grow grainfor the nation. The farmers were greatly influenced by the <strong>com</strong>bined effect of the speechesand posters, and even most simple-minded cultivator began to feel the likelihood of there wassome ulterior motive behind the whole campaign.One advertisement had be<strong>com</strong>e especially well known in Shivpalganj. It showed a healthyfarmer with turban wrapped around his head, earrings and a quilted jacket, cutting a tall cropof wheat with a sickle. A woman was standing behind him, very pleased with herself; she waslaughing like an official from the Department of Agriculture.Below and above the picture was written in Hindi and English – ‘Grow More Grain’. Farmerswith earrings and a quilted jacket who were also scholars of English were expected to be wonover by the English slogans, and those who were scholars of Hindi, by the Hindi version. Andthose who didn’t know how to read either language could at least recognise the figures of theman and the laughing woman. The government hoped that as soon as they saw the man andthe laughing woman, farmer would turn away from the poster and start growing more grain likemen possessed”.Extracts of translation from ‘Raag Darbari’ by Shrilal Shukla. The satire is set in a villageShivpalganj in Uttar Pradesh in the 1960s.Land reformsOh! I thought landreforms were aboutimproving the quality ofsoil!In the agrarian sector, this period witnessed a serious attempt atland reforms. Perhaps the most significant and successful of thesewas the abolition of the colonial system of zamindari. This bold actnot only released land from the clutches of a class that had littleinterest in agriculture, it also reduced the capacity of the landlords small pieces of land together in one place so that the farm size couldother two <strong>com</strong>ponents of land reforms were much less successful.Though the laws were made to put an upper limit or ‘ceiling’ to howmuch agricultural land one person could own, people with excessland managed to evade the law. Similarly, the tenants who worked onsomeone else’s land were given greater legal security against eviction,but this provision was rarely implemented.It was not easy to turn these well-meaning policies on agricultureinto genuine and effective action. This could happen only if the rural,landless poor were mobilised. But the landowners were very powerfuland wielded considerable political influence. Therefore, many proposalsfor land reforms were either not translated into laws, or, when made into
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Politics of Planned Development 59Food CrisisThe agricultural situation went from bad to worse in the 1960s. Already, the rate of growth offood grain production in the 1940s and 1950s was barely staying above rate of populationgrowth. Between 1965 and 1967, severe droughts occurred in many parts of the country. Aswe shall study in the next chapter, this was also the period when the country faced two warsand foreign exchange crisis. All this resulted in a severe food shortage and famine – likeconditions in many parts of the country.It was in Bihar that the food-crisis was most acutely felt as the state faced a near-faminesituation. The food shortage was significant in all districts of Bihar, with 9 districts producingless than half of their normal output. Five of these districts, in fact, produced less than one-thirdof what they produced normally. Food deprivation subsequently led to acute and widespreadmalnutrition. It was estimated that the calorie intake dropped from 2200 per capita per day toas low as 1200 in many regions of the state (as against the requirement of 2450 per day forthe average person). Death rate in Bihar in 1967 was 34% higher than the number of deathsthat occurred in the following year. Food prices also hit a high in Bihar during the year, evenwhen <strong>com</strong>pared with other north Indian states. For wheat and rice the prices in the state weretwice or more than their prices in more prosperous Punjab. The government had “zoning”policies that prohibited trade of food across states; this reduced the availability of food in Bihardramatically. In situations such as this, the poorest sections of the society suffered the most.The food crisis had many consequences. The government had to import wheat and had toaccept foreign aid, mainly from the US. Now the first priority of the planners was to somehowattain self-sufficiency in food. The entire planning process and sense of optimism and prideassociated with it suffered a setback.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>60 Politics in India since Independencelaws, they remained only on paper. This shows that economic policy ispart of the actual political situation in the society. It also shows that inspite of good wishes of some top leaders, the dominant social groupswould always effectively control policy making and implementation.Why don’t we call itwheat revolution? Andwhy does everythinghave to be ‘revolution’?The Green RevolutionIn the face of the prevailing food-crisis, the country was clearlyvulnerable to external pressures and dependent on food aid, mainlyfrom the United States. The United States, in turn, pushed India tochange its economic policies. The government adopted a new strategyfor agriculture in order to ensure food sufficiency. Instead of theearlier policy of giving more support to the areas and farmers thatwere lagging behind, now it was decided to put more resources intothose areas which already had irrigation and those farmers who werealready well-off. The argument was that those who already had thecapacity could help increase production rapidly in the short run.Thus the government offered high-yielding variety seeds, fertilizers,pesticides and better irrigation at highly subsidised prices. Thegovernment also gave a guarantee to buy the produce of the farmersat a given price. This was the beginning of what was called the ‘greenrevolution’.The rich peasants and the large landholders were the majorbeneficiaries of the process. The green revolution delivered only amoderate agricultural growth (mainly a rise in wheat production) andraised the availability of food in the country, but increased polarisationbetween classes and regions. Some regions like Punjab, Haryanaand western Uttar Pradesh became agriculturally prosperous, whileothers remained backward. The green revolution had two othereffects: one was that in many parts, the stark contrast between thepoor peasantry and the landlords produced conditions favourable forSrikanth still remembers the struggle his elder brother had to undergoin order to get the monthly supply of ration for the ration shop. Theirfamily was totally dependent on the supplies from the ration shop forrice, oil and kerosene. Many times, his brother would stand in thequeue for an hour or so only to find out that the supply had ended andhe would have to <strong>com</strong>e later when fresh supply arrives. Find out fromtalking to elders in your family what is a ration card and ask your elderswhat, if any, items they buy from the ration shop. Visit a ration shop inthe vicinity of your school or home and find out what is the differencein the prices of at least three <strong>com</strong>modities—wheat\rice, cooking oil,sugar—between the ration shop and the open market.Let’s re-search
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Politics of Planned Development 61Fast Forward The White RevolutionYou must be familiar with the jingle ‘utterly butterly delicious’ andthe endearing figure of the little girl holding a buttered toast. Yes, theAmul advertisements! Did you know that behind Amul products lies asuccessful history of cooperative dairy farming in India. Verghese Kurien,nicknamed the ‘Milkman of India’, played a crucial role in the story ofGujarat Cooperative Milk and Marketing Federation Ltd that launchedAmul.Based in Anand, a town in Gujarat, Amul is a dairy cooperative movementjoined by about 2 and half million milk producers in Gujarat. The Amulpattern became a uniquely appropriate model for rural development andpoverty alleviation, spurring what has <strong>com</strong>e to be known as the WhiteRevolution. In 1970 the rural development programme called Operation Flood was started.Operation Flood organised cooperatives of milk producers into a nationwide milk grid, with thepurpose of increasing milk production, bringing the producer and consumer closer by eliminatingmiddlemen, and assuring the producers a regular in<strong>com</strong>e throughout the year. OperationFlood was, however, not just a dairy programme. It saw dairying as a path to development,for generating employment and in<strong>com</strong>e for rural households and alleviating poverty. Thenumber of members of the cooperative has continued to increase with the numbers of womenmembers and Women’s Dairy Cooperative Societies also increasing significantly.leftwing organisations to organise the poor peasants. Secondly, thegreen revolution also resulted in the rise of what is called the middlepeasant sections. These were farmers with medium size holdings, whobenefited from the changes and soon emerged politically influential inmany parts of the country.Later developmentsThe story of development in India took a significant turn from theend of 1960s. You will see in Chapter Five how after Nehru’s deaththe Congress system encountered difficulties. Indira Gandhi emergedas a popular leader. She decided to further strengthen the role ofthe state in controlling and directing the economy. The period from1967 onwards witnessed many new restrictions on private industry.Fourteen private banks were nationalised. The government announcedmany pro-poor programmes. These changes were ac<strong>com</strong>panied by anideological tilt towards socialist policies. This emphasis generatedheated debates within the country among political parties and alsoamong experts.However, the consensus for a state-led economic developmentdid not last forever. Planning did continue, but its salience wassignificantly reduced. Between 1950 and 1980 the Indian economygrew at a sluggish per annum rate of 3 to 3.5%. In view of the prevailing
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>62 Politics in India since Independenceinefficiency and corruption in some public sector enterprises and thenot-so-positive role of the bureaucracy in economic development, thepublic opinion in the country lost the faith it initially placed in manyof these institutions. Such lack of public faith led the policy makers toreduce the importance of the state in India’s economy from the 1980sonwards. We shall look at that part of the story towards the end ofthis book.EXERCISESCredit: Shankar1. Which of these statements about the Bombay Plan is incorrect?(a) It was a blueprint for India’s economic future.(b) It supported state-ownership of industry.(c) It was made by some leading industrialists.(d) It supported strongly the idea of planning.n2. Which of the following ideas did not form part of the early phase ofIndia’s development policy?(a) Planning (c) Cooperative Farming(b) Liberalisation (d) Self sufficiency3. The idea of planning in India was drawn from(a) the Bombay plan(c) Gandhian vision ofsociety(b) experiences of the Soviet (d) Demand by peasantbloc countriesorganisationsi. b and d only iii. a and b onlyii. d and c only iv. all the above
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Politics of Planned Development 634. Match the following.(a) Charan Singh i. Industrialisation(b) P C Mahalanobis ii. Zoning(c) Bihar Famine iii. Farmers(d) Verghese Kurien iv. Milk Cooperatives5. What were the major differences in the approach towards developmentat the time of Independence? Has the debate been resolved?6. What was the major thrust of the First Five Year Plan? In which waysdid the Second Plan differ from the first one?7. What was the Green Revolution? Mention two positive and twonegative consequences of the Green Revolution.8. State the main arguments in the debate that ensued betweenindustrialisation and agricultural development at the time of theSecond Five Year Plan.9. “Indian policy makers made a mistake by emphasising the role ofstate in the economy. India could have developed much better ifprivate sector was allowed a free play right from the beginning”. Givearguments for or against this proposition.10. Read the following passage and answer the questions below:“In the early years of Independence, two contradictory tendencieswere already well advanced inside the Congress party. On the onehand, the national party executive endorsed socialist principlesof state ownership, regulation and control over key sectors of theeconomy in order to improve productivity and at the same time curbeconomic concentration. On the other hand, the national Congressgovernment pursued liberal economic policies and incentives toprivate investment that was justified in terms of the sole criterion ofachieving maximum increase in production. “ — FRANCINE FRANKEL(a) What is the contradiction that the author is talking about?What would be the political implications of a contradiction likethis?(b) If the author is correct, why is it that the Congress waspursuing this policy? Was it related to the nature of theopposition parties?(c) Was there also a contradiction between the central leadershipof the Congress party and its Sate level leaders?EXERCISES
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Credit: NMMLNehru with Nkrumahfrom Ghana, Nasserfrom Egypt, Sukarnofrom Indonesia and Titofrom Yugoslavia at theAfro-Asian conference inBandung in 1955. Thesefive <strong>com</strong>prised the coreleadership of the NonAligned Movement.In this chapter…Thus far we have focussed in this book on the developments withinthe country and on domestic challenges. We now turn to the externalchallenges. Here too our leaders faced the challenge with an innovativeresponse by way of the policy of non-alignment. But they also foundthemselves in conflict with neighbours. This led to three wars in 1962,1965 and 1971. These wars, and the external relations in general, wereshaped by and had its impact on the politics in the country.In this chapter we study the story of this relationship between theexternal and the internal politics by focussing on• the international context that shaped India’s external relations;• the operational principles that informed the country’s foreignpolicy;• the history of India’s relations with China and Pakistan; and• the evolution of India’s nuclear policy.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>india’s externalrelationschapter4International contextIndia was born in a very trying and challenging international context.The world had witnessed a devastating war and was grapplingwith issues of reconstruction; yet another attempt to establishan international body was underway; many new countries wereemerging as a result of the collapse of colonialism; and most newnations were trying to <strong>com</strong>e to terms with the twin challenges ofwelfare and democracy. Free India’s foreign policy reflected all theseconcerns in the period immediately after Independence. Apart fromthese factors at the global level, India had its own share of concerns.The British government left behind the legacy of many internationaldisputes; Partition created its own pressures, and the task of povertyalleviation was already waiting for fulfilment. This was the overallcontext in which India started participating in the world affairs as anindependent nation-state.As a nation born in the backdrop of the world war, India decidedto conduct its foreign relations with an aim to respect the sovereigntyof all other nations and to achieve security through the maintenanceof peace. This aim finds an echo in the Directive Principles of StatePolicy.Just as both internal and external factors guide the behaviour of anindividual or a family, both domestic and international environmentinfluence the foreign policy of a nation. The developing countrieslack the required resources to effectively advocate their concerns inthe international system. So they pursue more modest goals thanthe advanced states. They focus more on peace and development intheir own neighbourhood. Moreover, their economic and securitydependence on the more powerful states occasionally influencestheir foreign policy. In the period immediately after the Second WorldWar, many developing nations chose to support the foreign policypreferences of the powerful countries who were giving them aid orcredits. This resulted in the division of countries of the world into twoclear camps. One was under the influence of the United States andits western allies and the other was under the influence of the thenSoviet Union. You have read about this in the book on ContemporaryWorld Politics. You have read there about the experiment called theNon-Aligned Movement. As you also read there, the end of the ColdWar changed the context of international relations entirely. But whenIndia achieved its freedom and started framing its foreign policy, the“What doesindependence consist of?It consists fundamentallyand basically of foreignrelations. That is the testof independence. All else islocal autonomy. Once foreignrelations go out of yourhands into the charge ofsomebody else, to that extentand in that measure you arenot independent.“Jawaharlal Nehruduring a debate in theConstituent Assembly inMarch 1949.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>66 Politics in India since IndependenceThe Constitutional principlesArticle 51 of the Indian Constitution lays down some Directive Principles of State Policy on‘Promotion of international peace and security’.“The State shall endeavour to –(a) Promote international peace and security(b) Maintain just and honourable relations between nations(c) Foster respect for international law and treaty obligations in the dealings of organisedpeople with one another; and(d) Encourage settlement of international disputes by arbitration.”How well did the Indian state live up to these principles in the first two decades afterIndependence? You may <strong>com</strong>e back to this question after reading the chapter.Cold War was just beginning and the world was getting divided intothese two camps. Did India belong to any of these two camps in globalpolitics of the fifties and the sixties? Was it successful in conductingits foreign policy peacefully and avoiding international conflicts?It’sthe fourth chapterand it’s Nehru onceagain! Was he asuperman or what? Orhave the historiansglorified his role?Policy of non-alignmentThe Indian national movement was not an isolated process. It was apart of the worldwide struggle against colonialism and imperialism.It influenced the liberation movements of many Asian and Africancountries. Prior to India’s Independence, there were contacts betweenthe nationalist leaders of India and those of other colonies, unitedas they were in their <strong>com</strong>mon struggle against colonialism andimperialism. The creation of the Indian National Army (INA) by NetajiSubhash Chandra Bose during the Second World War was the clearestmanifestation of the linkages established between India and overseasIndians during the freedom struggle.The foreign policy of a nation reflects the interplay of domesticand external factors. Therefore, the noble ideals that inspired India’sstruggle for freedom influenced the making of its foreign policy. ButIndia’s attainment of independence coincided with the beginning ofthe Cold War era. As you read in the first chapter of the book onContemporary World Politics, this period was marked by the political,economic, and military confrontation at the global level between thetwo blocs led by the superpowers, the US and the USSR. The sameperiod also witnessed developments like the establishment of theUN, the creation of nuclear weapons, the emergence of Communist
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>India’s external relations 67China, and the beginning of decolonisation. So India’s leadership hadto pursue its national interests within the prevailing internationalcontext.Nehru’s roleThe first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru played a crucial role insetting the national agenda. He was his own foreign minister. Thusboth as the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister, he exercisedprofound influence in the formulation and implementation of India’sforeign policy from 1946 to 1964. The three major objectives ofNehru’s foreign policy were to preserve the hard-earned sovereignty,protect territorial integrity, and promote rapid economic development.Nehru wished to achieve these objectives through the strategy of nonalignment.There were of course parties and groups in the countrythat believed that India should be more friendly with the bloc ledby US because that bloc claimed to be pro-democracy. Among thosewho thought on these lines were leaders like Dr Ambedkar. Somepolitical parties, which were opposed to <strong>com</strong>munism, also wantedIndia to follow a pro-US foreign policy. These included the BharatiyaJan Sangh and later the Swatantra Party. But Nehru possessedconsiderable leeway in formulating the foreign policy.Distance from two campsThe foreign policy of independent India vigorously pursued the dreamof a peaceful world by advocating the policy of non-alignment, byreducing the Cold War tensions and by contributing human resourcesto the UN peacekeeping operations. You might ask why India did notjoin either of the two camps during the Cold War era. India wantedto keep away from the military alliances led by US and Soviet Unionagainst each other. As you have read in the book on ContemporaryWorld Politics, during the Cold War, the US-led North AtlanticTreaty Organisation (NATO) and the Soviet-led Warsaw Pact cameinto existence. India advocated non-alignment as the ideal foreignpolicy approach. This was a difficult balancing act and sometimesthe balance did not appear perfect. In 1956 when Britain attackedEgypt over the Suez canal issue, India led the world protest againstthis neo-colonial invasion. But in the same year when the USSRinvaded Hungary, India did not join its public condemnation. Despitesuch situation, by and large India did take an independent stand onvarious international issues and could get aid and assistance frommembers of both the blocs.While India was trying to convince the other developing countriesabout the policy of non-alignment, Pakistan joined the US-led militaryalliances. The US was not happy about India’s independent initiativesand the policy of non-alignment. Therefore, there was a considerable“Our generalpolicy is to avoidentanglement in powerpolitics and not to joinany group of powers asagainst any other group.The two leading groupstoday are the Russianbloc and the Anglo-American bloc. We mustbe friendly to both andyet not join either. BothAmerica and Russiaare extraordinarilysuspicious of each otheras well as of othercountries. This makesour path difficultand we may well besuspected by each ofleaning towards theother. This cannot behelped.Jawaharlal NehruLetter to K .P. S.Menon, January1947.“
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>68 Politics in India since Independenceunease in Indo-US relations during the 1950s. The US also resentedIndia’s growing partnership with the Soviet Union.You have studied in the last chapter, the strategy of plannedeconomic development adopted by India. This policy emphasisedimport-substitution. The emphasis on developing a resource base alsomeant that export oriented growth was limited. This developmentstrategy limited India’s economic interaction with the outside world.Did we have morerecognition and powerin the world when wewere younger, poorerand more vulnerablethan now? Isn’t thatstrange?“a country withoutmaterial, men or money– the three means of power– is now fast <strong>com</strong>ing to berecognised as the biggestmoral power in the civilisedworld …her word listened towith respect in the councilsof the great.“C. RajagopalachariLetter to EdwinaMountbatten, 1950.Afro-Asian unityYet, given its size, location and power potential, Nehru envisaged amajor role for India in world affairs and especially in Asian affairs.His era was marked by the establishment of contacts between Indiaand other newly independent states in Asia and Africa. Throughoutthe 1940s and 1950s, Nehru had been an ardent advocate of Asianunity. Under his leadership, India convened the Asian RelationsConference in March 1947, five months ahead of attaining itsindependence. India made earnest efforts for the early realisation offreedom of Indonesia from the Dutch colonial regime by conveningan international conference in 1949 to support its freedom struggle.India was a staunch supporter of the decolonisation process andfirmly opposed racism, especially apartheid in South Africa. The Afro-Asian conference held in the Indonesian city of Bandung in 1955,<strong>com</strong>monly known as the Bandung Conference, marked the zenith ofIndia’s engagement with the newly independent Asian and Africannations. The Bandung Conference later led to the establishmentof the NAM. The First Summit of the NAM was held in Belgrade inSeptember 1961. Nehru was a co-founder of the NAM (See Chapter 1of Contemporary World Politics).Peace and conflict with ChinaUnlike its relationship with Pakistan, free India began its relationshipwith China on a very friendly note. After the Chinese revolution in1949, India was one of the first countries to recognise the <strong>com</strong>munistgovernment. Nehru felt strongly for this neighbour that was <strong>com</strong>ing outof the shadow of western domination and helped the new governmentin international fora. Some of his colleagues, like Vallabhbhai Patel,were worried about a possible Chinese aggression in future. But Nehruthought it was ‘exceedingly unlikely’ that India will face an attackfrom China. For a very long time, the Chinese border was guarded bypara-military forces, not the army.The joint enunciation of Panchsheel, the Five Principles of PeacefulCoexistence, by the Indian Prime Minister Nehru and the ChinesePremier Zhou Enlai on 29 April 1954 was a step in the direction ofstronger relationship between the two countries. Indian and Chineseleaders visited each other’s country and were greeted by large andfriendly crowds.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>India’s external relations 69TIBETThe plateau of the central Asian region called Tibetis one of the major issues that historically causedtension between India and China. From time totime in history, China had claimed administrativecontrol over Tibet. And from time to time, Tibet wasindependent too. In 1950, China took over controlof Tibet. Large sections of the Tibetan populationopposed this takeover. India tried to persuadeChina to recognise Tibet’s claims for independence.When the Panchsheel agreement was signedbetween India and China in 1954, through one ofits clauses about respecting each other’s territorialintegrity and sovereignty, India conceded China’sclaim over Tibet. The Tibetan spiritual leader Dalai Lama ac<strong>com</strong>panied the Chinese Premier ZhouEnlai during the official Chinese visit to India in 1956. He informed Nehru about the worsening situationin Tibet. But China had already assured India that Tibet will be given greater autonomy than enjoyedby any other region of China. In 1958, there was armed uprising in Tibet against China’s occupation.This was suppressed by the Chinese forces. Sensing that the situation had be<strong>com</strong>e worse, in 1959, theDalai Lama crossed over into the Indian border and sought asylum which was granted. The Chinesegovernment strongly protested against this. Over the last half century, a large number of Tibetans havealso sought refuge in India and many other countries of the world. In India, particularly in Delhi, thereare large settlements of Tibetan refugees. Dharmashala in Himachal Pradesh is perhaps the largestrefuge settlement of Tibetans in India. The Dalai Lama has also made Dharmashala his home in India.In the 1950s and 1960s many political leaders and parties in India including the Socialist Party and theJan Sangh supported the cause of Tibet’s independence.China has created the Tibet autonomous region, which is an integral part of China. Tibetans oppose theChinese claim that Tibet is part of Chinese territory. They also oppose the policy of bringing into Tibetmore and more Chinese settlers. Tibetans dispute China’s claim that autonomy is granted to the region.They think that China wants to undermine the traditional religion and culture of Tibet.Dalai Lama enters India with his followers.Credit: Homai Vyarawalla
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>70Politics in India since IndependenceNote: Thisillustrationis not a mapdrawn toscale andshould notbe takento be anauthenticdepictionof India’sexternalboundaries.Border disputes withChina erupted in 1960. Talksbetween Nehru and Mao Tsetungproved futile.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>India’s external relations 711962Credit: R. K. LaxmanChina rollerevidenceunderconstruction.V.K. KrishnaMenon(1897-1974):Diplomat andminister; activein the LabourParty in UKbetween 1934-1947; Indian HighCommissioner in UK and later headof India’s delegation to UN; RajyaSabha MP and later Lok Sabha MP;member of the Union Cabinet from1956; Defence Minsiter since 1957;considered very close to Nehru;resigned after the India-China war in1962.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>72 Politics in India since Independence“Frankly ...myimpression (of Zhou Enlai)was very favourable. ….theChinese premier is, I believea good type of man andtrustworthy.“C. RajagopalachariIn a letter, December 1956I heardit from mygrandfather. NehruJi cried in public whenLata Mangeshkar sang“Ai mere watan ke logo…”after the 1962 war.The Chinese invasion, 1962Two developments strained this relationship. China annexed Tibet in1950 and thus removed a historical buffer between the two countries.Initially, the government of India did not oppose this openly. But asmore information came in about the suppression of Tibetan culture,the Indian government grew uneasy. The Tibetan spiritual leader, theDalai Lama, sought and obtained political asylum in India in 1959.China alleged that the government of India was allowing anti-Chinaactivities to take place from within India.A little earlier, a boundary dispute had surfaced between Indiaand China. India claimed that the boundary was a matter settled incolonial time, but China said that any colonial decision did not apply.The main dispute was about the western and the eastern end of thelong border. China claimed two areas within the Indian territory:Aksai-chin area in the Ladakh region of Jammu and Kashmir andmuch of the state of Arunachal Pradesh in what was then calledNEFA (North Eastern Frontier Agency). Between 1957 and 1959,the Chinese occupied the Aksai-chin area and built a strategic roadthere. Despite a very long correspondence and discussion among topleaders, these differences could not be resolved. Several small borderskirmishes between the armies of the two countries took place.Do you remember the Cuban Missile Crisis in Chapter One of theContemporary World Politics? While the entire world’s attention wason this crisis involving the two superpowers, China launched a swiftand massive invasion in October 1962 on both the disputed regions.The first attack lasted one week and Chinese forces captured somekey areas in Arunachal Pradesh. The second wave of attack came nextmonth. While the Indian forces could block the Chinese advances onthe western front in Ladakh, in the east the Chinese managed toadvance nearly to the entry point of Assam plains. Finally, Chinadeclared a unilateral ceasefire and its troops withdrew to where theywere before the invasion began.The China war dented India’s image at home and abroad. Indiahad to approach the Americans and the British for military assistanceto tide over the crisis. The Soviet Union remained neutral duringthe conflict. It induced a sense of national humiliation and at thesame time strengthened a spirit of nationalism. Some of the top army<strong>com</strong>manders either resigned or were retired. Nehru’s close associateand the then Defence Minister, V. Krishna Menon, had to leave thecabinet. Nehru’s own stature suffered as he was severely criticisedfor his naïve assessment of the Chinese intentions and the lack ofmilitary preparedness. For the first time, a no-confidence motionagainst his government was moved and debated in the Lok Sabha.Soon thereafter, the Congress lost some key by-elections to LokSabha. The political mood of the country had begun to change.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>India’s external relations 73Fast ForwardSino-Indian relations since 1962It took more than a decade for India andChina to resume normal relations. It wasin 1976 that full diplomatic relations wererestored between the two countries. AtalBehari Vajpayee was the first top levelleader (he was then External AffairsMinister) to visit China in 1979. Later,Rajiv Gandhi became the first PrimeMinister after Nehru to visit China. Sincethen, the emphasis is more on traderelations between the two countries. Inthe book, Contemporary World Politics,you have already read about thesedevelopments.The Sino-Indian conflict affected theopposition as well. This and the growingrift between China and the Soviet Unioncreated irreconcilable differences withinthe Communist Party of India (CPI). Thepro-USSR faction remained within theCPI and moved towards closer ties withthe Congress. The other faction was forsometime closer to China and was againstany ties with the Congress. The partysplit in 1964 and the leaders of the latterfaction formed Communist Party of India(Marxist) (CPI-M). In the wake of Chinawar, many leaders of what became CPI(M) were arrested for being pro-China.The war with China alerted Indianleadership to the volatile situation inthe Northeast region. Apart from beingisolated and extremely underdeveloped,this region also presented India withthe challenge of national integrationand political unity. The process of itsreorganisation began soon after the Chinawar. Nagaland was granted statehood;Manipur and Tripura, though UnionTerritories, were given the right to electtheir own legislative assemblies.Let’s watch a FilmHAQEEQATA small platoon of Indian armyis rescued by the gypsies inLadakh region. The enemy hassurrounded their post. Capt.Bahadur Singh and his gypsygirlfriend Kammo help thejawans vacate their posts. BothBahadur Singh and Kammo diewhile holding the Chinese butthe jawans too, are out poweredby the enemy and lay down theirlives for the country.Set in the backdrop of the Chinawar of 1962, this film portraysthe soldier and his travails as itscentral theme. It pays tribute tothe soldiers while depicting theirplight, and the political frustrationover the betrayal by the Chinese.The film uses documentaryfootage of war scenes and isconsidered as one of the earlywar films made in Hindi.Year: 1964Director: Chetan AnandActors: Dharmendra, PriyaRajvansh, Balraj Sahni, Jayant,Sudhir, Sanjay Khan, VijayAnand
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>74 Politics in India since IndependenceWhy dowe say Indiaand Pakistan hada war? Leaders quarreland armies fight wars.Most ordinary citizenshave nothing to dowith these.Wars and Peace with PakistanIn the case of Pakistan the conflict started just after Partition overthe dispute on Kashmir. You will read more about the dispute inChapter 8. A proxy war broke out between Indian and Pakistani armyin Kashmir during 1947 itself. But this did not turn into a full war.The issue was then referred to the UN. Pakistan soon emerged as acritical factor in India’s relations with the US and subsequently withChina.The Kashmir conflict did not prevent cooperation between thegovernments of India and Pakistan. Both the governments workedtogether to restore the women abducted during Partition to theiroriginal families. A long-term dispute about the sharing of riverwaters was resolved through mediation by the World Bank. The India-Pakistan Indus Waters Treaty was signed by Nehru and General AyubKhan in 1960. Despite all ups and downs in the Indo-Pak relations,this treaty has worked well.A more serious armed conflict between the two countries beganin 1965. As you would read in the next chapter, by then Lal BahadurShastri had taken over as the Prime Minister. In April 1965 Pakistanlaunched armed attacks in the Rann of Kutch area of Gujarat. Thiswas followed by a bigger offensive in Jammu and Kashmir in August-September. Pakistani rulers were hoping to get support from the localpopulation there, but it did not happen. In order to ease the pressureon the Kashmir front, Shastri ordered Indian troops to launch acounter-offensive on the Punjab border. In a fierce battle, the Indianarmy reached close to Lahore.The hostilities came to an end with the UN intervention. Later,Indian Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri and Pakistan’s GeneralAyub Khan signed the Tashkent Agreement, brokered by the SovietUnion, in January 1966. Though India could inflict considerablemilitary loss on Pakistan, the 1965 war added to India’s alreadydifficult economic situation.Bangladesh war, 1971Beginning in 1970, Pakistan faced its biggest internal crisis. TheBhutto’s party emerged a winner in West Pakistan, while the AwamiLeague led by Sheikh Mujib-ur Rahman swept through East Pakistan.The Bengali population of East Pakistan had voted to protest againstyears of being treated as second class citizens by the rulers basedin West Pakistan. The Pakistani rulers were not willing to accept thedemocratic verdict. Nor were they ready to accept the Awami League’sdemand for a federation.Instead, in early 1971, the Pakistani army arrested Sheikh Mujiband unleashed a reign of terror on the people of East Pakistan. In
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>India’s external relations 751965
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>76 Politics in India since IndependenceThissounds likejoining the Sovietbloc. Can we say thatwe were non-alignedeven after signing thistreaty with the SovietUnion?response to this, the people started a struggle to liberate ‘Bangladesh’from Pakistan. Throughout 1971, India had to bear the burden ofabout 80 lakh refugees who fled East Pakistan and took shelter inthe neighbouring areas in India. India extended moral and materialsupport to the freedom struggle in Bangladesh. Pakistan accusedIndia of a conspiracy to break it up.Support for Pakistan came from the US and China. The US-Chinarapprochement that began in the late 1960s resulted in a realignmentof forces in Asia. Henry Kissinger, the adviser to the US PresidentRichard Nixon, made a secret visit to China via Pakistan in July1971. In order to counter the US-Pakistan-China axis, India signed a20-year Treaty of Peace and Friendship with the Soviet Union inAugust 1971. This treaty assured India of Soviet support if the countryfaced any attack.After months of diplomatic tension and military build-up, afull-scale war between India and Pakistan broke out in December1971. Pakistani aircrafts attacked Punjab and Rajasthan, while thearmy moved on the Jammu and Kashmir front. India retaliated withan attack involving the air force, navy and the army on both theWestern and the Eastern front. Wel<strong>com</strong>ed and supported by the localpopulation, the Indian army made rapid progress in East Pakistan.Within ten days the Indian army had surrounded Dhaka from threesides and the Pakistani army of about 90,000 had to surrender. WithBangladesh as a free country, India declared a unilateral ceasefire.Later, the signing of the Shimla Agreement between Indira Gandhi andZulfikar Ali Bhutto on 3 July 1972 formalised the return of peace.A decisive victory in the war led to national jubiliation. Most peoplein India saw this as a moment of glory and a clear sign of India’sgrowing military prowess. As you would read in the next chapter,Indira Gandhi was the Prime Minister at this time. She had alreadywon the Lok Sahba elections in 1971. Her personal popularity soaredFast Forward Kargil ConfrontationIn the early part of 1999 several points on the Indian side of the LoC in the Mashkoh, Dras, Kaksarand Batalik areas were occupied by forces claiming to be Mujahideens. Suspecting involvementof the Pakistan Army, Indian forces started reacting to this occupation. This led to a confrontationbetween the two countries. This is known as the Kargil conflict. This conflict went on during Mayand June 1999. By 26 July 1999, India had recovered control of many of the lost points. The Kargilconflict drew attention worldwide for the reason that only one year prior to that, both India andPakistan had attained nuclear capability. However, this conflict remained confined only to the Kargilregion. In Pakistan, this conflict has been the source of a major controversy as it was alleged laterthat the Prime Minister of Pakistan was kept in the dark by the Army Chief. Soon after the conflict,the government of Pakistan was taken over by the Pakistan Army led by the Army Chief, GeneralParvez Musharraf.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>India’s external relations 771971
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>78 Politics in India since Independencefurther after the 1971 war. After the war, assembly elections in mostStates took place, bringing large majorities for the Congress party inmany states.India, with its limited resources, had initiated developmentplanning. However, conflicts with neighbours derailed the five-yearplans. The scarce resources were diverted to the defence sector especiallyafter 1962, as India had to embark on a military modernisation drive.The Department of Defence Production was established in November1962 and the Department of Defence Supplies in November 1965.The Third Plan (1961-66) was affected and it was followed by threeAnnual Plans and the Fourth Plan could be initiated only in 1969.India’s defence expenditure increased enormously after the wars.I amconfused! Isn’tit all about atombombs? Why don’twe say so?India’s nuclear policyAnother crucial development of this period was the first nuclearexplosion undertaken by India in May 1974. Nehru had always puthis faith in science and technology for rapidly building a modernIndia. A significant <strong>com</strong>ponent of his industrialisation plans was thenuclear programme initiated in the late 1940s under the guidance ofHomi J. Bhabha. India wanted to generate atomic energy for peacefulpurposes. Nehru was against nuclear weapons. So he pleaded withthe superpowers for <strong>com</strong>prehensive nuclear disarmament. However,the nuclear arsenal kept rising. When Communist China conductednuclear tests in October 1964, the five nuclear weapon powers, theimpose the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) of 1968 on the restof the world. India always considered the NPT as discriminatory andhad refused to sign it. When India conducted its first nuclear test, itwas termed as peaceful explosion. India argued that it was <strong>com</strong>mittedto the policy of using nuclear power only for peaceful purposes.The period when the nuclear test was conducted was a difficultperiod in domestic politics. Following the Arab-Israel War of 1973, theentire world was affected by the Oil Shock due to the massive hike inthe oil prices by the Arab nations. It led to economic turmoil in Indiaresulting in high inflation. As you will read in Chapter Six, manyagitations were going on in the country around this time, including anationwide railway strike.Although there are minor differences among political parties abouthow to conduct external relations, Indian politics is generally markedby a broad agreement among the parties on national integration,protection of international boundaries, and on questions of nationalinterest. Therefore, we find that in the course of the decade of1962-1972, when India faced three wars, or even later, when differentparties came to power from time to time, foreign policy has playedonly a limited role in party politics.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>India’s external relations 79Fast Forward India’s Nuclear ProgrammeIndia has opposed the international treaties aimed at non-proliferation sincethey were selectively applicable to the non-nuclear powers and legitimisedthe monopoly of the five nuclear weapons powers. Thus, India opposedthe indefinite extension of the NPT in 1995 and also refused to sign theComprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).India conducted a series of nuclear tests in May 1998, demonstrating itscapacity to use nuclear energy for military purposes. Pakistan soon followed,thereby increasing the vulnerability of the region to a nuclear exchange. Theinternational <strong>com</strong>munity was extremely critical of the nuclear tests in thesubcontinent and sanctions were imposed on both India and Pakistan, whichwere subsequently waived. India’s nuclear doctrine of credible minimumnuclear deterrence professes “no first use” and reiterates India’s <strong>com</strong>mitmentto global, verifiable and non-discriminatory nuclear disarmament leading to anuclear weapons free world.Shifting alliances in world politicsAs you will read in Chapter Six and also in Chapter Nine, many non-Congress governmentscame to power in the period starting 1977. This was also the time when world politics waschanging dramatically. What did it mean for India’s external relations?The Janata Party government that came to power in 1977 announced that it would followgenuine non-alignment. This implied that the pro-Soviet tilt in the foreign policy will becorrected. Since then, all governments (Congress or non-Congress) have taken initiativesfor restoring better relations with China and entering into close ties with US. In Indianpolitics and in popular mind, India’s foreign policy is always very closely linked to twoquestions. One is India’s stand vis-à-vis Pakistan and the other is Indo-US relations. Inthe post-1990 period the ruling parties have often been criticised for their pro-US foreignpolicy.Foreign policy is always dictated by ideas of national interest. In the period after 1990,Russia, though it continues to be an important friend of India, has lost its global preeminence.Therefore, India’s foreign policy has shifted to a more pro-US strategy. Besides,the contemporary international situation is more influenced by economic interests than bymilitary interests. This has also made an impact on India’s foreign policy choices. At thesame time, Indo-Pakistan relations have witnessed many new developments during thisperiod. While Kashmir continues to be the main issue between the two countries, therehave been many efforts to restore normal relations. This means that cultural exchanges,movement of citizens and economic cooperation would be encouraged by both countries.Do you know that a train and a bus service operate between these two countries? Thishas been a major achievement of the recent times. But that could not avoid the near-warsituation from emerging in 1999. Even after this setback to the peace process, efforts atnegotiating durable peace have been going on.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>80 Politics in India since Independence1. Write ‘true’ or ‘false’ against each of these statements.(a) Non-alignment allowed India to gain assistance both from USA andUSSR.(b) India’s relationship with her neighbours has been strained from thebeginning.(c) The cold war has affected the relationship between India andPakistan.(d) The treaty of Peace and Friendship in 1971 was the result of India’scloseness to USA.EXERCISES2. Match the following(a) The goal of India’s foreign i. Tibetan spiritual leader whopolicy in the period 1950-1964 crossed over to India(b) Panchsheel ii. Preservation of territorialintegrity, sovereignty andeconomic development(c) Bandung Conference iii. Five principles of peacefulcoexistence(d) Dalai Lamaiv. Led to the establishment ofNAM3. Why did Nehru regard conduct of foreign relations as an essentialindicator of independence? State any two reasons with examples tosupport your reading.4. “The conduct of foreign affairs is an out<strong>com</strong>e of a two-way interactionbetween domestic <strong>com</strong>pulsions and prevailing international climate”.Take one example from India’s external relations in the 1960s tosubstantiate your answer.5. Identify any two aspects of India’s foreign policy that you would like toretain and two that you would like to change, if you were to be<strong>com</strong>e adecision maker. Give reasons to support your position.6. Write short notes on the following.(a) India’s Nuclear policy(b) Consensus in foreign policy matters7. India’s foreign policy was built around the principles of peace andcooperation. But India fought three wars in a space of ten yearsbetween 1962 and 1972. Would you say that this was a failure of theforeign policy? Or would you say that this was a result of internationalsituation? Give reasons to support your answer.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>India’s external relations 818. Does India’s foreign policy reflect her desire to be an important regionalpower? Argue your case with the Bangladesh war of 1971 as anexample.9. How does political leadership of a nation affect its foreign policy?Explain this with the help of examples from India’s foreign policy.10. Read this passage and answer the questions below:“Broadly, non-alignment means not tying yourself off with militaryblocs….It means trying to view things, as far as possible, not fromthe military point of view, though that has to <strong>com</strong>e in sometimes,but independently, and trying to maintain friendly relations with allcountries.” — JAWAHARLAL NEHRU(a) Why does Nehru want to keep off military blocs?(b) Do you think that the Indo-Soviet friendship treaty violated theprinciple of non-alignment? Give reasons for your answer.(c) If there were no military blocs, do you think non-alignment wouldhave been unnecessary?
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Credit: R. K. Laxman in the Times of IndiaOriginally the electionsymbol of the Congresswas a pair of bullocks.This famous cartoondepicts the changeswithin the Congressleading to a headonconfrontation inthe 22nd year afterIndependence.In this chapter…In Chapter Two we read about the emergence of the Congresssystem. This system was first challenged during the 1960s. As political<strong>com</strong>petition became more intense, the Congress found it difficult toretain its dominance. It faced challenges from the opposition that wasmore powerful and less divided than before. The Congress also facedchallenges from within, as the party could no longer ac<strong>com</strong>modate allkinds of differences. In this chapter we pick the story from where we leftit in Chapter Two, in order to• understand how the political transition took place after Nehru;• describe how the opposition unity and the Congress split posed achallenge to Congress dominance;• explain how a new Congress led by Indira Gandhi overcame thesechallenges; and• analyse how new policies and ideologies facilitated the restorationof the Congress system.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>challenges to andrestoration of thecongress systemchapter5Challenge of Political SuccessionPrime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru passed away in May 1964. Hehad been unwell for more than a year. This had generated a lot ofspeculation about the usual question of succession: after Nehru,who? But in a newly independent country like India, this situationgave rise to a more serious question: after Nehru, what?The second question arose from the serious doubts that manyoutsiders had about whether India’s democratic experiment willsurvive after Nehru. It was feared that like so many other newlyindependent countries, India too would not be able to manage ademocratic succession. A failure to do so, it was feared, could leadto a political role for the army. Besides, there were doubts if the newleadership would be able to handle the multiple crises that awaiteda solution. The 1960s were labelled as the ‘dangerous decade’ whenWhenFranceor Canada havesimilar problems, noone talks about failureor disintegration. Why arewe under this constantsuspicion?
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>84 Politics in India since IndependenceLal BahadurShastri(1904-1966):Prime Minister ofIndia; participatedin the freedommovement since1930; ministerin UP cabinet;General Secretaryof Congress;Minister in UnionCabinet from1951 to 1956 whenhe resigned takingresponsibility forthe railway accidentand later from 1957to 1964; coined thefamous slogan ‘JaiJawan-Jai Kisan’.“…new PrimeMinister of India, in spiteof all forebodings, had beennamed with more dispatch,and much more dignity,than was the new PrimeMinister of Britain.“Editorial in The Guardian,London, 3 June 1964,<strong>com</strong>paring the politicalsuccession after Nehruwith the succession dramaafter Harold Macmillan inBritain.unresolved problems like poverty, inequality, <strong>com</strong>munal and regionaldivisions etc. could lead to a failure of the democratic project or eventhe disintegration of the country.From Nehru to ShastriThe ease with which the succession after Nehru took place proved allthe critics wrong. When Nehru passed away, K. Kamraj, the presidentof the Congress party consulted party leaders and Congress membersof Parliament and found that there was a consensus in favour of LalBahadur Shastri. He was unanimously chosen as the leader of theCongress parliamentary party and thus became the country’s nextPrime Minister. Shastri was a non-controversial leader from UttarPradesh who had been a Minister in Nehru’s cabinet for many years.Nehru had <strong>com</strong>e to depend a lot on him in his last year. He wasknown for his simplicity and his <strong>com</strong>mitment to principles. Earlierhe had resigned from the position of Railway Minister accepting moralresponsibility for a major railway accident.Shastri was the country’s Prime Minister from 1964 to 1966.During Shastri’s brief Prime Ministership, the country faced twomajor challenges. While India was still recovering from the economicimplications of the war with China, failed monsoons, drought andserious food crisis presented a grave challenge. As discussed in theprevious chapter, the country also faced a war with Pakistan in1965. Shastri’s famous slogan ‘Jai Jawan Jai Kisan’, symbolised thecountry’s resolve to face both these challenges.Shastri’s Prime Ministership came to an abrupt end on 10 January1966, when he suddenly expired in Tashkent, then in USSR andcurrently the capital of Uzbekistan. He was there to discuss and signan agreement with Muhammad Ayub Khan, the then President ofPakistan, to end the war.From Shastri to Indira GandhiThus the Congress faced the challenge of political succession for thesecond time in two years. This time there was an intense <strong>com</strong>petitionbetween Morarji Desai and Indira Gandhi. Morarji Desai had earlierserved as Chief Minister of Bombay state (today’s Maharashtra andGujarat) and also as a Minister at the centre. Indira Gandhi, thedaughter of Jawaharlal Nehru, had been Congress President in thepast and had also been Union Minister for Information in the Shastricabinet. This time the senior leaders in the party decided to backIndira Gandhi, but the decision was not unanimous. The contestwas resolved through a secret ballot among Congress MPs. IndiraGandhi defeated Morarji Desai by securing the support of more thantwo-thirds of the party’s MPs. A peaceful transition of power, despiteintense <strong>com</strong>petition for leadership, was seen as a sign of maturity ofIndia’s democracy.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Challenges to and Restoration of the Congress System 85Credit: R. K. Laxman in the Times of IndiaIt took some time before the new Prime Minister could settle down.While Indira Gandhi had been politically active for very long, she hadserved as a minister under Lal Bahadur Shastri only for a short period.The senior Congress leaders may have supported Indira Gandhi in thebelief that her administrative and political inexperience would <strong>com</strong>pelher to be dependent on them for support and guidance. Within ayear of be<strong>com</strong>ing Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi had to lead the partyin a Lok Sabha election. Around this time, the economic situation inthe country had further deteriorated, adding to her problems. Facedwith these difficulties, she set out to gain control over the party andto demonstrate her leadership skills.Indira Gandhi (1917-1984): Prime Minister of India from 1966 to 1977and 1980 to 1984; daughter of Jawaharlal Nehru; participated in thefreedom struggle as a young Congress worker; Congress Presidentin 1958; minister in Shastri’s cabinet from 1964-66; led the Congressparty to victory in 1967, 1971 and 1980 general elections; credited withthe slogan ‘garibi hatao’, victory in 1971 war and for policy initiativeslike abolition of Privy Purse, nationalisation of banks, nuclear test andenvironmental protection; assassinated on 31 October 1984.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>86 Politics in India since IndependenceCredit: Raghu RaiIt must havebeen difficult forworld dominated by men.Why don’t we have morewomen in positionslike that?Fourth General Elections, 1967The year 1967 is considered a landmark year in India’s political andelectoral history. In Chapter Two you read about how the Congressparty was the dominant political force throughout the country from1952 onwards. This trend was to undergo significant changes withthe 1967 elections.Context of the electionsIn the years leading up to the fourth general elections, the countrywitnessed major changes. Two Prime Ministers had died in quicksuccession, and the new Prime Minister, who was being seen as apolitical novice, had been in office for less than a year. You will recallfrom the discussion in Chapter Three and in the previous section ofthis chapter that the period was fraught with grave economic crisisresulting from successive failure of monsoons, widespread drought,
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Challenges to and Restoration of the Congress System 87decline in agricultural production,serious food shortage, depletion offoreign exchange reserves, drop inindustrial production and exports,<strong>com</strong>bined with a sharp rise inmilitary expenditure and diversionof resources from planning andeconomic development. One of thefirst decisions of the Indira Gandhigovernment was to devaluate theIndian rupee, under what was seen tobe pressure from the US. Earlier oneUS dollar could be purchased for lessthan Rs. 5; after devaluation it costmore than Rs. 7.The economic situation triggeredoff price rise. People started protestingagainst the increase in prices ofessential <strong>com</strong>modities, food scarcity,growing unemployment and theoverall economic condition in thecountry. Bandhs and hartals werecalled frequently across the country.The government saw the protests asa law and order problem and not asexpressions of people’s problems. Thisfurther increased public bitternessand reinforced popular unrest.The <strong>com</strong>munist and socialistparties launched struggles forgreater equality. You will read in thenext chapter about how a group of<strong>com</strong>munists who separated from theCommunist Party of India (Marxist)to form the Communist Party of India(Marxist-Leninist) led armed agrarianstruggles and organised peasantagitations. This period also witnessedsome of the worst Hindu-Muslim riotssince Independence.Non-CongressismThis situation could not haveremained isolated from party politicsin the country. Opposition partieswere in the forefront of organisingpublic protests and pressurising theElection in a Rajasthan VillageThis is a story about 1967assembly elections. Inthe Chomu constituency,the main parties in thefray were Congress andthe Swatantra party.But village Devisar hadits own local politicaldynamics and it got mixedup with the <strong>com</strong>petitionbetween the two parties.Sher Singh, traditionallydominated village politics,but gradually his nephew,Bhim Singh was emergingas the more popularleader and rival. Though both were Rajputs, BhimSingh cultivated the support of many non-Rajputs inthe village by attending to their requirements afterbe<strong>com</strong>ing the panchayat Pradhan. So, he struck a newequation—the alliance of Rajputs and non-Rajputs.He proved to be more adept in building alliancesacross the village by supporting candidates in othervillages for the posts of village Pradhan. In fact, he tookan initiative and took a delegation to the State ChiefMinister and Congress leader Mohan Lal Sukhadiafor pressing the name of one of his friends from anearby village as Congress candidate in the Assemblyelection. When Sukhadia convinced him of some othername, Bhim Singh, in turn, convinced many othersthat they should work for the party candidate. BhimSingh knew that if the party candidate won from thisconstituency, that candidate would be<strong>com</strong>e a ministerand thus, he would have direct contacts with a ministerfor the first time!Sher Singh had no option but to work for the Swatantracandidate, who was a jagirdar. He kept telling peoplethat the jagirdar would help build the village school anduse his resources for the development of the locality.At least in Devisar village, the Assembly electionhad turned into a factional fight between uncle andnephew.Based on Anand Chakravarti, ‘A Village in ChomuAssembly Constituency in Rajasthan.’
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>88 Politics in India since Independence“...in India, aspresent trends continue…maintenance of an orderedstructure of society is goingto slip out of reach of anordered structure of civilgovernment and the armywill be only alternativesource of authorityand order. …the greatexperiment of developingIndia within a democraticframework has failed.“Neville Maxwell‘India’s DisintegratingDemocracy’ an articlepublished in the LondonTimes, 1967.government. Parties opposed tothe Congress realised that thedivision of their votes kept theCongress in power. Thus partiesthat were entirely different anddisparate in their programmesand ideology got together toform anti-Congress fronts insome states and entered intoelectoral adjustments of sharingseats in others. They felt that theinexperience of Indira Gandhiand the internal factionalismwithin the Congress providedthem an opportunity to topplethe Congress. The socialistleader Ram Manohar Lohiagave this strategy the nameof ‘non-Congressism’. He alsoproduced a theoretical argumentin its defense: Congress rule wasundemocratic and opposed to theinterests of ordinary poor people;therefore the <strong>com</strong>ing togetherof the non-Congress partieswas necessary for reclaimingdemocracy for the people.C. Natarajan Annadurai(1909-1969): Chief Ministerof Madras (Tamil Nadu)from 1967; a journalist,popular writer and orator;initially associated with theJustice Party in Madrasprovince; later joined DravidKazagham (1934); formedDMK as a political party in1949; a proponent of Dravidculture, he was opposed toimposition of Hindi and ledthe anti-Hindi agitations;supporter of greaterautonomy to States.RammanoharLohia (1910-1967):Socialist leader andthinker; freedomfighter and amongthe founders of theCongress SocialistParty; after thesplit in the parentparty, the leader of the Socialist Partyand later the Samyukta SocialistParty; Member, Lok Sabha, 1963-67; founder editor of Mankind andJan, known for original contributionto a non-European socialist theory;as political leader, best known forsharp attacks on Nehru, strategyof non-Congressism, advocacy ofreservation for backward castes andopposition to English.Electoral verdictIt was in this context of heightened populardiscontent and the polarisation of political forcesthat the fourth general elections to the Lok Sabhaand State Assemblies were held in February 1967.The Congress was facing the electorate for the firsttime without Nehru.The results jolted the Congress at both thenational and state levels. Many contemporarypolitical observers described the election results asa ‘political earthquake’.The Congress did manageto get a majority in the Lok Sabha, but with itslowest tally of seats and share of votes since 1952.Half the ministers in Indira Gandhi’s cabinet weredefeated. The political stalwarts who lost in theirconstituencies included Kamaraj in Tamil Nadu,S.K. Patil in Maharashtra, Atulya Ghosh in WestBengal and K. B. Sahay in Bihar.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Challenges to and Restoration of the Congress System 89Note: Thisillustration is nota map drawn toscale and shouldnot be taken tobe an authenticdepiction ofIndia’s externalboundaries.Is non-Congressismrelevant today? Can it beapplied against Left Front intoday’s West Bengal?
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>90 Politics in India since IndependenceThe dramatic nature of the political change would be moreapparent to you at the State level. The Congress lost majority in asmany as seven States. In two other States defections prevented itfrom forming a government. These nine States where the CongressPradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, West Bengal, Orissa, Madras andKerala. In Madras State (now called Tamil Nadu), a regional party —a clear majority. The DMK won power after having led a massiveanti-Hindi agitation by students against the centre on the issue ofimposition of Hindi as the official language. This was the first time anynon-Congress party had secured a majority of its own in any State. Inthe other eight States, coalition governments consisting of differentnon-Congress parties were formed. A popular saying was that onecould take a train from Delhi to Howrah and not pass through asingle Congress ruled State. It was a strange feeling for those whowere used to seeing the Congress in power. So, was the dominationof the Congress over?What’sso unusual inhung assembliesand coalitiongovernments? Wesee them allthe time.CoalitionsThe elections of 1967 brought into picture the phenomenon ofcoalitions. Since no single party had got majority, various non-Congress parties came together to form joint legislative parties (calledSamyukt Vidhayak Dal in Hindi) that supported non-Congressgovernments. That is why these governments came to be describedas SVD governments. In most of these cases the coalition partnerswere ideologically incongruent. The SVD government in Bihar, forwith the CPI on the left and Jana Sangh on the right. In Punjab itwas called the ‘Popular United Front’ and <strong>com</strong>prised the two rivalRepublican Party and the Bharatiya Jana Sangh.Credit: KuttyA cartoonist’s reading of Charan Singh’s attempt to build a United Front of non-<strong>com</strong>munistparties in 1974
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Challenges to and Restoration of the Congress System 91DefectionAnother important feature of the politics after the 1967 election was therole played by defections in the making and unmaking of governmentsin the States. Defection means an elected representative leaves theparty on whose symbol he/she was elected and joins another party.After the 1967 general election, the breakaway Congress legislatorsplayed an important role in installing non-Congress governments inthree States - Haryana, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. Theconstant realignments and shifting political loyalties in this periodgave rise to the expression ‘Aya Ram, Gaya Ram’.The story of ‘Aya Ram, Gaya Ram’The expression ‘aya ram, gaya ram’ becamepopular in the political vocabulary in India todescribe the practice of frequent floor-crossingby legislators. Literally translated the termsmeant, Ram came and Ram went. The expressionoriginated in an amazing feat of floor crossingachieved by Gaya Lal, an MLA in Haryana, in1967. He changed his party thrice in a fortnight,from Congress to United Front, back to Congressand then within nine hours to United Front again! It is said that when Gaya Lal declared hisintention to quit the United Front and join the Congress, the Congress leader, Rao Birendra Singhbrought him to Chandigarh press and declared “Gaya Ram was now Aya Ram”.Gaya Lal’s feat was immortalised in the phrase “Aya Ram, Gaya Ram” which became the subjectof numerous jokes and cartoons. Later, the Constitution was amended to prevent defections.Split in the CongressWe saw that after the 1967 elections, theCongress retained power at the Centre but witha reduced majority and lost power in manyStates. More importantly, the results proved thatthe Congress could be defeated at the elections.But there was no substitute as yet. Most non-Congress coalition governments in the States didnot survive for long. They lost majority, and eithernew <strong>com</strong>binations were formed or President’srule had to be imposed.Indira vs. the ‘Syndicate’The real challenge to Indira Gandhi came notfrom the opposition but from within her ownK. Kamraj(1903-1975): Freedomfighter and CongressPresident; ChiefMinister of Madras(Tamil Nadu); havingsuffered educationaldeprivation, madeefforts to spreadeducation in Madrasprovince; introduced mid-day mealscheme for schoolchildren; in 1963 heproposed that all senior Congressmenshould resign from office to make wayfor younger party workers—this proposalis famous as the ‘Kamraj plan.’
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>92 Politics in India since IndependenceThe Congress ‘Syndicate’Syndicate was the informal name given to a group of Congressleaders who were in control of the party’s organisation. It was led byK. Kamraj, former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu and then the presidentof the Congress party. It included powerful State leaders like S. K.Patil of Bombay city (later named as Mumbai), S. Nijalingappa ofMysore (later Karnataka), N. Sanjeeva Reddy of Andhra Pradeshand Atulya Ghosh of West Bengal. Both Lal Bahadur Shastri andlater Indira Gandhi owed their position to the support received fromthe Syndicate. This group had a decisive say in Indira Gandhi’s firstCouncil of Ministers and also in policy formulation and implementation.After the Congress split the leaders of the syndicate and those owingallegiance to them stayed with the Congress (O). Since it was IndiraGandhi’s Congress (R) that won the test of popularity, all these bigand powerful men of Indian politics lost their power and prestigeafter 1971.So,there is nothingnew about Statelevel leaders beingthe king-makers atthe centre. I thoughtit happened only inthe 1990s.Karpoori Thakur(1924-1988): Chief Ministerof Bihar between December1970 and June 1971 andagain between June 1977and April 1979; FreedomFighter and socialistleader; active in labourand peasant movements;staunch follower of Lohia;participated in the movement led by JP; knownfor his decision to introduce reservationsfor the backward classes in Bihar during hissecond Chief Ministership; strong opponent ofthe use of English Language.party. She had to deal withthe ‘syndicate’, a group ofpowerful and influentialleaders from within theS. Nijalingappa(1902-2000):Senior Congressleader; Memberof ConstituentAssembly; memberof Lok Sabha; ChiefMinister of the thenMysore (Karnataka)State; regarded asthe maker of modernKarnataka; Presidentof Congress during1968-71.Congress. The Syndicatehad played a role in theinstallation of Indira Gandhi as the Prime Minister byensuring her election as the leader of the parliamentaryparty. These leaders expected Indira Gandhi to follow theiradvise. Gradually, however, Indira Gandhi attempted toassert her position within the government and the party.She chose her trusted group of advisers from outsidethe party. Slowly and carefully, she sidelinedthe Syndicate.Indira Gandhi thus faced two challenges.She needed to build her independence from theSyndicate. She also needed to work towardsregaining the ground that the Congress hadlost in the 1967 elections. Indira Gandhiadopted a very bold strategy. She converteda simple power struggle into an ideologicalstruggle. She launched a series of initiatives togive the government policy a Left orientation.She got the Congress Working Committee toadopt a Ten Point Programme in May 1967.This programme included social control ofbanks, nationalisation of General Insurance,ceiling on urban property and in<strong>com</strong>e,
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Challenges to and Restoration of the Congress System 93public distribution of food grains, land reforms andprovision of house sites to the rural poor. While the‘syndicate’ leaders formally approved this Left-wingprogramme, they had serious reservations aboutthe same.Presidential election, 1969The factional rivalry between the Syndicate and IndiraGandhi came in the open in 1969. Following PresidentZakir Hussain’s death, the post of President of theIndia fell vacant that year. Despite Mrs Gandhi’sreservations the ‘syndicate’ managed to nominateher long time opponent and then speaker of the LokSabha, N. Sanjeeva Reddy, as the official Congresscandidate for the ensuing Presidential elections.Indira Gandhi retaliated by encouraging the thenVice-President, V.V. Giri, to file his nomination asan independent candidate. She also announcedseveral big and popular policy measures like thenationalisation of fourteen leading private banksand the abolition of the ‘privy purse’ or the specialprivileges given to former princes. Morarji Desai wasthe Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister.V.V. Giri(1894-1980):President ofIndia from1969 to 1974;Congressworker andlabour leaderfrom AndhraPradesh; IndianHigh Commissioner to Ceylon(Sri Lanka); Labour Minister inUnion cabinet; Governor of U.P.,Kerala, Mysore (Karnataka);Vice-President (1967-1969) andacting President after the death ofPresident Zakir Hussain; resignedand contested presidential electionas independent candidate; receivedsupport from Indira Gandhi for hiselection as President.Credit: R. K. Laxman in The TImes of India“The Left Hook” was published after the victory of V.V. Giri, (the boxer with the garland)over the nominee of the Sydicate, represented here by Nijalingappa (on his knees).
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>94 Politics in India since Independence“History … isreplete with instances ofthe tragedy that overtakesdemocracy when a leaderwho has risen to power onthe crest of a popular waveor with the support of ademocratic organisationbe<strong>com</strong>es a victim ofpolitical narcissismand is egged on by acoterie of unscrupuloussycophants…...“S NijalingappaLetter to Indira Gandhiexpelling her from theparty, 11 November1969.On both the above issues serious differences emerged between himand the Prime Minister resulting in Desai leaving the government.Congress had seen differences of this kind in the past. Butthis time both the parties wanted a showdown which took placeduring the Presidential elections. The then Congress PresidentS. Nijalingappa issued a ‘whip’ asking all the Congress MPs and MLAsto vote in favour of Sanjeeva Reddy, the official candidate of the party.Supporters of Indira Gandhi requisitioned a special meeting of theAICC (that is why this faction came to be known as ‘requisitionists’)but this was refused. After silently supporting V.V. Giri, the PrimeMinister openly called for a ‘conscience vote’ which meant that theMPs and MLAs from the Congress should be free to vote the way theywant. The election ultimately resulted in the victory of V.V. Giri, theindependent candidate, and the defeat of Sanjeeva Reddy, the officialCongress candidate.The defeat of the official Congress candidate formalised the splitin the party. The Congress President expelled the Prime Ministerfrom the party; she claimed that her group was the real Congress. ByNovember 1969, the Congress group led by the ‘syndicate’ came to bereferred to as the Congress (Organisation) and the group led by IndiraGandhi came to be called the Congress (Requisitionists). These twoparties were also described as Old Congress and New Congress. IndiraGandhi projected the split as an ideological divide between socialistsand conservatives, between the pro-poor and the pro-rich.Abolition of Privy PurseIn Chapter One you have read about the integration of the Princely States. This integration waspreceded by an assurance that after the dissolution of princely rule, the then rulers’ familieswould be allowed to retain certain private property, and given a grant in heredity or governmentallowance, measured on the basis of the extent, revenue and potential of the merging state.This grant was called the privy purse. At the time of accession, there was little criticism of theseprivileges since integration and consolidation was the primary aim.Yet, hereditary privileges were not consonant with the principles of equality and social and economicjustice laid down in the Constitution of India. Nehru had expressed his dissatisfaction over thematter time and again. Following the 1967 elections, Indira Gandhi supported the demand that thegovernment should abolish privy purses. Morarji Desai, however, called the move morally wrongand amounting to a ‘breach of faith with the princes’.The government tried to bring a Constitutional amendment in 1970, but it was not passed in RajyaSabha. It then issued an ordinance which was struck down by the Supreme Court. Indira Gandhimade this into a major election issue in 1971 and got a lot of public support. Following its massivevictory in the 1971 election, the Constitution was amended to remove legal obstacles for abolitionof ‘privy purse’.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Challenges to and Restoration of the Congress System 95Credit: KuttyA cartoonist’s impression of the implication of Indira Gandhi’s conflict with the Syndicate.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>96 Politics in India since IndependenceThe 1971 Election and Restoration of CongressThe split in the Congress reduced Indira Gandhi Government to aminority. Yet her government continued in office with the issue-basedsupport of a few other parties including the Communist Party of Indiaand the DMK. During this period the government made consciousattempts to project its socialist credentials. This was also a phase whenIndira Gandhi vigorously campaigned for implementing the existingland reform laws and undertook further land ceiling legislation. Inorder to end her dependence on other political parties, strengthenher party’s position in the Parliament, and seek a popular mandatefor her programmes, Indira Gandhi’s government re<strong>com</strong>mended thedissolution of the Lok Sabha in December 1970. This was anothersurprising and bold move. The fifth general election to Lok Sabhawere held in February 1971.The contestThe electoral contest appeared to be loaded against Congress(R).After all, the new Congress was just one faction of an already weakparty. Everyone believed that the real organisational strength of theCongress party was under the <strong>com</strong>mand of Congress(O). To makematters worse for Indira Gandhi, all the major non-<strong>com</strong>munist, non-Congress opposition parties formed an electoral alliance known asthe Grand Alliance. The SSP, PSP, Bharatiya Jana Sangh, SwatantraParty and the Bharatiya Kranti Dal came together under this umbrella.The ruling party had an alliance with the CPI.Almost fourdecades after giving theslogan of Garibi Hatao, westill have much povertyaround! Was the sloganonly an electiongimmick?Yet the new Congress had something that its big opponentsAlliance did not have a coherent political programme. Indira Gandhisaid that the opposition alliance had only one <strong>com</strong>mon programme:Indira Hatao (Remove Indira). In contrast to this, she put forwarda positive programme captured in the famous slogan: Garibi Hatao(Remove Poverty). She focused on the growth of the public sector,imposition of ceiling on rural land holdings and urban property,removal of disparities in in<strong>com</strong>e and opportunity, and abolition ofprincely privileges. Through garibi hatao Indira Gandhi tried togenerate a support base among the disadvantaged, especially amongthe landless labourers, Dalits and Adivasis, minorities, women andthe unemployed youth. The slogan of garibi hatao and the programmesthat followed it were part of Indira Gandhi’s political strategy ofbuilding an independent nationwide political support base.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Challenges to and Restoration of the Congress System 97The out<strong>com</strong>e and afterThe results of the Lok Sabha elections of 1971, were as dramaticas was the decision to hold these elections. The Congress(R)-CPIalliance won more seats and votes than the Congress had ever wonin the first four general elections. The <strong>com</strong>bine won 375 seats in LokSabha and secured 48.4 per cent votes. Indira Gandhi’s Congress(R)won 352 seats with about 44 per cent of the popular votes on its own.Contrast this with the performance of the Congress(O): the partywith so many stalwarts could get less than one-fourth of the votessecured by Indira Gandhi’s party and win merely 16 seats. With thisthe Congress party led by Indira Gandhi established its claim to beingthe ‘real’ Congress and restored to it the dominant position in Indianpolitics. The Grand Alliance of the opposition proved a grand failure.Their <strong>com</strong>bined tally of seats was less than 40.Credit: R. K. Laxman in The Times of India“The Grand Finish” is how a cartoonist interpreted the out<strong>com</strong>e of the 1971 elections.Players on the ground are the then leading opposition figures.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>98 Politics in India since IndependenceCredit: R. K. Laxman in the Times of IndiaThe cupthat cheersSoon after the 1971 Lok Sabhaelections, a major political and militarycrisis broke out in East Pakistan (nowBangladesh). As you have read in ChapterFour, the 1971 elections were followed bythe crisis in East Pakistan and the Indo-Pak war leading to the establishmentof Bangladesh. These events added tothe popularity of Indira Gandhi. Eventhe opposition leaders admired herstatesmanship. Her party swept through allthe State Assembly elections held in 1972.She was seen not only as the protector ofthe poor and the underprivileged, but alsoa strong nationalist leader. The oppositionto her, either within the party or outside ofit, simply did not matter.With two successive election victories,one at the centre and other at the Statelevel, the dominance of the Congress wasrestored. The Congress was now in power in almost all the States. Itwas also popular across different social sections. Within a span of fouryears, Indira Gandhi had warded off the challenge to her leadershipand to the dominant position of the Congress party.Credit: KuttyThe new manner of choosing CMs by Indira Gandhi inspired this cartoon.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Challenges to and Restoration of the Congress System 99Restoration?But does it mean that the Congress systemwas restored? What Indira Gandhi haddone was not a revival of the old Congressparty. In many ways she had re-inventedthe party. The party occupied a similarposition in terms of its popularity as inthe past. But it was a different kind of aparty. It relied entirely on the popularityof the supreme leader. It had a somewhatweak organisational structure. ThisCongress party now did not have manyfactions, thus it could not ac<strong>com</strong>modateall kinds of opinions and interests. Whileit won elections, it depended more onsome social groups: the poor, the women,Dalits, Adivasis and the minorities. Thiswas a new Congress that had emerged.Thus Indira Gandhi restored the Congresssystem by changing the nature of theCongress system itself.Despite being more popular, the newCongress did not have the kind of capacityto absorb all tensions and conflicts thatthe Congress system was known for. Whilethe Congress consolidated its positionand Indira Gandhi assumed a positionof unprecedented political authority,the spaces for democratic expressionof people’s aspirations actually shrank.The popular unrest and mobilisationaround issues of development andeconomic deprivation continued togrow. In the next chapter you will readabout how this led to a political crisisthat threatened the very existence ofconstitutional democracy in the country.Thatis likechanging the topand legs of a tableand still calling it theold table! What was<strong>com</strong>mon between theOld and the NewCongress?Let’s watch a FilmZANJEERVijay, a young police officer isframed in false charges and sentto jail while fighting gangsters.Released from jail, Vijay isdetermined to take revenge. Hefights all odds and vanquishesthe villains. Even while he isengaged in taking revenge, Vijayis fighting the anti-social elementand gets the tacit support of manyothers from within the system.This film portrayed the erosionof moral values and the deepfrustrations arising from thatquite forcefully. It represents theindifference of the system andthe harsh and volcanic eruptionof protest through the anger ofVijay. The film set the trend ofwhat was later to be known asthe ‘angry young man’ of theseventies.Year: 1973Director: Prakash MehraScreenplay: Javed AkhtarCast: Amitabh Bachchan, Ajit,Jaya Bhaduri, Pran
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>100 Politics in in India since Independence1. Which of these statements about the 1967 elections is/are correct?(a) Congress won the Lok Sabha elections but lost the Assemblyelections in many states.(b) Congress lost both Lok Sabha and Assembly elections.(c) Congress lost majority in the Lok Sabha but formed a coalitiongovernment with the support of some other parties.(d) Congress retained power at the Centre with an increased majority.EXERCISES2. Match the following:(a) Syndicate i. An elected representativeleaving the party on whoseticket s/he has been elected(b) Defection ii. A catchy phrase that attractspublic attention(c) Slogan iii. parties with differentideological position <strong>com</strong>ingtogether to oppose Congressand its policies(d) Anti-Congressismiv. A group of powerfuland influential leaderswithin the Congress3. Whom would you identify with the following slogans/phrases?(a) Jai Jawan, Jai Kisan(b) Indira Hatao!(c) Garibi Hatao!4. Which of the following statement about the Grand Alliance of 1971 iscorrect?The Grand Alliance …..(a) was formed by non-Communist, non-Congress parties.(b) had a clear political and ideological programme.(c) was formed by all non-Congress parties.5. How should a political party resolve its internal differences? Here aresome suggestions. Think of each and list out their advantages andshort<strong>com</strong>ings.(a) Follow the footsteps of the party president(b) Listen to the majority group(c) Secret ballot voting on every issue(d) Consult the senior and experienced leaders of the party6. State which of these were reasons for the defeat of the Congress in1967. Give reasons for your answer.(a) The absence of a charismatic leader in the Congress party(b) Split within the Congress party(c) Increased mobilisation of regional, ethnic and <strong>com</strong>munal groups
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Challenges to and Restoration of the Congress System 101(d) Increasing unity among non-Congress parties(e) Internal differences within the Congress party7. What were the factors which led to the popularity of Indira Gandhi’sGovernment in the early 1970s?8. What does the term ‘syndicate’ mean in the context of the Congressparty of the sixties? What role did the Syndicate play in the Congressparty?9. Discuss the major issue which led to the formal split of the CongressParty in 1969.10. Read the passage and answer the questions below:…Indira Gandhi changed the Congress into highly cerntalised andundemocratic party organisation, from the earlier federal, democraticand ideological formation that Nehru had led…..But this… could nothave happened had not Indira Gandhi changed the entire nature ofpolitics. This new, populist politics turned political ideology ……. intoa mere electoral discourse, use of various slogans not meant to betranslated into government policies…… During its great electoralvictories in early 1970s, amidst the celebration, the Congress party as apolitical organisation died….. — SUDIPTA KAVIRAJ(a) What according to the author is the difference between thestrategies of Nehru and Indira Gandhi?(b) Why does the author say that the Congress party ‘died’ in theseventies?(c) In what way, did the change in the Congress party affect otherpolitical parties also?LET US DO IT TOGETHER• Make a list of slogans coined by political parties.• Do you see any similarities between advertisements andmanifestoes, slogans and advertisements of political parties?• Have a discussion on how price rise affects the political fortunes ofthe political parties.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>The editorial page of‘Nai Dunia’ of 27 June1975 was like any otherday, except that thespace for editorial wasleft blank. The editorialwas “censored” usingemergency powers.Many other newspapersalso carried such blankto protest againstemergency. Later, leavingblank space was alsobanned.In this chapter…We have seen in the last chapter that the Congress recovered after1971, but was not the same kind of party. The difference becameclear in a series of events between 1973 and 1975 that brought newchallenges to India’s democratic politics and the institutional balancesought by the Constitution. These developments led to the imposition of‘emergency’ in June 1975. Normally, we would associate ‘emergency’with war and aggression or with natural disaster. But this ‘emergency’was imposed because of the perceived threat of internal disturbance.The Emergency ended as dramatically as it had begun, resulting in adefeat of the Congress in the Lok Sabha elections of 1977.In this chapter we focus on this crucial phase in the history of democracyin India and ask some questions that have remained controversial afterall these years.• Why was Emergency imposed? Was it necessary?• What did the imposition of Emergency mean in practice?• What were the consequences of Emergency on party politics?• What are the lessons of Emergency for Indian democracy?
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>the crisis ofdemocratic orderchapter6Background to EmergencyWe have already studied the changes that were taking place in Indianpolitics since 1967. Indira Gandhi had emerged as a towering leaderwith tremendous popularity. This was also the period when party<strong>com</strong>petition became bitter and polarised. This period also witnessedtensions in the relationship between the government and the judiciary.The Supreme Court found many initiatives of the government to beviolative of the Constitution. The Congress party took the positionthat this stand of the Court was against principles of democracyand parliamentary supremacy. The Congress also alleged that theCourt was a conservative institution and it was be<strong>com</strong>ing an obstaclein the way of implementing pro-poor welfare programmes. Theparties opposed to the Congress felt that politics was be<strong>com</strong>ing toopersonalised and that governmental authority was being convertedinto personal authority. The split in the Congress had sharpened thedivisions between Indira Gandhi and her opponents.Economic contextIn the elections of 1971, Congress had given the sloganof garibi hatao (remove poverty). However, the social andeconomic condition in the country did not improve muchafter 1971-72. The Bangladesh crisis had put a heavy strainon India’s economy. About eight million people crossed overthe East Pakistan border into India. This was followed by warwith Pakistan. After the war the U.S government stopped allaid to India. In the international market, oil prices increasedmanifold during this period. This led to an all-round increasein prices of <strong>com</strong>modities. Prices increased by 23 per cent in1973 and 30 per cent in 1974. Such a high level of inflationcaused much hardship to the people.Industrial growth was low and unemployment wasvery high, particularly in the rural areas. In order toreduce expenditure the government froze the salaries ofits employees. This caused further dissatisfaction amonggovernment employees. Monsoons failed in 1972-1973. Thisresulted in a sharp decline in agricultural productivity. Foodgrain output declined by 8 per cent. There was a generalatmosphere of dissatisfaction with the prevailing economicPM saysCredit: Abu
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>104 Politics in India since IndependencePoorpeople must havehad a tough time. Whathappened to the promiseof garibi hatao?“Sampoorna Krantiab nara hai, bhavi itihashamara hai [With TotalRevolution as our motto, thefuture belongs to us]“A slogan of the Biharmovement, 1974situation all over the country. In such a context non-Congressopposition parties were able to organise popular protests effectively.Instances of students’ unrests that had persisted from the late 1960sbecame more pronounced in this period. There was also an increasein the activities of Marxist groups who did not believe in parliamentarypolitics. These groups had taken to arms and insurgent techniquesfor the overthrow of the capitalist order and the established politicalsystem. Known as the Marxist-Leninist (now Maoist) groups orNaxalites, they were particularly strong in West Bengal, where theState government took stringent measures to suppress them.Gujarat and Bihar movementsStudents’ protests in Gujarat and Bihar, both of which were Congressruled States, had far reaching impact on the politics of the two Statesand national politics. In January 1974 students in Gujarat startedan agitation against rising prices of food grains, cooking oil andother essential <strong>com</strong>modities, and against corruption in high places.The students’ protest was joined by major opposition parties andbecame widespread leading to the imposition of President’s rule in thestate. The opposition parties demanded fresh elections to the statelegislature. Morarji Desai, a prominent leader of Congress (O), whowas the main rival of Indira Gandhi when he was in the Congress,announced that he would go on an indefinite fast if fresh electionswere not held in the State. Under intense pressure from students,supported by the opposition political parties, assembly elections wereheld in Gujarat in June 1975. The Congress was defeated in thiselection.In March 1974 students came together in Bihar to protest againstrising prices, food scarcity, unemployment and corruption. Aftera point they invited Jayaprakash Narayan (JP), who had given upactive politics and was involved in social work, to lead the studentmovement. He accepted it on the condition that the movement willremain non-violent and will not limit itself to Bihar. Thus the students’movement assumed a political character and had national appeal.People from all walks of life now enteredthe movement. Jayaprakash Narayandemanded the dismissal of the Congressgovernment in Bihar and gave a call for“total revolution in the social, economicand political spheres in order to establishIndira is India,what he considered to be true democracy.India is IndiraA series of bandhs, gehraos, and strikeswere organised in protest against theBihar government. The government,however, refused to resign.“A slogan given byD. K. Barooah, President of theCongress, 1974
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>The Crisis of Democratic Order 105The Naxalite MovementIn 1967 a peasant uprising took place in the Naxalbari police station area ofDarjeeling hills district in West Bengal under the leadership of the local cadresof the Communist Party of India (Marxist). Beginning from the Naxalbari policestation, the peasant movement spread to several states of India and came tobe referred broadly as the Naxalite movement. In 1969, they broke off from theCPI (M) and a new party, Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist) (CPI-ML), wasformed under the leadership of Charu Majumdar. It argued that democracy inIndia was a sham and decided to adopt a strategy of protracted guerrilla warfarein order to lead to a revolution.The Naxalite movement hasused force to snatch land fromthe rich landowners and give itto the poor and the landless. Itssupporters advocated the use ofviolent means to achieve theirpolitical goals. In spite of the useof preventive detention and otherstrong measures adopted by theWest Bengal government run bythe Congress party, the Naxalitemovement did not <strong>com</strong>e to an end. In later years, it spread to many other partsof the country. The Naxalite movement has by now splintered into variousparties and organisations. Some of these parties, like the CPI – ML (Liberation)participate in open, democratic politics.Currently about 75 districts in nine States are affected by Naxalite violence.Most of these are very backward areas inhabited by Adivasis. In these areas thesharecroppers, under-tenants andCharu Majumdar(1918-1972): Communistrevolutionary and theleader of the Naxalbariuprising; participated inthe Tebhaga movementbefore independence; leftthe CPI and founded theCommunist Party of India(Marxist-Leninist); believedin the Maoist path of peasant rebellion anddefended revolutionary violence; died in policecustody.small cultivators are denied theirbasic rights with regard to securityof tenure or their share in produce,payment of fair wages etc. Forcedlabour, expropriation of resourcesby outsiders and exploitation bymoneylenders are also <strong>com</strong>monin these areas. These conditionslead to the growth of the Naxalitemovement.Governments have taken sternmeasures in dealing with theNaxalite movement. Humanright activists have criticisedthe government for violatingconstitutional norms in dealingwith the Naxalites. Many thousand people have lost their lives in the violence bythe Naxalites and the anti-Naxalite violence by the government.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>106 Politics in India since IndependenceCredit: R. K. Laxman in the Times of IndiaLoknayakJayaprakashNarayan (JP)(1902-1979): Amarxist in his youth;founder generalsecretary of theCongress SocialistParty and the Socialist Party; a hero of the 1942Quit India movement; declined to join Nehru’scabinet; after 1955 quit active politics; becamea Gandhian and was involved in the Bhoodanmovement, negotiations with the Naga rebels,peace initiative in Kashmir and ensured thesurrender of decoits in Chambal; leader of Biharmovement, he became the symbol of opposition toEmergency and was the moving force behind theformation of Janata Party.The movement was beginning toinfluence national politics. JayaprakashNarayan wanted to spread the Biharmovement to other parts of thecountry. Alongside the agitation led byJayaprakash Narayan, the employees ofthe Railways gave a call for a nationwidestrike. This threatened to paralyse thecountry. In 1975, JP led a peoples’march to the Parliament. This was oneof the largest political rallies ever heldin the capital. He was now supportedby the non-Congress opposition partieslike the Bharatiya Jana Sangh, theCongress (O), the Bharatiya Lok Dal, theSocialist Party and others. These partieswere projecting JP as an alternative toIndira Gandhi. However, there were manycriticisms about his ideas and about thepolitics of mass agitations that he wasemploying. Both the Gujarat and Bihar
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>The Crisis of Democratic Order 107agitations were seen as anti-Congress and rather than opposing theState governments, they were seen as protests against the leadershipof Indira Gandhi. She believed that the movement was motivated bypersonal opposition to her.Railway Strike of 1974What would happen when the railways stop running? Not for one ortwo days, but for more than a week? Of course, many people would beinconvenienced; but more than that, the economy of the country would<strong>com</strong>e to a halt because goods are transported from one part to anotherby trains.Do you know that such a thing actually happened in 1974? The NationalCoordination Committee for Railwaymen’s Struggle led by GeorgeFernandes gave a call for nationwide strike by all employees of the Railwaysfor pressing their demands related to bonus and service conditions. Thegovernment was opposed to these demands. So, the employees of India’slargest public sector undertaking went on a strike in May 1974. The strikeby the Railway employees added to the atmosphere of labour unrest. Italso raised issues like rights of the workers and whether employees ofessential services should adopt measures like strikes.The government declared the strike illegal. As the government refusedto concede the demands of the striking workers, arrested many of theirleaders and deployed the territorial army to protect railway tracks, thestrike had to be called off after twenty days without any settlement.Conflict with JudiciaryThis was also the period when the government and the ruling partyhad many differences with the judiciary. Do you remember thediscussion about the long drawn conflict between the Parliament andthe judiciary? You have studied this last year. Three constitutionalThe Supreme Court said it cannot. Secondly, can the Parliamentcurtail the right to property by making an amendment? Again, theCourt said that Parliament cannot amend the Constitution in sucha manner that rights are curtailed. Thirdly, the Parliament amendedthe Constitution saying that it can abridge Fundamental Rights forgiving effect to Directive Principles. But the Supreme Court rejectedthis provision also. This led to a crisis as far as the relations betweenthe government and the judiciary were concerned. You may rememberthat this crisis culminated in the famous Kesavananda Bharati Case. Inthis case, the Court gave a decision that there are some basic featuresof the Constitution and the Parliament cannot amend these features.Two developments further added to the tension between thejudiciary and the executive. Immediately after the Supreme Court’sPutsimply,<strong>com</strong>mitted judiciaryand <strong>com</strong>mittedbureaucracy means thatthe judges and officersshould be loyal to theruling party. What apity!
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>108 Politics in India since Independencedecision in 1973 in the Kesavananda Bharati case, a vacancy arosefor the post of the Chief Justice of India. It had been a practice toappoint the senior-most judge of the Supreme Court as the ChiefJustice. But in 1973, the government set aside the seniority ofthree judges and appointed Justice A. N. Ray as the Chief Justiceof India. The appointment became politically controversial becauseall the three judges who were superseded had given rulings againstthe stand of the government. Thus, constitutional interpretationsand political ideologies were getting mixed up rapidly. People closeto the Prime Minister started talking of the need for a judiciary andthe bureaucracy ‘<strong>com</strong>mitted’ to the vision of the executive and thelegislature. The climax of the confrontation was of course the rulingof the High Court declaring Indira Gandhi’s election invalid.Declaration of EmergencyOn 12 June 1975, Justice Jagmohan Lal Sinha of the Allahabad HighCourt passed a judgment declaring Indira Gandhi’s election to theLok Sabha invalid. This order came on an election petition filed by RajNarain, a socialist leader and a candidate who had contested againsther in 1971. The petition, challenged the election of Indira Gandhion the ground that she had used the services of government servantsin her election campaign. The judgment of the High Court meant thatlegally she was no more an MP and therefore, could not remain thePrime Minister unless she was once again elected as an MP within sixmonths. On June 24, the Supreme Court granted her a partial stay onMP but could not take part in the proceedings of the Lok Sabha.Crisis and responseThat is like askingthe army to disobeythe government! Isthat democratic?The stage was now set for a big political confrontation. The oppositionpolitical parties led by Jayaprakash Narayan pressed for IndiraGandhi’s resignation and organised a massive demonstration inDelhi’s Ramlila grounds on 25 June 1975. Jayaprakash announceda nationwide satyagraha for her resignation and asked the army, thepolice and government employees not to obey “illegal and immoralorders”. This too threatened to bring the activities of the governmentto a standstill. The political mood of the country had turned againstthe Congress, more than ever before.The response of the government was to declare a state of emergency.On 25 June 1975, the government declared that there was a threatof internal disturbances and therefore, it invoked Article 352 of theConstitution. Under the provision of this article the government coulddeclare a state of emergency on grounds of external threat or a threatof internal disturbances. The government decided that a grave crisishad arisen which made the proclamation of a state of emergencynecessary. Technically speaking this was within the powers of the
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>The Crisis of Democratic Order 109Credit: R. K. Laxman in the Times of IndiaThis cartoon appeared few days before the declaration of Emergency and captures the sense of impendingpolitical crisis. The man behind the chair is D. K. Barooah, the Congress President.government, for our Constitution provides for some special powers tothe government once an emergency is declared.Once an emergency is proclaimed, the federal distribution of powersremains practically suspended and all the powers are concentrated inthe hands of the union government. Secondly, the government alsogets the power to curtail or restrict all or any of the FundamentalRights during the emergency. From the wording of the provisions ofthe Constitution, it is clear that an Emergency is seen as an extraordinarycondition in which normal democratic politics cannotfunction. Therefore, special powers are granted to the government.On the night of 25 June 1975, the Prime Minister re<strong>com</strong>mendedthe imposition of Emergency to President Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed. Heissued the proclamation immediately. After midnight, the electricityto all the major newspaper offices was disconnected. In the earlymorning, a large number of leaders and workers of the oppositionparties were arrested. The Cabinet was informed about it at a specialmeeting at 6 a.m. on 26 June, after all this had taken place.Shouldthe Presidenthave declaredEmergency without anyre<strong>com</strong>mendation from theCabinet?
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>110 110 Politics in India since Independence
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>The Crisis of Democratic Order 111
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>112 Politics in India since IndependenceNow,even theSupreme Courtgave in! Whatwas happening toeveryone in thosedays?ConsequencesThis brought the agitation to an abrupt stop; strikes were banned;many opposition leaders were put in jail; the political situation becamevery quiet though tense. Deciding to use its special powers underEmergency provisions, the government suspended the freedom of thePress. Newspapers were asked to get prior approval for all materialto be published. This is known as press censorship. Apprehendingsocial and <strong>com</strong>munal disharmony, the government banned RashtriyaSwayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and Jamait-e-Islami. Protests and strikesand public agitations were also disallowed. Most importantly, underthe provisions of Emergency, the various Fundamental Rights ofcitizens stood suspended, including the right of citizens to move theCourt for restoring their Fundamental Rights.The government made extensive use of preventive detention. Underthis provision, people are arrested and detained not because they have<strong>com</strong>mitted any offence, but on the apprehension that they may <strong>com</strong>mitan offence. Using preventive detention acts, the government madelarge scale arrests during the Emergency. Arrested political workerscould not challenge their arrest through habeas corpus petitions.Many cases were filed in the High Courts and the Supreme Court byand on behalf of arrested persons, but the government claimed that itwas not even necessary to inform the arrested persons of the reasonsand grounds of their arrest. Several High Courts gave judgments thateven after the declaration of Emergency the courts could entertain awrit of habeas corpus filed by a person challenging his/her detention.In April 1976, the constitution bench of the Supreme Court over-ruledthe High Courts and accepted the government’s plea. It meant thatduring Emergency the government could take away the citizen’s rightto life and liberty. This judgment closed the doors of judiciary for thecitizens and is regarded as one of the most controversial judgmentsof the Supreme Court.There were many acts of dissent and resistance to the Emergency.Many political workers who were not arrested in the first wave,went ‘underground’ and organised protests against the government.Newspapers like the Indian Express and the Statesman protestedagainst censorship by leaving blank spaces where news items hadbeen censored. Magazines like the Seminar and the Mainstream choseto close down rather than submit to censorship. Many journalistswere arrested for writing against the Emergency. Many undergroundnewsletters and leaflets were published to bypass censorship. Kannadawriter Shivarama Karanth, awarded with Padma Bhushan, and Hindiwriter Fanishwarnath Renu, awarded with Padma Shri, returned theirawards in protest against the suspension of democracy. By and large,though, such open acts of defiance and resistance were rare.The Parliament also brought in many new changes to theConstitution. In the background of the ruling of the Allahabad High
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>The Crisis of Democratic Order 113Court in the Indira Gandhi case, an amendment was made declaringthat elections of Prime Minister, President and Vice-President couldnot be challenged in the Court. The forty-second amendment wasalso passed during the Emergency. You have already studied thatthis amendment consisted of a series of changes in many parts of theConstitution. Among the various changes made by this amendment,one was that the duration of the legislatures in the country wasextended from five to six years. This change was not only for theEmergency period, but was intended to be of a permanent nature.Besides this, during an Emergency, elections can be postponed byone year. Thus, effectively, after 1971, elections needed to be heldonly in 1978; instead of 1976.Controversies regarding EmergencyEmergency is one of the most controversial episodes in Indian politics.One reason is that there are differing view points about the need todeclare emergency. Another reason is that using the powers given bythe Constitution, the government practically suspended the democraticfunctioning. As the investigations by the Shah Commission after theEmergency found out, there were many ‘excesses’ <strong>com</strong>mitted duringthe Emergency. Finally, there are varying assessments of what thelessons of Emergency are for the practice of democracy in India. Letus look at these one by one.Letus nottalk about thefew who protested.What about the rest?All the big officials,intellectuals, socialand religious leaders,citizens… What werethey doing?Was the Emergency necessary?The Constitution simply mentioned ‘internaldisturbances’ as the reason for declaringEmergency. Before 1975, Emergency wasnever proclaimed on this ground. We havenoted that agitations were going on inmany parts of the country. Was this reasonenough for declaring Emergency? Thegovernment argued that in a democracy,the opposition parties must allow theelected ruling party to govern according toits policies. It felt that frequent recourse toagitations, protests and collective actionare not good for democracy. Supportersof Indira Gandhi also held that in ademocracy, you cannot continuously haveextra-parliamentary politics targetingthe government. This leads to instabilityand distracts the administration from itsroutine task of ensuring development. Allenergies are diverted to maintenance oflaw and order. Indira Gandhi wrote in aShah Commission of InquiryIn May 1977, the Janata Party governmentappointed a Commission of Inquiry headedby Justice J.C. Shah, retired Chief Justiceof the Supreme Court of India, to inquire“into several aspects of allegations of abuseof authority, excesses and malpractices<strong>com</strong>mitted and action taken in the wakeof the Emergency proclaimed on the 25thJune, 1975”. The Commission examinedvarious kinds of evidence and called scoresof witnesses to give testimonies. Theseincluded Indira Gandhi who appeared beforethe Commission but refused to answer anyquestions.The Government of India accepted thefindings, observations and re<strong>com</strong>mendationscontained in the two interim reports and thirdand final report of the Shah Commission.The reports were also tabled in the twohouses of Parliament.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>114 Politics in India since Independence“In the nameof democracy it has beensought to negate the veryfunctioning of democracy.Duly elected governmentshave not been allowed tofunction. …Agitations havesurcharged the atmosphere,leading to violent incidents.…Certain persons have goneto the length of incitingour armed forces to mutinyand our police to rebel. Theforces of disintegration arein full play and <strong>com</strong>munalpassions are being aroused,threatening our unity.How can any Governmentworth the name stand byand allow the country’sstability to be imperilled?The actions of a few areendangering the rights of thevast majority.“Indira GandhiAddressing the nation onAll India Radio on26 June 1975Mrs. Gandhi’s confrontation with the Shah Commission provoked this cartoonwhen the <strong>com</strong>mission’s report was released.letter to the Shah Commission that subversive forces were trying toobstruct the progressive programmes of the government and wereattempting to dislodge her from power through extra-constitutionalmeans.Some other parties, like the CPI that continued to back theCongress during the Emergency, also believed that there was aninternational conspiracy against the unity of India. It believed thatin such circumstances some restrictions on agitations were justified.Demolitions in Turkman Gate area, DelhiEmergency witnessed large-scale displacement of people living inDelhi’s poorer localities. The jhuggi-jhopris were forcibly relocated inthe then barren areas across the river Yamuna. One such affectedarea was the colonies in Turkman gate. The jhuggis of the areawere demolished. Hundreds of people of this area were forciblysterilised. However, many people escaped sterilisation simplybecause they were able to motivate other people to get themselvessterilised and were rewarded by the grant of title to a piece of land.Thus, while some people became victims of government-sponsoredactions, some people managed to victimise others in their desire tolegally secure a piece of land, which would safeguard them fromarbitrary displacement.Source: Shah Commission of Inquiry, Interim Report IICredit: R. K. Laxman in the Times of India
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>The Crisis of Democratic Order 115Ask your parents or other elders in the family or neighbourhood abouttheir experience during 1975-77. Take down notes on the following:• Their personal experience of the Emergency.• Any report of support or opposition to the Emergency in yourlocality.• Their participation in the 1977 elections and why they voted theway they did.Put your notes together and make a collective report on ‘Emergency inmy city/village.’Let’s re-searchThe CPI felt that the agitations led by JP were mainly by the middleclasses who were opposed to the radical policies of the Congress party.After the Emergency, the CPI felt that its assessment was mistakenand that it was an error to have supported the Emergency.On the other hand, the critics of the Emergency argued that eversince the freedom movement, Indian politics had a history of popularstruggles. JP and many other opposition leaders felt that in a democracy,people had the right to publicly protest against the government. TheBihar and Gujarat agitations were mostly peaceful and non-violent.Those who were arrested were never tried for any anti-national activity.No cases were registered against most of the detainees. The HomeMinistry, which is entrusted with the responsibility of monitoring theinternal situation of the country, also did not express any concernabout the law and order situation in the country. If some agitationshad over-stepped their limits, the government had enough routinepowers to deal with it. There was no need to suspend democraticfunctioning and use draconian measures like the Emergency for that.The threat was not to the unity and integrity of the country but to theruling party and to the Prime Minister herself. The critics say thatIndira Gandhi misused a constitutional provision meant for savingthe country to save her personal power.What happened during emergency?The actual implementation of the Emergency is another contentiousissue. Did the government misuse its Emergency powers? Were thereexcesses and abuse of authority? The government said that it wantedto use the Emergency to bring law and order, restore efficiency, andabove all, implement the pro-poor welfare programmes. For thispurpose, the government led by Indira Gandhi announced a twentypointprogramme and declared its determination to implement thisprogramme. The twenty-point programme included land reforms, landredistribution, review of agricultural wages, workers’ participation inmanagement, eradication of bonded labour, etc. In the initial months
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>116 Politics in India since Independenceafter the declaration of Emergency, the urban middle classes weregenerally happy over the fact that agitations came to an end anddiscipline was enforced on the government employees. The poor andrural people also expected effective implementation of the welfareprogrammes that the government was promising. Thus, differentsections of society had different expectations from the emergency andalso different viewpoints about it.Credit: R. K. Laxman in the Times of IndiaCritics of Emergency point out that most of these promises bythe government remained unfulfilled, that these were simply meantto divert attention from the excesses that were taking place. Theyquestion the use of preventive detention on such a large scale. We havenoted that many prominent political leaders were arrested. In all, 676opposition leaders were arrested. The Shah Commission estimatedthat nearly one lakh eleven thousand people were arrested underpreventive detention laws. Severe restrictions were put on the press,sometimes without proper legal sanctions. The Shah Commissionreport mentions that the General Manager of the Delhi Power SupplyCorporation received verbal orders from the office of the Lt. Governorof Delhi to cut electricity to all newspaper presses at 2.00 a.m. on 26June, 1975. Electricity was restored two to three days later after thecensorship apparatus had been set up.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>The Crisis of Democratic Order 117Custodial death of RajanOn 1 March 1976, P. Rajan, a final year student of the CalicutEngineering College, Kerala, was whisked away from the hostel in theearly hours along with another student, Joseph Chali. Rajan’s father,T.V Eachara Warrior made frantic efforts to trace his son. He metlegislators, he petitioned the concerned authorities, he also sought thehelp of the then Home Minister, K. Karunakaran. As the emergency wasproclaimed, issues relating to the citizen’s liberty could not be raisedin the courts. After the Emergency was lifted, Warrior filed a petitionfor writ of Habeas Corpus in the Kerala High Court at Ernakulam.From the evidence of witnesses, it became clear that from the hostel,Rajan had been taken to the Tourist Bungalow in Calicut the next daywhere he was tortured by the police. At a subsequent hearing Keralagovernment told the High Court that Raian had died in “unlawful policecustody”, as a result of continuous police torture. The Division Benchof Kerala High Court held that Karunakaran had lied to the Court.K. Karunakaran who had by then be<strong>com</strong>e Chief Minister of Kerala, hadto resign because of the strictures passed by the High Court.Source: Shah Commission of Inquiry, Interim Report IIThere were other and more serious allegations regarding theexercise of governmental power by people who held no officialposition. Sanjay Gandhi, the Prime Minister’s younger son, did nothold any official position at the time. Yet, he gained control overthe administration and allegedly interfered in the functioning of thegovernment. His role in the demolitions and forced sterilisation inDelhi became very controversial.Apart from the arrests of political workers and the restrictions onthe press, the Emergency directly affected lives of <strong>com</strong>mon peoplein many cases. Torture and custodial deaths occurred during theEmergency; arbitrary relocation of poor people also took place; andover-enthusiasm about population control led to cases of <strong>com</strong>pulsorysterilisation. These instances show what happens when the normaldemocratic process is suspended.Lessons of the EmergencyThe Emergency at once brought out both the weaknesses and thestrengths of India’s democracy. Though there are many observerswho think that India ceased to be democratic during the Emergency,it is noteworthy that normal democratic functioning resumed withina short span of time. Thus, one lesson of Emergency is that it isextremely difficult to do away with democracy in India.Secondly, it brought out some ambiguities regarding the Emergencyprovision in the Constitution that have been rectified since. Now,““… death ofD. E. M. O’Cracy, mourned byhis wife T. Ruth, his sonL. I. Bertie, and hisdaughters Faith, Hope andJustice.An anonymousadvertisement in the Timesof India, soon after thedeclaration of Emergency,1975.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>118 Politics in India since Independence“Today is India’sIndependence Day…Don’tLet the Lights Go Out onIndia’s Democracy“An advertisement in TheTimes, London,15 August 1975 by‘Free JP Campaign’.‘internal’ Emergency can be proclaimed only on the groundsof ‘armed rebellion’ and it is necessary that the advice to thePresident to proclaim Emergency must be given in writing bythe Council of Ministers.Thirdly, the Emergency made everyone more aware of thevalue of civil liberties. The Courts too, have taken an activerole after the Emergency in protecting the civil liberties of theindividuals. This is a response to the inability of the judiciaryto protect civil liberties effectively during the emergency. Manycivil liberties organisations came up after this experience.However, the critical years of emergency brought manyissues that have not been adequately grappled with. We havenoted in this chapter that there is a tension between routinefunctioning of a democratic government and the continuouspolitical protests by parties and groups. What is the correctbalance between the two? Should the citizens have full freedomto engage in protest activity or should they have no such rightat all? What are the limits to such a protest?Secondly, the actual implementation of the Emergency rule tookplace through the police and the administration. These institutionscould not function independently. They were turned into politicalinstruments of the ruling party and according to the Shah CommissionReport, the administration and the police became vulnerable to politicalpressures. This problem did not vanish after the Emergency.Politics after EmergencyThe most valuable and lasting lesson of the Emergency was learnt assoon as the Emergency was over and the Lok Sabha elections wereannounced. The 1977 elections turned into a referendum on theexperience of the Emergency, at least in north India where the impactof the Emergency was felt most strongly. The opposition fought theelection on the slogan of ‘save democracy’. The people’s verdict wasdecisively against the Emergency. The lesson was clear and has beenare perceived to be anti-democratic are severely punished by the voters.In this sense the experience of 1975 -77 ended up strengthening thefoundations of democracy in India.Lok Sabha Elections, 1977In January 1977, after eighteen months of Emergency, the governmentdecided to hold elections. Accordingly, all the leaders and activists werereleased from jails. Elections were held in March 1977. This left theopposition with very little time, but political developments took placevery rapidly. The major opposition parties had already been <strong>com</strong>ingcloser in the pre-Emergency period. Now they came together on the
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>The Crisis of Democratic Order 119eve of the elections and formed a new party, known as theJanata Party. The new party accepted the leadership ofJayaprakash Narayan. Some leaders of the Congress whowere opposed to the Emergency also joined this new party.Some other Congress leaders also came out and formed aseparate party under the leadership of Jagjivan Ram. Thisparty named as Congress for Democracy, later merged withthe Janata Party.The Janata Party made this election into a referendumon the Emergency. Its campaign was focused on the nondemocraticcharacter of the rule and on the various excessesthat took place during this period. In the backdrop of arrestsof thousands of persons and the censorship of the Press,the public opinion was against the Congress. JayaprakashNarayan became the popular symbol of restoration ofdemocracy. The formation of the Janata Party also ensuredthat non-Congress votes would not be divided. It was evidentthat the going was tough for the Congress.Yet the final results took everyone by surprise. Forthe first time since Independence, the Congress party wasdefeated in the Lok Sabha elections. The Congress couldwin only 154 seats in the Lok Sabha. Its share of popularvotes fell to less than 35 per cent. The Janata Party andMorarji Desai(1896-1995): Freedomfighter; a Gandhianleader; Proponenet ofKhadi, naturopathy andprohibition; Chief Ministerof Bombay State; DeputyPrime Minister (1967-1969); joined Congress(O) after the split in theparty; Prime Minister from1977 to 1979—first PrimeMinister belonging to anon-Congress party.Credit: R. K. Laxman in the Times of IndiaA cartoonist’sreading of whowon and whatwas defeated inthe 1977 election.Those standingwith the <strong>com</strong>monman includeJagjivan Ram,Morarji Desai,Charan Singhand Atal BehariVajpayee.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>120 Politics in India since Independenceits allies won 330 out of the 542 seats in the Lok Sabha; Janata Partyitself won 295 seats and thus enjoyed a clear majority. In north India,it was a massive electoral wave against the Congress. The Congresslost in every constituency in Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Delhi, Haryana andthe Punjab and could win only one seat each in Rajasthan and MadhyaPradesh. Indira Gandhi was defeated from Rae Bareli, as was her sonSanjay Gandhi from Amethi.But if you look at the map showing the result of this election, youwill notice that Congress did not lose elections all over the country.It retained many seats in Maharashtra, Gujarat and Orissa andvirtually swept through the southern States. There are many reasonsfor this. To begin with, the impact of Emergency was not felt equallyin all the States. The forced relocation and displacements, the forcedsterilisations, were mostly concentrated in the northern States.But more importantly, north India had experienced some long termchanges in the nature of political <strong>com</strong>petition. The middle castes fromnorth India were beginning to move away from the Congress and theJanata party became a platform for many of these sections to <strong>com</strong>etogether. In this sense, the elections of 1977 were not merely aboutthe Emergency.Janata GovernmentThe Janata Party government that came to power after the 1977 electionswas far from cohesive. After the election, there was stiff <strong>com</strong>petitionOath taking by the first non-congress government at the centre in 1977. In the picture areJayaprakash Narayan, J. B. Kriplani, Morarji Desai and Atal Behari Vajpayee.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>The Crisis of Democratic Order 121Note: This illustration is not a map drawn to scale and should not be taken tobe an authentic depiction of India’s external boundaries.Read this map and identify the states where swept the polls.Which are the constituencies in north India that theCongress managed to win?How canwe talk about amandate or verdict in1977 when the northand the south voted sodifferently?
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>122 Politics in India since IndependenceChaudharyCharan Singh(1902-1987):Prime Ministerof India betweenJuly1979 - January1980; freedomfighter; activein the politics ofUttar Pradesh;proponent of ruraland agriculturaldevelopment; leftCongress partyand foundedBharatiya KrantiDal in 1967; twiceChief Ministerof U.P.; later hewas one of thefounders of theJanata Party in1977 and becameDeputy PrimeMinister andHome Minister(1977-79);founder ofLok Dal.I got it!Emergencywas like avaccinationagainstdictatorship. Itwas painful andcaused fever, butstrengthenedthe resistanceof ourdemocracy.Credit: R. K. Laxman in the Times of India Credit: R. K. Laxman in the Times of IndiaCredit: Atanu Roy/India TodayJanata Party’s faction fight inspired many cartoons at that time. Here is a selection.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>The Crisis of Democratic Order 123was the rival to Indira Gandhi ever since 1966-67; Charan Singh, leaderof the Bharatiya Lok Dal and a farmers’ leader from UP; and JagjivanRam, who had vast experience as a senior minister in the Congressgovernments. Eventually Morarji Desai became the Prime Minister butthat did not bring the power struggle within the party to an end.The opposition to Emergency could keep the Janata Party togetheronly for a while. Its critics felt that the Janata Party lacked direction,leadership, and a <strong>com</strong>mon programme. The Janata Party governmentcould not bring about a fundamental change in policies from thosepursued by the Congress. The Janata Party split and the governmentwhich was led by Morarji Desai lost its majority in less than 18 months.Another government headed by Charan Singh was formed on theassurance of the support of the Congress party. But the Congressparty later decided to withdraw its support with the result that theCharan Singh government could remain in power for just about fourmonths. Fresh Lok Sabha elections were held in January 1980 inwhich the Janata Party suffered a <strong>com</strong>prehensive defeat, especially innorth India where it had swept the polls in 1977. Congress partyled by Indira Gandhi nearly repeated its great victory in 1971.It won 353 seats and came back to power. The experience of1977-79 taught another lesson in democratic politics: governmentsthat are seen to be unstable and quarrelsome are severely punishedby the voters.LegacyBut was it only a case of return of Indira Gandhi? Betweenthe elections of 1977 and 1980 the party system had changeddramatically. Since 1969, the Congress party had startingshedding its character as an umbrella party which ac<strong>com</strong>modatedleaders and workers of different ideological dispensations andview points. The Congress party now identified itself with aparticular ideology, claiming to be the only socialist and pro-poorparty. Thus with the early nineteen seventies, the Congress’spolitical success depended on attracting people on the basis ofsharp social and ideological divisions and the appeal of one leader,Indira Gandhi. With the change in the nature of the Congressparty, other opposition parties relied more and more on what isknown in Indian politics as ‘non-Congressism’. They also realisedthe need to avoid a division of non-Congress votes in the election.This factor played a major role in the elections of 1977.In an indirect manner the issue of welfare of the backwardcastes also began to dominate politics since 1977. As we sawabove, the results of 1977 elections were at least partly due toa shift among the backward castes of north India. Following theLok Sabha elections, many states also held Assembly electionsin 1977. Again, the northern States elected non-Congressgovernments in which the leaders of the backward castes playedJagjivan Ram(1908-1986):Freedom fighter andCongress leader fromBihar; Deputy PrimeMinister of India(1977-79); memberof ConstituentAssembly; alsoa Member ofParliament since1952 till his death;Labour Minister in thefirst ministry of freeIndia; held variousother ministries from1952 to 1977; ascholar and astuteadministrator.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>124 Politics in India since IndependenceCredit: R. K. Laxman in the Times of India Credit: India TodayThis cartoon appeared after the election results of 1980.an important role. The issue of reservations for ‘other backwardclasses’ became very controversial in Bihar and following this, theMandal Commission was appointed by the Janata Party governmentat the centre. You will read more about this and about the role of thepolitics of backward castes, in the last chapter. The elections after theEmergency set off the process of this change in the party system.The Emergency and the period around it can be described as a periodof constitutional crisis because it had its origins in the constitutionalbattle over the jurisdiction of the Parliament and the judiciary. On theother hand, it was also a period of political crisis. The party in powerhad absolute majority and yet, its leadership decided to suspend
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>The Crisis of Democratic Order 125the democratic process. The makersof India’s Constitution trusted that allpolitical parties would basically abideby the democratic norm. Even duringthe Emergency, when the governmentwould use extraordinary powers, itsuse would be within the norms ofthe rule of law. This expectation ledto the wide and open ended powersgiven to the government in times ofEmergency. These were abused duringthe Emergency. This political crisis wasmore serious than the constitutionalcrisis.Another critical issue that emergedduring this period was the role and extentof mass protests in a parliamentarydemocracy. There was clearly a tensionbetween institution-based democracyand democracy based on spontaneouspopular participation. This tensionmay be attributed to the inability ofthe party system to incorporate theaspirations of the people. In the twochapters that follow we shall study someof the manifestations of this tension,in particular, popular movements anddebates around regional identity.Let’s watch a FilmHAZARON KHWAISHEIN AISISiddharth, Vikram and Geetaare three spirited and sociallyengaged students. Graduatingfrom Delhi, they follow differentpaths. While Siddharth is a strongsupporter of the revolutionaryideology of social transformation,Vikram is in favour of achievingsuccess in life, whatever the cost.The film narrates the story of theirjourneys towards their goals andthe underlying disappointments.The film is set in the backdrop of theseventies. The young charactersare products of the expectationsand idealism of that period.Siddharth is not successful in hisambition to stage a revolution, butis so involved in the plight of thepoor that he begins valuing theiruplift more than revolution. Onthe other hand, Vikram be<strong>com</strong>esa typical political fixer but isconstantly ill at ease.Year: 2005Director: Sudhir MishraScreenplay: Sudhir MishraRuchi NarainShivkumar SubramaniamCast: Kay Kay Menon, ShineyAhuja, Chitrangada Singh
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>126 Politics in India since Independence1. State whether the following statements regarding the Emergency arecorrect or incorrect.(a) It was declared in 1975 by Indira Gandhi.(b) It led to the suspension of all fundamental rights.(c) It was proclaimed due to the deteriorating economic conditions.(d) Many Opposition leaders were arrested during the emergency.(e) CPI supported the proclamation of the Emergency.2. Find the odd one out in the context of proclamation of Emergency(a) The call for ‘Total Revolution.(b) The Railway Strike of 1974(c) The Naxalite Movement(d) The Allahbad High Court verdict(e) The findings of the Shah Commission ReportEXERCISES3. Match the following(a) Total Revolution i. Indira Gandhi(b) Garibi hatao ii. Jayaprakash Narayan(c) Students’ Protest iii. Bihar Movement(d) Railway Strikeiv. George Fernandes4. What were the reasons which led to the mid-term elections in 1980?5. The Shah Commission was appointed in 1977 by the Janata PartyGovernment. Why was it appointed and what were its findings?6. What reasons did the Government give for declaring a National Emergencyin 1975?7. The 1977 elections for the first time saw the Opposition <strong>com</strong>ing intopower at the Centre. What would you consider as the reasons for thisdevelopment?8. Discuss the effects of Emergency on the following aspects of our polity.• Effects on civil liberties for citizens.• Impact on relationship between the Executive and Judiciary• Functioning of Mass Media• Working of the Police and Bureaucracy.9. In what way did the imposition of Emergency affect the party system inIndia? Elaborate your answer with examples.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>The Crisis of Democratic Order 12710. Read the passage and answer the questions below:Indian democracy was never so close to a two-party system as it wasduring the 1977 elections. However, the next few years saw a <strong>com</strong>pletechange. Soon after its defeat, the Indian National Congress split intotwo groups……….. … … …The Janata Party also went through majorconvulsions…..David Butler, Ashok Lahiri and Prannoy Roy. — PARTHACHATTERJEE(a) What made the party system in India look like a two-party system in1977?(b) Many more than two parties existed in 1977. Why then are theauthors describing this period as close to a two-party system?(c) What caused splits in Congress and the Janata parties?
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Credit: Bhawan SinghPhotograph on thisand the facing pageare of the participantsand leaders of theChipko Movement,recognised as one ofthe first environmentalmovements in thecountry.In this chapter…Three decades after Independence, the people were beginning toget impatient. Their unease expressed itself in various forms. In theprevious chapter, we have already gone through the story of electoralupheavals and political crisis. Yet that was not the only form in whichpopular discontent expressed itself. In the 1970s, diverse social groupslike women, students, Dalits and farmers felt that democratic politics didnot address their needs and demands. Therefore, they came togetherunder the banner of various social organisations to voice their demands.These assertions marked the rise of popular movements or new socialmovements in Indian politics.In this chapter we trace the journey of some of the popular movementsthat developed after the 1970s in order to understand:• what are popular movements?• which sections of Indian society have they mobilised?• what is the main agenda of these movements?• what role do they play in a democratic set up like ours?
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>rise of popularmovementsNature of popular movementsTake a look at the opening image of this chapter. What do you seethere? Villagers have literally embraced the trees. Are they playingsome game? Or participating in some ritual or festival? Not really. Theimage here depicts a very unusual form of collective action in whichmen and women from a village in what is now Uttarakhand wereengaged in early 1973. These villagers were protesting against thepractices of <strong>com</strong>mercial logging that the government had permitted.to prevent them from being cut down. These protests marked thebeginning of a world-famous environmental movement in our countryChipko movementchapter7The movement began in two or three villages of Uttarakhand when theforest department refused permission to the villagers to fell ash treesfor making agricultural tools. However, the forest department allottedthe same patch of land to a sports manufacturer for <strong>com</strong>mercialuse. This enraged the villagers and they protested against the moveof the government. The struggle soon spread across many parts ofthe Uttarakhand region. Larger issues of ecological and economicexploitation of the region were raised. The villagers demanded thatno forest-exploiting contracts should be given to outsiders and local<strong>com</strong>munities should have effective control over natural resourceslike land, water and forests. They wanted the government to providelow cost materials to small industries and ensure development ofFascinating!But I wonder how itrelates to the history ofpolitics.Two historicpictures of theearly Chipkomovement inChamoli,Uttarakhand.Credit: Anupam Mishra
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>130 Politics in India since IndependenceI don’t get it. How can you dopolitics without a party?the region without disturbing the ecological balance. The movementtook up economic issues of landless forest workers and asked forguarantees of minimum wage.Women’s active participation in the Chipko agitation was a verynovel aspect of the movement. The forest contractors of the regionusually doubled up as suppliers of alcohol to men. Women heldsustained agitations against the habit of alcoholism and broadened theagenda of the movement to cover other social issues. The movementachieved a victory when the government issued a ban on felling oftrees in the Himalayan regions for fifteen years, until the green coverwas fully restored. But more than that, the Chipko movement, whichstarted over a single issue, became a symbol of many such popularmovements emerging in different parts of the country during the 1970sand later. In this chapter we shall study some of these movements.Party based movementsPopular movements may take the form of social movements or politicalmovements and there is often an overlap between the two. Thenationalist movement, for example, was mainly a political movement.But we also know that deliberations on social and economic issuesduring the colonial period gave rise to independent social movementslike the anti-caste movement, the kisan sabhas and the trade unionmovement in early twentieth century. These movements raised issuesrelated to some underlying social conflicts.Some of these movements continued in the post-independenceperiod as well. Trade union movement had a strong presence amongindustrial workers in major cities like Mumbai, Kolkata and Kanpur.All major political parties established their own trade unions formobilising these sections of workers. Peasants in the Telanganaregion of Andhra Pradesh organised massive agitations under theleadership of Communist parties in the early years of independenceand demanded redistribution of land to cultivators. Peasants andagricultural labourers in parts of Andhra Pradesh, West Bengal,Bihar and adjoining areas continued their agitations underthe leadership of the Marxist-Leninist workers; who wereknown as the Naxalites (you have already read about theNaxalite movement in the last chapter). The peasants’and the workers’ movements mainly focussed on issues ofeconomic injustice and inequality.These movements did not participate in electionsformally. And yet they retained connections with politicalparties, as many participants in these movements, asindividuals and as organisations, were actively associatedwith parties. These links ensured a better representation ofthe demands of diverse social sections in party politics.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Rise of Popular Movements 131Non-party movementsIn the 1970s and 1980s, many sections of the society becamedisillusioned with the functioning of political parties. Failure ofthe Janata experiment and the resulting political instability werethe immediate causes. But in the long run the disillusionmentwas also about economic policies of the state. The model ofplanned development that we adopted after Independencewas based on twin goals of growth and distribution. You haveread about it in Chapter Three. In spite of the impressivegrowth in many sectors of economy in the first twenty yearsof independence, poverty and inequalities persisted on a largescale. Benefits of economic growth did not reach evenly to allsections of society. Existing social inequalities like caste andgender sharpened and <strong>com</strong>plicated the issues of poverty in manyways. There also existed a gulf between the urban-industrialsector and the rural agrarian sector. A sense of injustice anddeprivation grew among different groups.Many of the politically active groups lost faith in existingdemocratic institutions and electoral politics. They thereforechose to step outside of party politics and engage in massmobilisation for registering their protests. Students and youngpolitical activists from various sections of the society were inthe forefront in organising the marginalised sections such asDalits and Adivasis. The middle class young activists launchedservice organisations and constructive programmes amongrural poor. Because of the voluntary nature of their social work,many of these organisations came to be known as voluntaryorganisations or voluntary sector organisations.These voluntary organisations chose to remain outsideparty politics. They did not contest elections at the local orregional level nor did they support any one political party. Mostof these groups believed in politics and wanted to participate init, but not through political parties. Hence, these organisationswere called ‘non-party political formations’. They hoped thatdirect and active participation by local groups of citizens wouldbe more effective in resolving local issues than political parties.It was also hoped that direct participation by people will reformthe nature of democratic government.Such voluntary sector organisations still continue theirwork in rural and urban areas. However, their nature haschanged. Of late many of these organisations are funded byexternal agencies including international service agencies. Theideal of local initiatives is weakened as a result of availability ofexternal funds on a large scale to these organisations.Popular movements have inspired artistic production like these posters.The three posters (from Top to Bottom) are from a campaign against a CocaCola plant, agitation against a highway and Save Periyar river movement.Credit: Design and People
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>132 Politics in India since IndependenceNamdeo DhasalTurning their backs to the sun, they journeyed through centuries.Now, now we must refuse to be pilgrims of darkness.That one, our father, carrying, carrying the darkness is now bent;Now, now we must lift the burden from his back.Our blood was spilled for this glorious cityAnd what we got was the right to eat stonesNow, now we must explode the building that kisses the sky!After a thousand years we were blessed with sunflower giving fakir;Now, now, we must like sunflowers turn our faces to the sun.English translation by Jayant Karve and Eleanor Zelliot of Namdeo Dhasal’sMarathi poem in Golpitha.Dalit PanthersRead this poem by well-known Marathi poet Namdeo Dhasal. Do youknow who these ‘pilgrims of darkness’ in this poem are and who the‘sunflower-giving fakir’ was that blessed them? The pilgrims were theDalit <strong>com</strong>munities who had experienced brutal caste injustices for along time in our society and the poet is referring to Dr. Ambedkar astheir liberator. Dalit poets in Maharashtra wrote many such poemsduring the decade of seventies. These poems were expressions ofanguish that the Dalit masses continued to face even after twentyyears of independence. But they were also full of hope for the future, afuture that Dalit groups wished to shape for themselves. You are awareof Dr. Ambedkar’s vision of socio-economic change and his relentlessstruggle for a dignified future for Dalits outside the Hindu caste-basedsocial structure. It is not surprising that Dr. Ambedkar remains aniconic and inspirational figure in much of Dalit liberation writings.OriginsHas thecondition ofDalits changed muchsince that time? I keepreading about atrocitiesagainst Dalits. Did thesemovements fail? Or is itthe failure of the entiresociety?By the early nineteen seventies, the first generation Dalit graduates,especially those living in city slums began to assert themselves fromvarious platforms. Dalit Panthers, a militant organisation of the Dalityouth, was formed in Maharashtra in 1972 as a part of these assertions.In the post-Independence period, Dalit groups were mainly fightingagainst the perpetual caste based inequalities and material injusticesthat the Dalits faced in spite of constitutional guarantees of equalityand justice. Effective implementation of reservations and other suchpolicies of social justice was one of their prominent demands.You know that the Indian Constitution abolished the practice ofuntouchability. The government passed laws to that effect in the 1960sand 1970s. And yet, social discrimination and violence against the
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Rise of Popular Movements 133Credit: Anhad and NCDHRex-untouchable groups continued in variousways. Dalit settlements in villages continuedto be set apart from the main village. They weredenied access to <strong>com</strong>mon source of drinkingwater. Dalit women were dishonoured andabused and worst of all, Dalits faced collectiveatrocities over minor, symbolic issues of castepride. Legal mechanisms proved inadequateto stop the economic and social oppressionof Dalits. On the other hand, political partiessupported by the Dalits, like the RepublicanParty of India, were not successful in electoralpolitics. These parties always remainedmarginal; had to ally with some other partyin order to win elections and faced constantsplits. Therefore the Dalit Panthers resortedto mass action for assertion of Dalits’ rights.ActivitiesActivities of Dalit Panthers mostly centredaround fighting increasing atrocities onDalits in various parts of the State. As aresult of sustained agitations on the part ofDalit Panthers along with other like mindedorganisations over the issue of atrocitiesagainst Dalits, the government passed a<strong>com</strong>prehensive law in 1989 that providedfor rigorous punishment for such acts. Thelarger ideological agenda of the Pantherswas to destroy the caste system and to buildan organisation of all oppressed sectionslike the landless poor peasants and urbanindustrial workers along with Dalits.The movement provided a platform forDalit educated youth to use their creativityas a protest activity. Dalit writers protestedagainst the brutalities of the caste system intheir numerous autobiographies and otherliterary works published during this period.These works portraying the life experiencesof the most downtrodden social sections ofIndian society sent shock waves in Marathiliterary world, made literature more broadbased and representative of different socialsections and initiated contestations in thecultural realm. In the post-Emergencyperiod, Dalit Panthers got involved inelectoral <strong>com</strong>promises; it also underwentCredit: Anhad and NCDHR
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>134 Politics in India since Independencemany splits, which led to its decline. Organisations like the Backwardand Minority Communities’ Employees Federation (BAMCEF) tookover this space.Bharatiya Kisan UnionThe social discontent in Indian society since the seventies wasmanifold. Even those sections that partially benefited in the processof development had many <strong>com</strong>plaints against the state and politicalparties. Agrarian struggles of the eighties is one such example wherebetter off farmers protested against the policies of the state.Credit: Hindustan TimesGrowthA Bhartiya Kisan Union Rally in Punjab.In January 1988, around twenty thousand farmers had gathered inthe city of Meerut, Uttar Pradesh. They were protesting against thegovernment decision to increase electricity rates. The farmers campedfor about three weeks outside the district collector’s office until theirdemands were fulfilled. It was a very disciplined agitation of the farmersand all those days they received regular food supply from the nearbyvillages. The Meerut agitation was seen as a great show of rural powerof the Bharatiya Kisan Union (BKU), an organisation of farmers fromwestern Uttar Pradesh and Haryana regions. The BKU was one of theleading organisations in the farmers’ movement of the eighties.We have noted in Chapter Three that farmers of Haryana, Punjaband western Uttar Pradesh had benefited in the late 1960s from thestate policies of ‘green revolution’. Sugar and wheat became the maincash crops in the region since then. The cash crop market faced a crisisin mid-eighties due to the beginning of the process of liberalisation ofIndian economy. The BKU demanded higher government floor pricesfor sugarcane and wheat, abolition ofrestrictions on the inter-state movementof farm produce, guaranteed supply ofelectricity at reasonable rates, waivingof repayments due on loans to farmersand the provision of a governmentpension for farmers.Similar demands were made by otherfarmers’ organisations in the country.Shetkari Sanghatana of Maharashtradeclared the farmers’ movement asa war of Bharat (symbolising rural,agrarian sector) against forces of India(urban industrial sector). You havealready studied in Chapter Threethat the debate between industry and
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Rise of Popular Movements 135agriculture has been one of the prominent issues in India’s model ofdevelopment. The same debate came alive once again in the eightieswhen the agricultural sector came under threat due to economicpolicies of liberalisation.CharacteristicsActivities conducted by the BKU to pressurise the state for acceptingits demands included rallies, demonstrations, sit-ins, and jail bharo(courting imprisonment) agitations. These protests involved tens ofin western Uttar Pradesh and adjoining regions. Throughout thedecade of eighties, the BKU organised massive rallies of these farmersin many district headquarters of the State and also at the nationalcapital. Another novel aspect of these mobilisations was the use ofcaste linkages of farmers. Most of the BKU members belonged to asingle <strong>com</strong>munity. The organisation used traditional caste panchayatsof these <strong>com</strong>munities in bringing them together over economic issues.In spite of lack of any formal organisation, the BKU could sustainitself for a long time because it was based on clan networks amongits members. Funds, resources and activities of BKU were mobilisedthrough these networks.Until the early nineties, the BKU distanced itself from all politicalparties. It operated as a pressure group in politics with its strengthof sheer numbers. The organisation, along with the other farmers’organisations across States, did manage to get some of their economicdemands accepted. The farmers’ movement became one of the mostsuccessful social movements of the ’eighties in this respect. Thesuccess of the movement was an out<strong>com</strong>e of political bargainingpowers that its members possessed. The movement was active mainlyin the prosperous States of the country. Unlike most of the Indianfarmers who engage in agriculture for subsistence, members of theorganisations like theBKU grew cash cropsfor the market. Likethe BKU, farmers’organisations acrossStates recruitedtheir members from<strong>com</strong>munities thatdominated regionalelectoral politics.Shetkari Sanghatanaof Maharashtraand Rayata Sanghaof Karnataka, areprominent examplesof such organisationsof the farmers.Kisan union wants agriculture out of WTO purviewBy Our Staff CorrespondentMYSORE, FEB. 15. TheBharatiya Kisan Union haswarned of socio-economicupheavals in the country ifIndia does not bargain tokeep agriculture out of thepurview of the World TradeOrganisation (WTO).Addressing a press conferencehere today, the chiefThe Hindu, Feb 16, 2005of the union, MahendraSingh Tikait, and its nationalcoordinating <strong>com</strong>mitteeconvener, M. YudhveerSingh, warned of theimpending dangers if Indiagoes ahead and agreesto the stipulations of theWTO in the next round ofmeeting scheduled to beheld in Hong Kong in November.I havenever met anyonewho says he wishesto be a farmer. Don’twe need farmers inthe country?The leaders said a farmers’rally will be taken out inNew Delhi on March 17to pressure the Governmentto keep agricultureout of the purview of theWTO. More than five lakhfarmers from all over Indiaare expected to attend therally. Subsequently, theagitation will be intensifiedacross the country.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>136Politics in India since IndependenceCredit: HinduNational Fish Workers’ ForumDo you know that the Indian fishers constitute the second largest fishing population inthe world? Both in the eastern and the western coastal areas of our country hundredsof thousands of families, mainly belonging to the indigenous fishermen <strong>com</strong>munities,are engaged in the occupation of fishing. These fish workers’ lives were threatenedin a major way when the government permitted entry to mechanised trawlers andtechnologies like bottom trawling for large-scale harvest of fish in the Indian seas.Throughout the seventies and eighties, local fish workers’ organisations fought withthe State governments over the issues of their livelihood. Fisheries being a Statesubject, the fish workers were mostly mobilised at the regional level.With the <strong>com</strong>ing of policies of economic liberalisation in and around the mid ’eighties,these organisations were <strong>com</strong>pelled to <strong>com</strong>e together on a national level platformtheNFF or National Fishworkers’ Forum. Fish workers from Kerala took the mainresponsibility of mobilising fellow workers, including women workers from otherStates. Work of the NFF consolidated when in 1991 it fought its first legal battle withthe Union government successfully. This was about the government’s deep seafishing policy that opened up India’s waters to large <strong>com</strong>mercial vessels includingthose of the multinational fishing <strong>com</strong>panies. Throughout the nineties the NFFfought various legal and public battles with the government. It worked to protect theinterests of those who rely on fishing for subsistence rather than those who investin the sector for profit. In July 2002, NFF called for a nationwide strike to oppose themove of the government to issue licenses to foreign trawlers. The NFF joined handswith organisations all over the world for protecting ecology and for protecting livesof the fish workers.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Rise of Popular Movements 137Anti-Arrack MovementWhen the BKU was mobilising the farmers of thenorth, an altogether different kind of mobilisation inthe rural areas was taking shape in the southern Stateof Andhra Pradesh. It was a spontaneous mobilisationof women demanding a ban on the sale of alcohol intheir neighbourhoods.Liquor Mafia take to Heels as Women Hit BackThe women of villageGundlur in Kalikarimandal of Chittoor districtassembled and resolvedto put an end to the saleof arrack in their village.They conveyed thisresolution to the villagearrack vendor. Theyturned back the jeep thatbrought arrack packetsto the village. However,when the village arrackvendor informed thecontractor about this,the contractor sent him agang of men to help himresume sales. Women ofthe village were adamantand opposed this move.The contractor called inthe police but even theyhad to beat a retreat. Aweek later, women whoCredit: Zubanprevented the sale of arrackwere assaulted by arrackcontractor’s goondas withiron rods and other lethalweapons. But when thewomen resisted the assaultunitedly, the hired mafiatook to their heels. Thewomen later destroyedthree jeeps full of arrack.Credit: ZubanBased on a report in Eenadu,October 29, 1992.Stories of this kindappeared in the Telugu pressalmost daily during the twomonths of September andOctober 1992. The name ofthe village would change ineach case but the story wasthe same. Rural women inremote villages from the Stateof Andhra Pradesh fought abattle against alcoholism,against mafias and against Wethe government during this hear allperiod. These agitationsthese nicestories, but theyshaped what was known asnever tell us howthe anti-arrack movement in these ended. Didthe State.this movement putan end to drinking?Or did the men goback to it aftersome time?
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>138 Politics in India since IndependenceCredit: The HinduWomen taking outprocession in Hyderabadin 1992, protestingagainst the selling ofarrack.OriginsIn a village in the interior of Dubagunta in Nellore district of AndhraPradesh, women had enrolled in the Adult Literacy Drive on a largescale in the early nineteen nineties. It is during the discussion inthe class that women <strong>com</strong>plained of increased consumption of aof alcoholism had taken deep roots among the village people and wasruining their physical and mental health. It affected the rural economyof the region a great deal. Indebtedness grew with increasing scales ofconsumption of alcohol, men remained absent from their jobs and thecontractors of alcohol engaged in crime for securing their monopolyover the arrack trade. Women were the worst sufferers of these illeffectsof alcohol as it resulted in the collapse of the family economyand women had to bear the brunt of violence from the male familymembers, particularly the husband.LinkagesWomen in Nellore came togetherin spontaneous local initiatives toprotest against arrack and forcedclosure of the wine shop. The newsspread fast and women of about 5000villages got inspired and met togetherin meetings, passed resolutions forimposing prohibition and sent themto the District Collector. The arrackauctions in Nellore district werepostponed 17 times. This movement inNellore District slowly spread all overthe State.The slogan of the anti-arrack movement was simple — prohibition onthe sale of arrack. But this simple demand touched upon larger social,economic and political issues of the region that affected women’s life.A close nexus between crime and politics was established around thebusiness of arrack. The State government collected huge revenuesby way of taxes imposed on the sale of arrack and was therefore notwilling to impose a ban. Groups of local women tried to address these<strong>com</strong>plex issues in their agitation against arrack. They also openlydiscussed the issue of domestic violence. Their movement, for thefirst time, provided a platform to discuss private issues of domesticviolence. Thus, the anti-arrack movement also became part of thewomen’s movement.Earlier, women’s groups working on issues of domestic violence,the custom of dowry, sexual abuse at work and public places wereactive mainly among urban middle class women in different parts ofthe country. Their work led to a realisation that issues of injustice
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Rise of Popular Movements 139Credit: India Todayto women and of gender inequalitieswere <strong>com</strong>plicated in nature. Duringthe decade of the eighties women’smovement focused on issues of sexual family and outside. These groups ran acampaign against the system of dowryand demanded personal and propertylaws based on the norms of genderequality.These campaigns contributed agreat deal in increasing overall socialawareness about women’s questions.Focus of the women’s movement graduallyshifted from legal reforms to open socialconfrontations like the one we discussedabove. As a result the movement madedemands of equal representation towomen in politics during the nineties. Weknow that 73rd and 74th amendmentshave granted reservations to women inlocal level political offices. Demands forextending similar reservations in Stateand Central legislatures have also beenmade. A constitution amendment bill tothis effect has been proposed but hasnot received enough support from theParliament yet. Main opposition to thebill has <strong>com</strong>e from groups, includingsome women’s groups, who are insistingon a separate quota for Dalit and OBCwomen within the proposed women’squota in higher political offices.Let’s watch a FilmAAKROSHThe lawyer Bhaskar Kulkarniis assigned a legal aid case torepresent Bhiku Lahanya, anAdivasi who is charged withmurdering his wife. The lawyertries hard to find out the causeof the killing but the accused isdeterminedly silent and so is hisfamily. The lawyer’s perseveranceleads to an attack on him and alsoa tip off by a social worker aboutwhat had happened.But the social worker disappearsand Bhiku’s father dies. Bhiku ispermitted to attend the funeralof his father. It is here that Bhikubreaks down and the ‘Aakrosh’(screaming cry) erupts….Thishard hitting film depicts the subhumanlife of the oppressedand the uphill task facing anyintervention against dominantsocial powers.Women’s demonstration in favour of anti-dowry act.Year: 1980Director: Govind NihlaniStory: Vijay TendulkarScreenplay: Satyadev DubeyActors: Naseeruddin Shah, OmPuri, Smita Patil, Nana Patekar,Mahesh Elkunchwar
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>140 Politics in India since IndependenceNarmada Bachao AandolanSocial movements that we discussed so far raised variousissues about the model of economic development that Indiahad adopted at the time of Independence. Chipko movementbrought out the issue of ecological depletion whereasthe farmers <strong>com</strong>plained of neglect of agricultural sector.Social and material conditions of Dalits led to their massstruggles whereas the anti-arrack movement focused onthe negative fallouts of what was considered development.The issue implicit in all these movements was madeexplicit by the movements against displacement causedby huge developmental projects.Sardar Sarovar ProjectCredit: Design and PeopleA poster in supportof Narmada BachaoAndolan.An ambitious developmental project was launchedin the Narmada valley of central India in early’eighties. The project consisted of 30 big dams, 135medium sized and around 3,000 small dams to beconstructed on the Narmada and its tributariesthat flow across three states of Madhya Pradesh,Gujarat and Maharashtra. Sardar Sarovar Projectin Gujarat and the Narmada Sagar Project inMadhya Pradesh were two of the most importantand biggest, multi-purpose dams planned underthe project. Narmada Bachao Aandolan, a movement to saveNarmada, opposed the construction of these dams and questionedthe nature of ongoing developmental projects in the country.Sardar Sarovar Project is a multipurpose mega-scale dam. Itsadvocates say that it would benefit huge areas of Gujarat and thethree adjoining states in terms of availability of drinking waterand water for irrigation, generation of electricity and increase inagricultural production. Many more subsidiary benefits like effectiveflood and drought control in the region were linked to the success ofthis dam. In the process of construction of the dam 245 villages fromthese States were expected to get submerged. It required relocationof around two and a half lakh people from these villages. Issues ofrelocation and proper rehabilitation of the project-affected people werefirst raised by local activist groups. It was around 1988-89 that thelocal voluntary organisations.Debates and strugglesSince its inception the NBA linked its opposition to the SardarSarovar Project with larger issues concerning the nature of ongoingdevelopmental projects, efficacy of the model of development that
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Rise of Popular Movements 141Credit: NBAthe country followed andabout what constituted publicinterest in a democracy. Itdemanded that there should bea cost-benefit analysis of themajor developmental projects<strong>com</strong>pleted in the country sofar. The movement arguedthat larger social costs ofthe developmental projectsmust be calculated in suchan analysis. The socialcosts included forced resettlementof the project-affected people, a serious loss oftheir means of livelihood and culture and depletion of ecologicalresources.Initially the movement demanded proper and just rehabilitationof all those who were directly or indirectly affected by the project. Themovement also questioned the nature of decision-making processesthat go in the making of mega scale developmental projects. The NBAinsisted that local <strong>com</strong>munities must have a say in such decisionsand they should also have effective control over natural resourceslike water, land and forests. The movement also asked why, in ademocracy, should some people be made to sacrifice for benefitingothers. All these considerations led the NBA to shift from its initialdemand for rehabilitation to its position of total opposition to thedam.Arguments and agitations of the movement met vociferous oppositionin the States benefiting from the project, especially in Gujarat. At thesame time, the point aboutright to rehabilitation hasbeen now recognised by thegovernment and the judiciary.A <strong>com</strong>prehensive NationalRehabilitation Policy formedby the government in 2003can be seen as an achievementof the movements like theNBA. However, its demandto stop the constructionof the dam was severelycriticised by many asobstructing the processof development, denyingaccess to water and toeconomic developmentfor many. The SupremeI havenever heard ofposh colonies andcities being demolishedfor any developmentalproject. Why is it alwaysthe Adivasis and thepoor who are askedto leave theirhomes?Top:NBA leader MedhaPatkar and otheractivists in Jalsamadhi(protesting in risingwaters) in 2002.Bottom:A boat ralley organisedby NBA.Credit: NBA
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>142 Politics in India since IndependenceCourt upheld the government’s decision to go ahead with theconstruction of the dam while also instructing to ensure properrehabilitation.Narmada Bachao Aandolan continued a sustained agitation formore than twenty years. It used every available democratic strategyto put forward its demands. These included appeals to the judiciary,mobilisation of support at the international level, public ralliesin support of the movement and a revival of forms of Satyagrahato convince people about the movement’s position. However, themovement could not garner much support among the mainstreamof the Narmada Bachao Aandolan depicted a gradual process ofdisjunction between political parties and social movements in Indianpolitics. By the end of the ’nineties, however, the NBA was not alone.There emerged many local groups and movements that challenged thelogic of large scale developmental projects in their areas. Around thistime, the NBA became part of a larger alliance of people’s movementsthat are involved in struggles for similar issues in different regions ofthe country.Canwe say thatmovements arelike laboratoriesof politics? Newexperiments arecarried out here andthe successful onesare taken up byparties.Lessons from popular movementsThe history of these popular movements helps us to understandbetter the nature of democratic politics. We have seen that thesenon-party movements are neither sporadic in nature nor are these aproblem. These movements came up to rectify some problems in thefunctioning of party politics and should be seen as integral part ofour democratic politics. They represented new social groups whoseeconomic and social grievances were not redressed in the realm ofelectoral politics. Popular movements ensured effective representationof diverse groups and their demands. This reduced the possibility ofdeep social conflict and disaffection of these groups from democracy.Popular movements suggested new forms of active participation andthus broadened the idea of participation in Indian democracy.Critics of these movements often argue that collective actions likestrikes, sit-ins and rallies disrupt the functioning of the government,delay decision making and destabilise the routines of democracy.Such an argument invites a deeper question: why do these movementsresort to such assertive forms of action? We have seen in this chapterthat popular movements have raised legitimate demands of the peopleand have involved large scale participation of citizens. It shouldbe noted that the groups mobilised by these movements are poor,socially and economically disadvantaged sections of the society frommarginal social groups. The frequency and the methods used by themovements suggest that the routine functioning of democracy didnot have enough space for the voices of these social groups. That
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Rise of Popular Movements 143Popular movements have produced a wide range of litrature,often in the form of small magazines. Here is a selcetion.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>144 Politics in India since IndependenceCredit: Pankaj Pushkar“Ghotala Rathyatra”, a populartheatre form evolved by MKSS.Movement for Right to InformationThe movement for Right to Information (RTI) isone of the few recent examples of a movementthat did succeed in getting the state to acceptits major demand. The movement started in1990, when a mass based organisation calledthe Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS) inRajasthan took the initiative in demanding recordsof famine relief work and accounts of labourers.The demand was first raised in Bhim Tehsil in avery backward region of Rajasthan. The villagersasserted their right to information by asking forcopies of bills and vouchers and names of personson the muster rolls who have been paid wages onthe construction of schools, dispensaries, smalldams and <strong>com</strong>munity centres. On paper suchdevelopment projects were all <strong>com</strong>pleted, but itwas <strong>com</strong>mon knowledge of the villagers that therewas gross misappropriation of funds. In 1994 and1996, the MKSS organised Jan Sunwais or PublicHearings, where the administration was asked toexplain its stand in public.The movement had a small success when theycould force an amendment in the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act to permit thepublic to procure certified copies of documents held by the Panchayats. ThePanchayats were also required to publish on a board and in newspapers the budget,accounts, expenditure, policies and beneficiaries. In 1996 MKSS formed NationalCouncil for People’sRight to Information inDelhi to raise RTI tothe status of a nationalcampaign. Prior to that,the Consumer Educationand Research Center,the Press Council andthe Shourie <strong>com</strong>mitteehad proposed a draftRTI law. In 2002, a weakFreedom of InformationAct was legislated butnever came into force. In2004 RTI Bill was tabledand received presidentialassent in June 2005.Credit: Sudhir Tailang/UNDP and Planning Commission
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Rise of Popular Movements 145Identify at least one popular movement in your city or district in the last25 years. Collect the following information about that movement.• When did it start? How long did it last?• Who were the main leaders? Which social groups supportedthe movement?• What were the main issues or demands of the movement?• Did it succeed? What was the long term effect of the movementin your area?Let’s re-searchis perhaps why these groups turned to mass actions and mobilisationsoutside the electoral arena.This can be seen in the recent case of the new economic policies. As youwill read in Chapter Nine, there is a growing consensus among politicalparties over the implementation of these policies. It follows that thosemarginal social groups who may be adversely affected by these policiesget less and less attention from political parties as well as the media.Therefore, any effective protest against these policies involves assertiveforms of action that are taken up by the popular movements outside theframework of political parties.Movements are not only about collective assertions or only aboutrallies and protests. They involve a gradual process of <strong>com</strong>ing together ofpeople with similar problems, similar demands and similar expectations.But then movements are also about making people aware of their rightsand the expectations that they can have from democratic institutions.Social movements in India have been involved in these educative tasks fora long time and have thus contributed to expansion of democracy ratherthan causing disruptions. The struggle for the right to information is acase in point.Yet the real life impact of these movements on the nature of publicpolicies seems to be very limited. This is partly because most of thecontemporary movements focus on a single issue and represent theinterest of one section of society. Thus it be<strong>com</strong>es possible to ignoretheir reasonable demands. Democratic politics requires a broad allianceof various disadvantaged social groups. Such an alliance does not seemto be shaping under the leadership of these movements. Political partiesare required to bring together different sectional interests, but they alsoseem to be unable to do so. Parties do not seem to be taking up issues ofmarginal social groups. The movements that take up these issues operatein a very restrictive manner. The relationship between popular movementsand political parties has grown weaker over the years, creating a vacuumin politics. In the recent years, this has be<strong>com</strong>e a major problem in Indianpolitics.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>146 Politics in India since Independence1. Which of these statements are incorrectThe Chipko Movement(a) was an environmental movement to prevent cutting down oftrees.(b) raised questions of ecological and economic exploitation.(c) was a movement against alcoholism started by the women(d) demanded that local <strong>com</strong>munities should have control over theirnatural resourcesEXERCISES2. Some of the statements below are incorrect. Identify the incorrectstatements and rewrite those with necessary correction:(a) Social movements are hampering the functioning of India’sdemocracy.(b) The main strength of social movements lies in their mass baseacross social sections.(c) Social movements in India emerged because there were manyissues that political parties did not address.3. Identify the reasons which led to the Chipko Movement in U.P in early1970s. What was the impact of this movement?4. The Bharatiya Kisan Union is a leading organisation highlighting theplight of farmers. What were the issues addressed by it in the ninetiesand to what extent were they successful?5. The anti-arrack movement in Andhra Pradesh drew the attention of thecountry to some serious issues. What were these issues?6. Would you consider the anti-arrack movement as a women’s movement?Why?7. Why did the Narmada Bachao Aandolan oppose the dam projects in theNarmada Valley?8. Do movements and protests in a country strengthen democracy? Justifyyour answer with examples.9. What issues did the Dalit Panthers address?10. Read the passage and answer questions below:…., nearly all ‘new social movements’ have emerged as corrective tonew maladies – environmental degradation, violation of the status ofwomen, destruction of tribal cultures and the undermining of humanrights – none of which are in and by themselves transformative of thesocial order. They are in that way quite different from revolutionaryideologies of the past. But their weakness lies in their being so heavilyfragmented. …… …. …….a large part of the space occupied by the new
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Rise of Popular Movements 147social movements seem to be suffering from .. various characteristicswhich have prevented them from being relevant to the truly oppressedand the poor in the form of a solid unified movement of the people. Theyare too fragmented, reactive, ad hocish, providing no <strong>com</strong>prehensiveframework of basic social change. Their being anti-this or that (anti-West, anti-capitalist, anti-development, etc) does not make them anymore coherent, any more relevant to oppressed and peripheralized<strong>com</strong>munities. — RAJNI KOTHARI(a) What is the difference between new social movements andrevolutionary ideologies?(b) What according to the author are the limitations of socialmovements?(c) If social movements address specific issues, would you say thatthey are ‘fragmented’ or that they are more focused? Give reasonsfor your answer by giving examples.LET US DO IT TOGETHERTrace newspaper reports for a week and identify any three news storiesyou would classify as ‘Popular Movement’. Find out the core demandsof these movements; the methods used by them to pursue their demandsand the response of political parties to these demands.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Regional aspirationsare usually expressedin the language of theregion and addressedto the local populationor the rulers. Thisunusual poster fromUttarakhand movementappeals to all theIndian citizens in sevendifferent languagesand thus underscoresthe <strong>com</strong>patibility of theregional aspirations withnationalist sentiments.In this chapter…In the first chapter of this book we studied theprocess of ‘nation-building’ in the first decadeafter Independence. But nation-building isnot something that can be ac<strong>com</strong>plishedonce and for all times to <strong>com</strong>e. In the courseof time new challenges came up. Some of theold problems had never been fully resolved.As democratic experiment unfolded, peoplefrom different regions began to expresstheir aspirations for autonomy. Sometimesthese aspirations were expressed outsidethe framework of the Indian union. Theseinvolved long struggles and often aggressiveand armed assertions by the people.This new challenge came to the fore in the1980s, as the Janata experiment came to anend and there was some political stability atthe centre. This decade will be rememberedfor some major conflicts and accords in thevarious regions of the country, especiallyin Assam, the Punjab, Mizoram and thedevelopments in Jammu and Kashmir. Inthis chapter we study these cases so as toask some general questions.• Which factors contribute to the tensionsarising out of regional aspirations?• How has the Indian state responded tothese tensions and challenges?• What kind of difficulties are faced inbalancing democratic rights and nationalunity?• What are the lessons here for achievingunity with diversity in a democracy?
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>regionalaspirationschapter8Region and the Nation1980s may be seen as a period of rising regional aspirations forautonomy, often outside the framework of the Indian Union. Thesemovements frequently involved armed assertions by the people,their repression by the government, and a collapse of the politicaland electoral processes. It is also not surprising that most of thesestruggles were long drawn and concluded in negotiated settlementsor accords between the central government and the groups leadingthe movement for autonomy. The accords were reached after aprocess of dialogue that aimed to settle contentious issues within theconstitutional framework. Yet the journey to the accord was alwaystumultuous and often violent.Indian approachIn studying the Indian Constitution and the process of nation-buildingwe have repeatedly <strong>com</strong>e across one basic principle of the Indiandifferent regions and linguistic groups to retain their own culture. Wedecided to live a united social life without losing the distinctiveness ofthe numerous cultures that constituted it. Indian nationalism soughtto balance the principles of unity and diversity. The nation would notmean the negation of the region. In this sense the Indian approachwas very different from the one adopted in many European countrieswhere they saw cultural diversity as a threat to the nation.India adopted a democratic approach to the question of diversity.Democracy allows the political expressions of regional aspirations anddoes not look upon them as anti-national. Besides,democratic politics allows parties and groups to addressthe people on the basis of their regional identity,aspiration and specific regional problems. Thus, in thecourse of democratic politics, regional aspirations getstrengthened. At the same time, democratic politicsalso means that regional issues and problems willreceive adequate attention and ac<strong>com</strong>modation in thepolicy making process.Such an arrangement may sometimes lead totensions and problems. Sometimes, the concern fornational unity may overshadow the regional needsDoes it meanthat regionalism isnot as dangerous as<strong>com</strong>munalism? Or maybe, not dangerous atall?
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>150 Politics in India since Independenceand aspirations. At other times a concern for region alone mayblind us to the larger needs of the nation. Therefore, politicalconflicts over issues of power of the regions, their rights andtheir separate existence are <strong>com</strong>mon to nations that want torespect diversity while trying to forge and retain unity.Why does thechallenge always<strong>com</strong>e from the borderStates?Areas of tensionIn the first chapter you have seen how immediately afterIndependence our nation had to cope with many difficult issueslike Partition, displacement, integration of Princely States,reorganisation of states and so on. Many observers, both withinthe country and from outside, had predicted that India as oneunified country cannot last long. Soon after Independence,the issue of Jammu and Kashmir came up. It was not only aconflict between India and Pakistan. More than that, it was aquestion of the political aspirations of the people of Kashmirvalley. Similarly, in some parts of the north-east, there was noconsensus about being a part of India. First Nagaland and thenMizoram witnessed strong movements demanding separationfrom India. In the south, some groups from the Dravid movementbriefly toyed with the idea of a separate country.These events were followed by mass agitations in many partsfor the formation of linguistic States. Today’s Andhra Pradesh,Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Gujarat were among the regionsaffected by these agitations. In some parts of southern India,particularly Tamil Nadu, there were protests against makingHindi the official national language of the country. In the north,there were strong pro-Hindi agitations demanding that Hindi bemade the official language immediately. From the late 1950s,people speaking the Punjabi language started agitating for aseparate State for themselves. This demand was finally acceptedand the States of Punjab and Haryana were created in 1966.Later, the States of Chhatisgarh, Jharkhand and Uttaranchal(now Uttarakhand) were created. Thus the challenge of diversitywas met by redrawing the internal boundaries of the country.Yet this did not lead to resolution of all problems and forall times. In some regions, like Kashmir and Nagaland, thechallenge was so <strong>com</strong>plex that it could not be resolved in thefirst phase of nation-building. Besides, new challenges cameup in States like Punjab, Assam and Mizoram. Let us studythese cases in some detail. In this process let us also go backto some of the earlier instances of difficulties of nation building.The successes and failures in these cases are instructive notmerely for a study of our past, but also for an understandingof India’s future.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Regional Aspirations 151Jammu and KashmirYou may have heard about theviolence in Jammu and Kashmir(J&K). This has resulted inthe loss of many lives and thedisplacement of many families.The ‘Kashmir issue’ is alwaysseen as a major issue betweenIndia and Pakistan. But thepolitical situation in the Statehas many dimensions.Jammu and Kashmir<strong>com</strong>prises three social andpolitical regions: Jammu,Kashmir and Ladakh. The heartof the Kashmir region is theKashmir valley; the people areKashmiri speaking and mostlyMuslim with a small Kashmirispeaking Hindu minority.Jammu region is a mix of foothillsand plains, of Hindus, Muslimsand Sikhs and speakers of various languages. The Ladakh regionis mountainous, has very little population which is equally dividedbetween Buddhists and Muslims.The ‘Kashmir issue’ is not just a dispute between India and Pakistan.This issue has external and internal dimensions. It involves the issueof Kashmiri identity known as Kashmiriyat and the aspirations of thepeople of J&K for political autonomy.Roots of the problemBefore 1947, Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) was a Princely State. ItsHindu ruler, Hari Singh, did not want to merge with India and tried tonegotiate with India and Pakistan to have an independent status forhis state. The Pakistani leaders thought the Kashmir region ‘belonged’to Pakistan, since majority population of the State was Muslim.themselves as Kashmiris above all. The popular movement in theState, led by Sheikh Abdullah of the National Conference, wanted toget rid of the Maharaja, but was against joining Pakistan. The NationalConference was a secular organisation and had a long associationwith the Congress. Sheikh Abdullah was a personal friend of some ofthe leading nationalist leaders including Nehru.In October 1947, Pakistan sent tribal infiltrators from its sideto capture Kashmir. This forced the Maharaja to ask for Indianmilitary help. India extended the military support and drove backNote: This illustrationis not a map drawn toscale and should not betaken to be an authenticdepiction of India’sexternal boundaries.In thatcase, why don’tthey rename theState as “Jammu,Kashmir and Ladakh”?Besides, JKL makesfor an easyabbreviation!
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>152Politics in India since IndependenceE.V.RamasamiNaicker(1879-1973):Known asPeriyar (therespected);strongsupporter of atheism; famousfor his anti-caste struggleand rediscovery of Dravididentity; initially a worker ofthe Congress party; startedthe self-respect movement(1925); led the anti-Brahminmovement; worked for theJustice party and later foundedDravid Kazhagam; opposedto Hindi and domination ofnorth India; propounded thethesis that north Indians andBrahmins are Aryans.Dravidian movement‘Vadakku Vaazhkirathu; Therkku Thaeikirathu’[The north thrives even as the south decays].This popular slogan sums up the dominantsentiments of one of India’s most effectiveregional movements, the Dravidian movement,at one point of time. This was one of the firstregional movements in Indian politics. Thoughsome sections of this movement had ambitionsof creating a Dravid nation, the movement didnot take to arms. It used democratic meanslike public debates and the electoral platformto achieve its ends. This strategy paid off asthe movement acquired political power inthe State and also became influential at thenational level.The Dravidian movement led to the formation ofDravida Kazhagam [DK] under the leadershipof Tamil social reformer E.V. Ramasami‘Periyar’. The organisation strongly opposedthe Brahmins’ dominance and affirmedregional pride against the political, economicand cultural domination of the North. Initially,the Dravidian movement spoke in terms ofthe whole of south India; however lack of support from other States limited themovement to Tamil Nadu.The DK split and the political legacy of themovement was transferred to DravidaMunnetra Kazhagam(DMK). The DMK madeits entry into politicswith a three prongedagitation in 1953-54.First, it demanded therestoration of the originalname of Kallakudi railwaystation which had beenrenamed Dalmiapuram,after an industrial housefrom the North. This demandbrought out its opposition tothe North Indian economicand cultural symbols. Thesecond agitation was forAnti-Hindi agitation in Tamil Nadu, 1965Credit: The Hindu
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Regional Aspirations 153giving Tamil cultural historygreater importance inschool curricula. The thirdagitation was againstthe craft educationscheme of the Stategovernment, which italleged was linkedto the Brahmanicalsocial outlook. It alsoagitated against makingHindi the country’s official language. Thesuccess of the anti-Hindi agitation of 1965 added to theDMK’s popularity.Sustained political agitations brought the DMK to power in theAssembly elections of 1967. Since then, the Dravidian parties havedominated the politics of Tamil Nadu. Though the DMK split after thedeath of its leader, C. Annadurai, the influence of Dravidian parties inTamil politics actually increased. After the split there were two parties– the DMK and the All India Anna DMK (AIADMK) – that claimedDravidian legacy. Both these parties have dominated politics in TamilNadu for the last four decades. Since 1996, one of these parties hasbeen a part of the ruling coalition at the Centre. In the 1990s, manyother Dravidian parties have emerged. These include MarumalarchchiDravida Munnetra Kazhagam (MDMK), Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK)and Desiya Murpokku Dravida Kazhagam(DMDK). All theseparties have keptalive the issueof regional pridein the politics ofTamil Nadu. Initiallyseen as a threat toIndian nationalism,regional politicsin Tamil Nadu is agood example ofthe <strong>com</strong>patibilityof regionalism andnationalism.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>154 Politics in India since IndependenceCredit: Hindustan TimesSheikhMohammadAbdullah(1905-1982):Leader of Jammuand Kashmir;proponent ofautonomy andsecularism forJammu and Kashmir; led thepopular struggle against princelyrule; opposed to Pakistan due toits non-secular character; leaderof the National Conference; PrimeMinister of J&K immediatelyafter its accession with India in1947; dismissed and jailed byGovernment of India from 1953 to1964 and again from 1965 to 1968;became Chief Minister of the Stateafter an agreement with IndiraGandhi in 1974.the infiltrators from Kashmir valley, but only after theMaharaja had signed an ‘Instrument of Accession’ withthe Government of India. It was also agreed that once thesituation normalised, the views of the people of J&K willbe ascertained about their future. Sheikh Abdullah tookover as the Prime Minister of the State of J&K (the headof the government in the State was then called PrimeMinister) in March 1948. India agreed to maintain theautonomy of Jammu and Kashmir.External and internal disputesSince then, the politics of Jammu and Kashmir alwaysremained controversial and conflict ridden both forexternal and internal reasons. Externally, Pakistan hasalways claimed that Kashmir valley should be part ofPakistan. As we noted above, Pakistan sponsored a tribalinvasion of the State in 1947, as a consequence of whichone part of the State came under Pakistani control. Indiaclaims that this area is under illegal occupation. Pakistandescribes this area as ‘Azad Kashmir’. Ever since 1947,
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Regional Aspirations 155Kashmir has remained a major issue ofconflict between India and Pakistan.Internally, there is a dispute aboutthe status of Kashmir within the Indianunion. You know that Kashmir was givena special status by Article 370 in ourConstitution. You have studied about thespecial provisions under Articles 370 and371 last year in Indian Constitution atWork. Article 370 gives greater autonomyto Jammu and Kashmir <strong>com</strong>pared toother States of India. The State has itsown Constitution. All provisions of theIndian Constitution are not applicable tothe State. Laws passed by the Parliamentapply to J&K only if the State agrees.This special status has provoked twoopposite reactions. There is a sectionof people outside of J&K that believesthat the special status of the Stateconferred by Article 370 does not allowfull integration of the State with India.This section feels that Article 370 shouldtherefore be revoked and J&K should belike any other State in India.Another section, mostly Kashmiris,believe that the autonomy conferred byArticle 370 is not enough. A section ofKashmiris have expressed at least threemajor grievances. First, the promise thatAccession would be referred to the peopleof the State after the situation createdby tribal invasion was normalised, hasnot been fulfilled. This has generatedthe demand for a ‘Plebiscite’. Secondly,there is a feeling that the special federalstatus guaranteed by Article 370, hasbeen eroded in practice. This has led tothe demand for restoration of autonomyor ‘Greater State Autonomy’. Thirdly, itis felt that democracy which is practicedin the rest of India has not been similarlyinstitutionalised in the State of Jammuand Kashmir.Let’s watch a FilmROJATamil film depicting the travailsof Roja, a newly wed and dotingwife when her husband, Rishi, isabducted by militants. Rishi is acryptologist who is assigned dutyin Kashmir to decode the enemymessages. As love blossomsbetween the husband and thewife, the husband is kidnapped.The kidnappers demand thattheir jailed leader, be set free inexchange of Rishi.Roja’s world is shattered and sheis seen knocking at the doors ofofficials and politicians. Since thefilm has the background of Indo-Pakistan dispute, it made instantappeal. The film was dubbedin Hindi and many other Indianlanguages.Year: 1992Director: ManiratnamScreenplay: ManiratnamCast (Hindi version): Madhu,Arvind Swamy, Pankaj Kapoor,Janagaraj
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>156 Politics in India since IndependenceSo, Nehrukept his personalfriend in jail for sucha long period! How didthey feel about it?Politics since 1948After taking over as the Prime Minister, Sheikh Abdullah initiatedmajor land reforms and other policies which benefited ordinarypeople. But there was a growing difference between him and thecentral government about his position on Kashmir’s status. He wasdismissed in 1953 and kept in detention for a number of years.The leadership that succeeded him did not enjoy as much popularsupport and was able to rule the State mainly due to the support ofthe Centre. There were serious allegations of malpractices and riggingin various elections.During most of the period between 1953 and 1974, the Congressparty exercised a lot of influence on the politics of the State. Atruncated National Conference (minus Sheikh Abdullah) remained inpower with the active support of Congress for some time but later itmerged with the Congress. Thus the Congress gained direct controlover the government in the State. In the meanwhile, there were severalattempts to reach an agreement between Sheikh Abdullah and theGovernment of India. Finally, in 1974 Indira Gandhi reached anagreement with Sheikh Abdullah and he became the Chief Minister ofthe State. He revived the National Conference which was elected withCredit: The Times of India
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Regional Aspirations 157a majority in the assembly elections held in 1977.Sheikh Abdullah died in 1982 and the leadershipof the National Conference went to his son, FarooqAbdullah, who became the Chief Minister. Buthe was soon dismissed by the Governor and abreakaway faction of the National Conferencecame to power for a brief period.The dismissal of Farooq Abdullah’s governmentdue to the intervention of the Centre generated afeeling of resentment in Kashmir. The confidencethat Kashmiris had developed in the democraticprocesses after the accord between Indira Gandhiand Sheikh Abdullah, received a set-back. Thefeeling that the Centre was intervening in politicsof the State was further strengthened when theNational Conference in 1986 agreed to have anelectoral alliance with the Congress, the rulingparty in the Centre.Insurgency and afterIt was in this environment that the 1987 Assembly election tookplace. The official results showed a massive victory for the NationalMinister. But it was widely believed that the results did not reflectpopular choice, and that the entire election process was rigged. Apopular resentment had already been brewing in the State against theinefficient administration since early 1980s. This was now augmentedby the <strong>com</strong>monly prevailing feeling that democratic processes werebeing undermined at the behest of the Centre. This generated a politicalcrisis in Kashmir which became severe with the rise of insurgency.By 1989, the State had <strong>com</strong>e in the grip of a militant movementmobilised around the cause of a separate Kashmiri nation. Theinsurgents got moral, material and military support from Pakistan. Fora number of years the State was under President’s rule and effectivelyunder the control of the armed forces. Throughout the period from1990, Jammu and Kashmir experienced violence at the hands of theinsurgents and through army action. Assembly elections in the Statewere held only in 1996 in which the National Conference led by FarooqAbdullah came to power with a demand for regional autonomy forJammu and Kashmir. J&K experienced a very fair election in 2002.The National Conference failed to win a majority and was replaced byPeople’s Democratic Party (PDP) and Congress coalition government.Separatism and beyondSeparatist politics which surfaced in Kashmir from 1989 has takendifferent forms and is made up of various strands. There is one strandA cartoonist’s take on the Sheikh Abdullah be<strong>com</strong>ing the Chief Minister.“The Kashmiriswere convinced now atthe second dethronementof their elected leader [in1984] that India wouldnever permit them to rulethemselves.B. K. NehruGovernor of J&K beforethe dismissal of FarooqAbdullah’s government.Credit: Kutty“
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>158 Politics in India since IndependenceThisis all aboutgovernments, officials,leaders, terrorists… butwhat about the people inKashmir? In a democracywe must go by what theywant, shouldn’t we?Master Tara Singh(1885-1967):Prominent Sikhreligious and politicalleader; one of theearly leaders of theShiromani GurudwaraPrabandhakCommittee (SGPC);leader of the Akalimovement; supporterof the freedommovement butopposed to Congress’policy of negotiatingonly with the Muslims;after Independence,he was the seniormost advocate offormation of separatePunjab State.of separatists who want a separate Kashmiri nation, independentof India and Pakistan. Then there are groups that want Kashmir tomerge with Pakistan. Besides these, there is a third strand whichwants greater autonomy for the people of the State within theIndian union. The idea of autonomy attracts the people of Jammuand Ladakh regions in a different way. They often <strong>com</strong>plain ofneglect and backwardness. Therefore, the demand for intra-Stateautonomy is as strong as the demand for the State autonomy.The initial period of popular support to militancy has now givenway to the urge for peace. The Centre has started negotiations withvarious separatist groups. Instead of demanding a separate nation,most of the separatists in dialogue are trying to re-negotiate arelationship of the State with India.Jammu and Kashmir is one of the living examples of pluralsociety and politics. Not only are there diversities of all kind(religious, cultural, linguistic, ethnic, tribal) but there are alsodivergent political aspirations. However, despite all these diversitiesand divergence on the one hand, and the continued situation ofconflict on the other, the plural and secular culture of the Statehas remained largely intact.PunjabThe decade of 1980s also witnessed major developments in theState of Punjab. The social <strong>com</strong>position of the State changed firstwith Partition and later on after the carving out of Haryana andHimachal Pradesh. While the rest of the country was reorganisedon linguistic lines in 1950s, Punjab had to wait till 1966 for thecreation of a Punjabi speaking State. The Akali Dal, which wasformed in 1920 as the political wing of the Sikhs, had led themovement for the formation of a ‘Punjabi suba’. The Sikhs werenow a majority in the truncated State of Punjab.Political contextAfter the reorganisation, the Akalis came to power in 1967and then in 1977. On both the occasions it was a coalitiongovernment. The Akalis discovered that despite the redrawingof the boundaries, their political position remained precarious.Firstly, their government was dismissed by the Centre mid-waythrough its term. Secondly, they did not enjoy strong supportamong the Hindus. Thirdly, the Sikh <strong>com</strong>munity, like all otherreligious <strong>com</strong>munities, was internally differentiated on caste andclass 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 Akalisbegan to demand political autonomy for the region. This was
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Regional Aspirations 159reflected in a resolution passed at their conference at AnandpurSahib in 1973. The Anandpur Sahib Resolution asserted regionalautonomy and wanted to redefine centre-state relationship in thecountry. The resolution also spoke of the aspirations of the Sikhqaum (<strong>com</strong>munity or nation) and declared its goal as attaining thebolbala (dominance or hegemony) of the Sikhs. The Resolution wasa plea for strengthening federalism, but it could also be interpretedas a plea for a separate Sikh nation.The Resolution had a limited appeal among the Sikh masses. Afew years later, after the Akali government had been dismissed in1980, the Akali Dal launched a movement on the question of thedistribution of water between Punjab and its neighbouring States.A section of the religious leaders raised the question of autonomousSikh identity. The more extreme elements started advocatingsecession from India and the creation of ‘Khalistan’.Cycle of violenceSoon, the leadership of the movement passed from the moderateAkalis to the extremist elements and took the form of armedinsurgency. These militants made their headquarters inside theSikh holy shrine, the Golden Temple in Amritsar, and turned it intoan armed fortress. In June 1984, the Government of India carriedout ‘Operation Blue Star’, code name for army action in the GoldenTemple. In this operation, the Government could successfully flushout the militants, but it also damaged the historic temple anddeeply hurt the sentiments of the Sikhs. A large proportion of Sikhsin India and abroad saw the military operation as an attack ontheir faith and this gave further impetus to militant and extremistgroups.Still more tragic turn of events <strong>com</strong>plicated the Punjab problemfurther. Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated on31 October 1984 outside her residence by herbodyguards. Boththe assassins wereSikhs and wantedto take revenge forOperation Bluestar.While the entirecountry was shockedby this development,in Delhi and in manyparts of northernIndia violence brokeout against theSikh <strong>com</strong>munity.The violence againstthe Sikhs continuedSant HarchandSingh Longowal(1932-1985):Sikh politicaland religiousleader; began hispolitical careerin mid-sixties asan Akali leader;became presidentof Akali Dal in1980; reached anagreement withPrime MinisterRajiv Gandhi onkey demandsof Akalis;assassinated byunidentified Sikhyouth.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>160 Politics in India since Independence“There is alsoevidence to show that on31-10-84 either meetingswere held or persons whocould organise attackswere contacted andwere given instructionsto kill Sikhs and loottheir houses and shops.The attacks were madein a systematic mannerand without much fearof the police, almostsuggesting that they wereassured that they wouldnot be harmed while<strong>com</strong>mitting those acts oreven after.“Justice NanavatiCommission of Inquiry,Report, Vol. I, 2005for almost a week. More than twothousand Sikhs were killed in thenational capital, the area worstaffected by this violence. Hundredsof Sikhs were killed in other parts ofthe country, especially in places likeKanpur, Bokaro and Chas. Many Sikhfamilies lost their male members andthus suffered great emotional andheavy financial loss. What hurt theSikhs most was that the governmenttook a long time in restoring normalcyand that the perpetrators of this violencewere not effectively punished. Twentyyears later, speaking in the Parliamentin 2005, Prime Minister ManmohanSingh expressed regret over thesekillings and apologised to the nation forthe anti-Sikh violence.Women looking at a wall paintingdepicting Indira Gandhi’s assassination.Credit : Raghu Rai
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Regional Aspirations 161Credit : Times of IndiaRoad to peaceThe Times ofIndia broughtout a specialmid-dayedition on theday IndiraGandhi wasassassinated.After <strong>com</strong>ing to power following the election in 1984, the new PrimeMinister Rajiv Gandhi initiated a dialogue with moderate Akalileaders. In July 1985, he reached an agreement with HarchandSingh Longowal, then the President of the Akali Dal. This agreement,known as the Rajiv Gandhi - Longowal Accord or the Punjab Accord,was a step towards bringing normalcy to Punjab. It was agreed thatChandigarh would be transferred to Punjab, a separate <strong>com</strong>missionwould be appointed to resolve the border dispute between Punjaband Haryana, and a tribunal would be set up to decide the sharingof Ravi-Beas river water among Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan. Theagreement also provided for <strong>com</strong>pensation to and better treatment ofthose affected by the militancy in Punjab and the withdrawal of theapplication of Armed Forces Special Powers Act in Punjab.However, peace did not <strong>com</strong>e easily or immediately. The cycleof violence continued nearly for a decade. Militancy and counterinsurgency violence led to excesses by the police and violations ofhuman rights. Politically, it led to fragmentation of the Akali Dal. Thecentral government had to impose President’s rule in the State andthe normal electoral and political process was suspended. It was noteasy to restore the political process in the atmosphere of suspicionand violence. When elections were held in Punjab in 1992, only 24per cent of the electors tuned out to vote.Militancy was eventually eradicated by the security forces. ButThe alliance of Akali Dal (Badal) and the BJP scored a major victoryin1997, in the first normal elections in the State in the post-militancyera. The State is once again preoccupied with questions of economicdevelopment and social change. Though religious identities continueto be important for the people, politics has gradually moved backalong secular lines.“I haveno hesitation inapologising not only tothe Sikh <strong>com</strong>munitybut the whole Indiannation because whattook place in 1984 isthe negation of theconcept of nationhoodand what is enshrinedin our Constitution.So, I am not standingon any false prestige.On behalf of ourGovernment, on behalfof the entire people ofthis country, I bow myhead in shame thatsuch thing took place.But, Sir, there are ebbs,there are tides in theaffairs of nations. Thepast is with us. Wecannot rewrite thepast. But as humanbeings, we have thewillpower and we havethe ability to writebetter future for allof us.“Prime MinisterDr. Manmohan Singhintervening in RajyaSabha debate on11 August 2005
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>162 Politics in India since IndependenceNote: This illustrationis not a map drawn toscale and should not betaken to be an authenticdepiction of India’sexternal boundaries.The North-EastIn the North-East, regional aspirations reached a turning point in1980s. This region now consists of seven States, also referred to asthe ‘seven sisters’. The region has only 4 per cent of the country’spopulation but about twice as much share of its area. A small corridorof about 22 kilometers connects the region to the rest of the country.Otherwise the region shares boundaries with China, Myanmar andBangladesh and serves as India’s gateway to South East Asia.The region has witnessed a lot of change since 1947. Tripura,Manipur and Khasi Hills of Meghalaya were erstwhile Princely Stateswhich merged with India after Independence. The entire region ofNorth-East has undergone considerable political reorganisation.Nagaland State was created in 1960; Meghalaya, Manipur and Tripurain 1972 while Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram became separateStates only in 1986. The Partition of India in 1947 had reduced theNorth-East to a land locked region and affected its economy. Cut offfrom the rest of India, the region suffered neglect in developmentalterms. Its politics too remained insulated. At the same time, mostStates in this region underwent major demographic changes due toinflux of migrants from neighbouring States and countries.The isolation of the region, its <strong>com</strong>plex social character andits backwardness <strong>com</strong>pared to other parts of the country have allresulted in the <strong>com</strong>plicated set of demands from different states of theNorth-East. The vast internationalborder and weak <strong>com</strong>municationbetween the North-East and therest of India have further addedto the delicate nature of politicsthere. Three issues dominate thepolitics of North-East: demandsfor autonomy, movements forsecession, and opposition to‘outsiders’. Major initiatives on thefirst issue in the 1970s set the stagefor some dramatic developmentson the second and the third in the1980s.Demands for autonomyAt independence the entire regionexcept Manipur and Tripura<strong>com</strong>prised the State of Assam.Demands for political autonomyarose when the non-Assamesefelt that the Assam governmentwas imposing Assamese language
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Regional Aspirations 163on them. There were opposition and protest riots throughout theState. Leaders of the major tribal <strong>com</strong>munities wanted to separatefrom Assam. They formed the Eastern India Tribal Union whichlater transformed into a more <strong>com</strong>prehensive All Party Hill LeadersConference in 1960. They demanded a tribal State to be carved out ofAssam. Finally instead of one tribal State, several States got carvedout of Assam. At different points of time the Central Government hadto create Meghalaya, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh out of Assam.Tripura and Manipur were upgraded into States too.The reorganisation of the North-East was <strong>com</strong>pleted by 1972. Butthis was not the end of autonomy demands in this region. In Assam,for example, <strong>com</strong>munities like the Bodos, Karbis and Dimasas wantedseparate States. They worked for this demand by mobilising publicopinion and popular movement as well as through insurgency. Oftenthe same area was claimed by more than one <strong>com</strong>munity. It was notpossible to go on making smaller and yet smaller States. Therefore,some other provisions of our federal set up were used to satisfy theirautonomy demands while remaining in Assam. Karbis and Dimasashave been granted autonomy under District Councils while Bodoswere recently granted Autonomous Council.Secessionist movementsDemands for autonomy were easier to respond to, for these involvedusing the various provisions in the Constitution for ac<strong>com</strong>modation ofdiversities. It was much more difficult when some groups demandeda separate country, not in momentary anger but consistently as aprincipled position. The country’s leadership faced this problem for avery long time in at least two States in the North-East. A <strong>com</strong>parisonof these two cases offers us a lesson in democratic politics.After Independence, the Mizo Hills area was made an autonomousdistrict within Assam. Some Mizos believed that they were never apart of British India and therefore did not belong to the Indian union.But the movement for secession gained popular support after theAssam government failed to respond adequately to the great famineof 1959 in Mizo hills. The Mizos’ anger led to the formation of the MizoNational Front (MNF) under the leadership of Laldenga.In 1966 the MNF started an armed campaign for independence.Thus, started a two decade long battle between Mizo insurgents andthe Indian army. The MNF fought a guerilla war, got support fromPakistani government and secured shelter in the then East Pakistan.The Indian security forces countered it with a series of repressivemeasures of which the <strong>com</strong>mon people were the victims. At one pointeven Air Force was used. These measures caused more anger andalienation among the people.At the end of two decades of insurgency everyone was a loser.This is where maturity of the political leadership at both ends madeMy friendChon said thatpeople in Delhi knowmore about the map ofEurope than about theNorth-East in our country.I think she is right at leastabout my schoolmates.Laldenga(1937-1990):Founder andleader of theMizo NationalFront; turned intoa rebel after theexperience of thefamine in 1959;led an armedstruggle againstIndia for twodecades; reacheda settlementand signed anagreement withPrime MinisterRajiv Gandhi in1986; became theChief Minister ofthe newly createdState of Mizoram.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>164 Politics in India since IndependenceCredit : Times of IndiaDeclaration of cease fire by MNFa difference. Laldenga came back from exile in Pakistan and startednegotiations with the Indian government. Rajiv Gandhi steered thesenegotiations to a positive conclusion. In 1986 a peace agreementwas signed between Rajiv Gandhi and Laldenga. As per this accordMizoram was granted full-fledged statehood with special powers andthe MNF agreed to give up secessioniststruggle. Laldenga took over as theChief Minister. This accord proveda turning point in the history ofMizoram. Today, Mizoram is one ofthe most peaceful places in the regionand has taken big strides in literacyand development.The story of Nagaland is similarto Mizoram, except that it startedmuch earlier and has not yet hadsuch a happy ending. Led byAngami Zaphu Phizo, a section ofthe Nagas declared independencefrom India way back in 1951.Phizo turned down many offers ofnegotiated settlement. The NagaNational Council launched anarmed struggle for sovereigntyof Nagas. After a period ofviolent insurgency a section ofthe Nagas signed an agreementwith the Government of India
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Regional Aspirations 165but this was not acceptable to other rebels. The problem in Nagalandstill awaits a final resolution.Movements against outsidersThe large scale migration into the North-East gave rise to a specialkind of problem that pitted the ‘local’ <strong>com</strong>munities against peoplewho were seen as ‘outsiders’ or migrants. These late<strong>com</strong>ers, eitherfrom India or abroad are seen as encroachers on scarce resourceslike land and potential <strong>com</strong>petitors to employment opportunities andpolitical power. This issue has taken political and sometimes violentform in many States of the North-East.The Assam Movement from 1979 to 1985 is the best exampleof such movements against ‘outsiders’. The Assamese suspectedthat there were huge numbers of illegal Bengali Muslim settlersfrom Bangladesh. They felt that unless these foreign nationals aredetected and deported they would reduce the indigenous Assameseinto a minority. There were other economic issues too. There waswidespread poverty and unemployment in Assam despite theexistence of natural resources like oil, tea and coal. It was felt thatthese were drained out of the State without any <strong>com</strong>mensuratebenefit to the people.In 1979 the All Assam Students’ Union (AASU), a students’group not affiliated to any party, led an anti-foreigner movement.The movement was against illegal migrations, against dominationof Bengalis and other outsiders, and against faulty voters’ registerthat included the names of lakhs of immigrants. The movementdemanded that all outsiders who had entered the State after 1951should be sent back. The agitation followed many novel methods andmobilised all sections of Assamese people, drawing support acrossthe State. It also involved many tragic and violent incidents leadingto loss of property and human lives. The movement also tried toblockade the movement of trains and the supply of oil from Assamto refineries in Bihar.Eventually after six years of turmoil, the Rajiv Gandhi-ledgovernment entered into negotiations with the AASU leaders,leading to the signing of an accord in 1985. According to thisagreement those foreigners who migrated into Assam during andafter Bangladesh war and since, were to be identified and deported.With the successful <strong>com</strong>pletion of the movement, the AASU and theAsom Gana Sangram Parishad organised themselves as a regionalpolitical party called Asom Gana Parishad (AGP). It came to powerin 1985 with the promise of resolving the foreign national problemas well as to build a ‘Golden Assam’.Assam accord brought peace and changed the face of politics inAssam, but it did not solve the problem of immigration. The issue ofthe ‘outsiders’ continues to be a live issue in the politics of AssamAngami ZapuPhizo(1904-1990):Leader of themovement forindependentNagaland;president of NagaNational Council;began an armedstruggle against theIndian state; went‘underground’,stayed in Pakistanand spent the lastthree decades ofhis life in exile inUK.I’ve neverunderstood thisinsider-outsiderbusiness. It’s like thetrain <strong>com</strong>partment.Someone who gotin before otherstreats others asoutsiders.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>166 Politics in India since Independenceand many other places in theNorth-East. This problemis particularly acute, forexample, in Tripura as theoriginal inhabitants havebeen reduced to being aminority in their own land.The same feeling informsthe hostility of the localpopulation to Chakmarefugees in Mizoram andArunachal Pradesh.Credit: HT book of Cartoon Rambabu MathurTo end the news, here is a look at theactivities of terorists in the four regions...Punjab, Darjeeling, Delhi, Mizoram
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Regional Aspirations 167Sikkim’s mergerAt the time of Independence, Sikkim was a ‘protectorate’ ofIndia. It meant that while it was not a part of India, it was alsonot a fully sovereign country. Sikkim’s defence and foreignrelations were looked after by India, while the power of internaladministration was with the Chogyal, Sikkim’s monarch. Thisarrangement ran into difficulty as the Chogyal was unable to dealwith the democratic aspirations of the people. An overwhelmingmajority of Sikkim’s population was Nepali. But the Chogyal wasseen as perpetuating the rule of a small elite from the minorityLepcha-Bhutia <strong>com</strong>munity. The anti-Chogyal leaders of both the<strong>com</strong>munities sought and got support from the Government ofIndia.The first democratic elections to Sikkim assembly in 1974 wereswept by Sikkim Congress which stood for greater integrationwith India. The assembly first sought the status of ‘associatestate’ and then in April 1975 passed a resolution asking forfull integration with India. This was followed by a hurriedlyorganised referendum that put a stamp of popular approval onthe assembly’s request. The Indian Parliament accepted thisrequest immediately and Sikkim became the 22nd State ofthe Indian union. Chogyal did not accept this merger and hissupporters accused the Government of India of foul play anduse of force. Yet the merger enjoyed popular support and did notbe<strong>com</strong>e a divisive issue in Sikkim’s politics.Kazi Lhendup DorjiKhangsarpa (1904):Leader of democracymovement in Sikkim;founder of Sikkim PrajaMandal and later leader ofthe Sikkim State Congress;in 1962 founded the SikkimNational Congress; after anelectoral victory, he led themovement for integrationof Sikkim with India; afterthe integration, SikkimCongress merged with theIndian National Congress.Ac<strong>com</strong>modation and National IntegrationThese cases have shown us that even after six decades of Independence,some of the issues of national integration are not fully resolved. Wehave seen that regional aspirations ranging from demands of statehoodand economic development to autonomy and separation keep <strong>com</strong>ingup. The period since 1980 accentuated these tensions and testedthe capacity of democratic politics to ac<strong>com</strong>modate the demands ofdiverse sections of the society. What lessons can we draw from theseexamples?First and the most elementary lesson is that regional aspirationsare very much a part of democratic politics. Expression of regionalissues is not an aberration or an abnormal phenomenon. Evenin smaller countries like the United Kingdom there are regionalaspirations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Spain facessecessionist movement from the Basques and so does Sri Lanka fromthe Tamils. A large and diverse democracy like India must deal withregional aspirations on a regular basis. Nation building is an ongoingprocess.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>168 Politics in India since IndependenceRajiv Gandhi(1944-1991): PrimeMinister of Indiabetween 1984 and1989; son of IndiraGandhi; joined activepolitics after 1980;reached agreementswith militants inPunjab, Mizoram andthe students’ union inAssam; pressed for amore open economyand <strong>com</strong>putertechnology; sentIndian Armycontingent onthe requestof Sri Lankangovernment, to sortout the Simhala-Tamil conflict;assassinated bysuspected LTTEsuicide bomber.The second lesson is that the best way to respond to regionalaspirations is through democratic negotiations rather than militancy had erupted in Punjab; problems were persisting in theNorth-East; students in Assam were agitating; Kashmir valleywas on the boil. Instead of treating these as simple law and orderproblems, the Government of India reached negotiated settlementwith regional movements. This produced a reconciliation whichreduced the tensions existing in many regions. The example ofMizoram shows how political settlement can resolve the problemof separatism effectively.The third lesson is about the significance of power sharing. Itis not sufficient to have a formal democratic structure. Besidesthat, groups and parties from the region need to be given sharein power at the State level. Similarly, it is not sufficient to saythat the states or the regions have autonomy in their matters.The regions together form the nation. So, the regions must havea share in deciding the destiny of the nation. If regions are notgiven a share in the national level decision making, the feeling ofinjustice and alienation can spread.The fourth lesson is that regional imbalance in economicdevelopment contributes to the feeling of regional discrimination.Regional imbalance is a fact of India’s development experience.Naturally, the backward states or backward regions in somestates feel that their backwardness should be addressed onpriority basis and that the policies of the Indian government havecaused this imbalance. If some states remain poor and othersdevelop rapidly, it leads to regional imbalances and inter-regionalmigrations.Finally, these cases make us appreciate the farsightednessof the makers of our Constitution in dealing with questionsof diversity. The federal system adopted by India is a flexiblearrangement. While most of the states have equal powers, thereare special provisions for some states like J&K and the states inthe North-East. The Sixth Schedule of the Constitution allowsdifferent tribes <strong>com</strong>plete autonomy of preserving their practicesand customary laws. These provisions proved crucial in resolvingsome very <strong>com</strong>plex political problems in the North-East.What distinguishes India from many other countries that facesimilar challenges is that the constitutional framework in Indiais much more flexible and ac<strong>com</strong>modative. Therefore, regionalaspirations are not encouraged to espouse separatism. Thus,politics in India has succeeded in accepting regionalism as partand parcel of democratic politics.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Regional Aspirations 169Goa’s liberationAlthough the British empire in India came to an end in 1947, Portugal refused to withdraw fromthe territories of Goa, Diu and Daman which were under its colonial rule since the sixteenthcentury. During their long rule, the Portuguese suppressed the people of Goa, denied themcivil rights, and carried out forced religious conversions. After India’s Independence, the Indiangovernment tried very patiently to persuade the Portuguese government to withdraw. Therewas also a strong popular movement within Goa for freedom. They were strengthened bysocialist satyagrahis from Maharashtra. Finally, in December 1961, the Government of Indiasent the army which liberated these territories after barely two days of action. Goa, Diu andDaman became Union Territory.Another <strong>com</strong>plication arose soon. Led by the Maharashtrawadi Gomanatak Party (MGP)one section desired that Goa, as a Marathi speaking area should merge with Maharashtra.However, many Goans were keen to retain a separate Goan identity and culture, particularlythe Konkani language. They were led by the United Goan Party (UGP). In January 1967, theCentral Government held a special ‘opinion poll’ in Goa asking people to decide if they wantedto be part of Maharashtra or remain separate. This was the only time in independent Indiathat a referendum-like procedure was used to ascertain people’s wishes on a subject. Themajority voted in favour of remaining outside of Maharashtra. Thus, Goa continued as a UnionTerritory. Finally, in 1987, Goa became a State of the Indian Union.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>170 Politics in India since Independence1. Match the following.A BNature of regional aspirations States(a) Socio-religious identity i. Nagaland /Mizoramleading to statehood(b) Linguistic identity and ii. Jharkhand /Chattisgarhtensions with Centre(c) Regional imbalance leading iii. Punjabto demand for Statehood(d) Secessionist demands on iv. Tamil Naduaccount of tribal identityEXERCISES2. Regional aspirations of the people of North-East get expressedin different ways. These include movements against outsiders,movement for greater autonomy and movement for separate nationalexistence. On the map of the North-East, using different shades forthese three, show the States where these expressions are prominentlyfound.3. What were the main provisions of the Punjab accord? In what waycan they be the basis for further tensions between the Punjab and itsneighbouring States?4. Why did the Anandpur Sahib Resolution be<strong>com</strong>e controversial?5. Explain the internal divisions of the State of Jammu and Kashmir anddescribe how these lead to multiple regional aspirations in that State.6. What are the various positions on the issue of regional autonomy forKashmir? Which of these do you think are justifiable? Give reasons foryour answer.7. The Assam movement was a <strong>com</strong>bination of cultural pride and economicbackwardness. Explain.8. All regional movements need not lead to separatist demands. Explainby giving examples from this chapter.9. Regional demands from different parts of India exemplify the principleof unity with diversity. Do you agree? Give reasons.10. Read the passage and answer the questions below:One of Hazarika’s songs.. … dwells on the unity theme; the sevenstates of north-eastern India be<strong>com</strong>e seven sisters born of the samemother. …. ‘Meghalaya went own way…., Arunachal too separated
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Regional Aspirations 171and Mizoram appeared in Assam’s gateway as a groom to marryanother daughter.’ ….. …. .. The song ends with a determination tokeep the unity of the Assamese with other smaller nationalities thatare left in the present-day Assam – ‘the Karbis and the Mising brothersand sisters are our dear ones.’ — SANJIB BARUAH(a) Which unity is the poet talking about?(b) Why were the States of North-East created separately out ofthe erstwhile State of Assam?(c) Do you think that the same theme of unity could apply to all theregions of India? Why?
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Ups and downs ofvarious political partiesin the 1990s appearedto many, like thiscartoon drawn in 1990,as a roller coaster ride.Riding the roller coasterare Rajiv Gandhi, V.P. Singh, L. K. Advani,Chandrashekhar, JyotiBasu, N. T. Rama Rao,Devi Lal, P. K. Mahantaand K. Karunanidhi.In this chapter…In this last chapter we take a synoptic view of the last two decades ofpolitics in India. These developments are <strong>com</strong>plex, for various kinds offactors came together to produce unanticipated out<strong>com</strong>es in this period.The new era in politics was impossible to foresee; it is still very difficult tounderstand. These developments are also controversial, for these involvedeep conflicts and we are still too close to the events. Yet we can asksome questions central to the political change in this period.• What are the implications of the rise of coalition politics for ourdemocracy?• What is Mandalisation all about? In which ways will it change thenature of political representation?• What is the legacy of the Ramjanambhoomi movement and theAyodhya demolition for the nature of political mobilisation?• What does the rise of a new policy consensus do to the nature ofpolitical choices?The chapter does not answer these questions. It simply gives you thenecessary information and some tools so that you can ask and answerthese questions when you are through with this book. We cannot avoidasking these questions just because they are politically sensitive, for thewhole point of studying the history of politics in India since Independenceis to make sense of our present.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>recentdevelopments inindian politicsContext of the 1990sYou have read in the last chapter that Rajiv Gandhi became the PrimeMinister after the assassination of Indira Gandhi. He led the Congressto a massive victory in the Lok Sabha elections held immediatelythereafter in 1984. As the decade of the eighties came to a close, thecountry witnessed five developments that were to make a long-lastingimpact on our politics.First the most crucial development of this period was the defeatof the Congress party in the elections held in 1989. The partythat had won as many as 415 seats in the Lok Sabha in 1984was reduced to only 197 in this election. The Congress improvedits performance and came back to power soon after the mid-termelections held in 1991. But the elections of 1989 marked the end ofwhat political scientists have called the ‘Congress system’. To be sure,the Congress remained an important party and ruled the countrymore than any other party even in this period since 1989. But it lostthe kind of centrality it earlier enjoyed in the party system.chapter9I wish to findout if the Congresscan still bounce backto its old glory.Congress leader Sitaram Kesri withdrew the crutches of support from Devegowda’sUnited Front Goverment.Second development was the rise of the ‘Mandal issue’ in nationalpolitics. This followed the decision by the new National Frontgovernment in 1990, to implement the re<strong>com</strong>mendation ofthe Mandal Commission that jobs in central government should bereserved for the Other Backward Classes. This led to violent ‘anti-Mandal’ protests in different parts of the country. This dispute betweenthe supporters and opponents of OBC reservations was known as the‘Mandal issue’ and was to play an important role in shaping politicssince 1989.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>174 Politics in India since IndependenceI wish to be sureif this phenomenonwould have a long-termeffect.A reaction to Mandalisation.Third, the economic policy followed by the various governmentstook a radically different turn. This is known as the initiationof the structural adjustment programme or the new economicreforms. Started by Rajiv Gandhi, these changes first became veryvisible in 1991 and radically changed the direction that the Indianeconomy had pursued since Independence. These policies have beenwidely criticised by various movements and organisations. But thevarious governments that came to power in this period have continuedto follow these.Credit: R. K. Laxman in the Times of IndiaI am not clearif this will make adifference to politics,especially if everyone hasthe same policy.Manmohan Singh, the then Finance Minister, with Prime Minister Narsimha Rao, inthe initial phase of the ‘New Economic Policy’.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Recent Developments in Indian Politics 175Fourth, a number of events culminated in the demolition ofthe disputed structure at Ayodhya (known as Babri Masjid) inDecember 1992. This event symbolised and triggered variouschanges in the politics of the country and intensified debates aboutthe nature of Indian nationalism and secularism. These developmentsare associated with the rise of the BJP and the politics of ‘Hindutva’.I wish to check ifthis affects partiesother than the BJP aswell.A reaction to rising <strong>com</strong>munalism.Finally, the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi in May 1991 led to achange in leadership of the Congress party. He was assassinatedby a Sri Lankan Tamil linked to the LTTE when he was onan election campaign tour in Tamil Nadu. In the elections of 1991,Congress emerged as the single largest party. Following Rajiv Gandhi’sdeath, the party chose Narsimha Rao as the Prime Minister.1 May 1996 25 October 1995 20 August 2001 25 October 2004Leadership in Congress made many headlines.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>176 Politics in India since IndependenceEra of CoalitionsElections in 1989 led to the defeat of the Congress party but did notresult in a majority for any other party. Though the Congress was thelargest party in the Lok Sabha, it did not have a clear majority andtherefore, it decided to sit in the opposition. The National Front (whichitself was an alliance of Janata Dal and some other regional parties)received support from two diametrically opposite political groups: theBJP and the Left Front. On this basis, the National Front formed acoalition government, but the BJP and the Left Front did not join inthis government.The NationalFrontGovernmentlead by V. P.Singh wassupportedby the Left(representedhere by JyotiBasu) as wellas the BJP(represented byL. K. Advani)Credit: Sudhir Tailang /HT Book of CartoonsDecline of CongressThe defeat of the Congress party marked the end of Congressdominance over the Indian party system. Do you remember thediscussion in Chapter Five about the restoration of the Congresssystem? Way back in the late sixties, the dominance of the Congressparty was challenged; but the Congress under the leadership of IndiraGandhi, managed to re-establish its predominant position in politics.The nineties saw yet another challenge to the predominant position ofthe Congress. It did not, however, mean the emergence of any othersingle party to fill in its place.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Recent Developments in Indian Politics 177Thus, began an era of multi-party system. To be sure, a largenumber of political parties always contested elections in our country.Our Parliament always had representatives from several politicalparties. What happened after 1989 was the emergence of severalparties in such a way that one or two parties did not get most of thevotes or seats. This also meant that no single party secured a clearmajority of seats in any Lok Sabha election held since 1989. Thisdevelopment initiated an era of coalition governments at the Centre,in which regional parties played a crucial role in forming rulingalliances.Talk to your parents about their memories of the 1990s. Ask them whatthey felt were the most significant events of the period. Sit togetherin groups and draw a <strong>com</strong>prehensive list of the events reported byyour parents, see which events get cited most, and <strong>com</strong>pare themwith what the chapter suggests were the most significant. You canalso discuss why some events are more important for some and notfor others.Let’s re-searchAlliance politicsThe nineties also saw the emergence of powerful parties and movementsthat represented the Dalit and backward castes (Other BackwardClasses or OBC). Many of these parties represented powerful regionalassertion as well. These parties played an important role in theUnited Front government that came to power in 1996. The UnitedFront was similar to the National Front of 1989 for it included JanataDal and several regional parties. This time the BJP did not supportthe government. The United Front government was supported by theCongress. This shows how unstable the political equations were. In1989, both Left and BJP supported the National Front Governmentbecause they wanted to keep the Congress out of power. In 1996, theLeft continued to support the non-Congress government but this timethe Congress, supported it, as both the Congress and the Left wantedto keep the BJP out of power.They did not succeed for long, as the BJP continued toconsolidate its position in the elections of 1991 and 1996. Itemerged as the largest party in the 1996 election and was invitedto form the government. But most other parties were opposed toits policies and therefore, the BJP government could not securea majority in the Lok Sabha. It finally came to power by leading
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>178 Politics in India since Independencea coalition government from May 1998 to June 1999 and wasre-elected in October 1999. Atal Behari Vajpayee was the PrimeMinister during both these NDA governments and his governmentformed in 1999 <strong>com</strong>pleted its full term.Credit: Ajit Ninan/India TodayA cartoonist’s depiction of the change from one-party dominance to a multi-partyalliance system.Thus, with the elections of 1989, a long phase of coalition politicsbegan in India. Since then, there have been nine governments atthe Centre, all of which have either been coalition governments orminority governments supported by other parties, which did not jointhe government. In this new phase, any government could be formedonly with the participation or support of many regional parties. Thisapplied to the National Front in 1989, the United Front in 1996 and1997, the NDA in 1997, BJP-led coalition in 1998, NDA in 1999 andthe UPA in 2004.Let us connect this development with what we have learnt so far.The era of coalition governments may be seen as a long-term trendresulting from relatively silent changes that were taking place overthe last few decades.We saw in Chapter Two that in earlier times, it was the Congressparty itself that was a ‘coalition’ of different interests and different socialstrata and groups. This gave rise to the term ‘Congress system’.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Recent Developments in Indian Politics 179
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>180 Politics in India since IndependenceWe also saw in Chapter Five that, especially since the late 1960s,various sections had been leaving the Congress fold and formingseparate political parties of their own. We also noted the rise of manyregional parties in the period after 1977. While these developmentsweakened the Congress party, they did not enable any single party toreplace the Congress.OK, coalitionsare the logic ofdemocratic politics inour kind of society. Doesthat mean that we willalways have coalitions? Orcan the national partiesconsolidate theirpositions again?I amnot worriedabout whetherit is a singleparty or coalitiongovernment. I ammore worried aboutwhat they do. Does acoalition governmentinvolve more<strong>com</strong>promises? Canwe not have bold andimaginative policiesin a coalition?Political Rise of Other Backward ClassesOne long-term development of this period was the rise of OtherBackward Classes as a political force. You have already <strong>com</strong>e acrossthis term ‘OBC’. This refers to the administrative category ‘OtherBackward Classes’. These are <strong>com</strong>munities other than SC and STwho suffer from educational and social backwardness. These are alsoreferred to as ‘backward castes’. We have already noted in ChapterSix that the support for the Congress among many sections of the‘backward castes’ had declined. This created a space for non-Congressparties that drew more support from these <strong>com</strong>munities. You wouldrecall that the rise of these parties first found political expressionat the national level in the form of the Janata Party government in1977. Many of the constituents of the Janata Party, like the BharatiyaKranti Dal and the Samyukta Socialist Party, had a powerful ruralbase among some sections of the OBC.‘Mandal’ implementedIn the 1980s, the Janata Dal brought together a similar <strong>com</strong>binationof political groups with strong support among the OBCs. The decisionof the National Front government to implement the re<strong>com</strong>mendations
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Recent Developments in Indian Politics 181of the Mandal Commission further helped in shaping the politics of‘Other Backward Classes’. The intense national debate for and againstreservation in jobs made people from the OBC <strong>com</strong>munities moreaware of this identity. Thus, it helped those who wanted to mobilisethese groups in politics. This period saw the emergence of manyparties that sought better opportunities for OBCs in education andemployment and also raised the question of the share of power enjoyedby the OBCs. These parties claimed that since OBCs constituted alarge segment of Indian society, it was only democratic that the OBCsshould get adequate representation in administration and have theirdue share of political power.Implementation of Mandal Commission report sparked off agitations and political upheavals.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>182Politics in India since IndependenceThe Mandal CommissionReservations for the OBC were in existence in southern States since the 1960s,if not earlier. But this policy was not operative in north Indian States. It wasduring the tenure of Janata Party government in 1977-79 that the demand forreservations for backward castes in north India and at the national level wasstrongly raised. Karpoori Thakur, the then Chief Minister of Bihar, was a pioneerin this direction. His government had introduced a new policy of reservations forOBCs in Bihar. Following this, the central government appointed a Commissionin 1978 to look into and re<strong>com</strong>mend ways to improve the conditions of thebackward classes. This was the second time since Independence that thegovernment had appointed such a <strong>com</strong>mission. Therefore, this <strong>com</strong>missionwas officially known as the Second Backward Classes Commission. Popularly,the <strong>com</strong>mission is known as the Mandal Commission, after the name of itsChairperson, Bindeshwari Prasad Mandal.B.P. Mandal(1918-1982): M.P. fromBihar for 1967-1970and 1977-1979; chairedthe Second BackwardClasses Commissionthat re<strong>com</strong>mendedreservations for OtherBackward Classes; asocialist leader from Bihar;Chief Minister of Bihar forjust a month and a half in1968; joined the JanataParty in 1977.The Mandal Commission was set up toinvestigate the extent of educational and socialbackwardness among various sections of Indiansociety and re<strong>com</strong>mend ways of identifying these‘backward classes’. It was also expected to giveits re<strong>com</strong>mendations on the ways in which thisbackwardness could be ended. The Commissiongave its re<strong>com</strong>mendations in 1980. By then theJanata government had fallen. The Commissionadvised that ‘backward classes’ should be understoodto mean ‘backward castes’, since many castes,other than the Scheduled Castes, were also treatedas low in the caste hierarchy. The Commission dida survey and found that these backward castes hada very low presence in both educational institutionsand in employment in public services. It thereforere<strong>com</strong>mended reserving 27 per cent of seats ineducational institutions and government jobs forthese groups. The Mandal Commission also mademany other re<strong>com</strong>mendations, like, land reform, toimprove the conditions of the OBCs.In August 1990, the National Front governmentdecided to implement one of the re<strong>com</strong>mendationsof Mandal Commission pertaining to reservationsfor OBCs in jobs in the central government and itsundertakings. This decision sparked agitations andviolent protests in many cities of north India. Thedecision was also challenged in the Supreme Court and came to be knownas the ‘Indira Sawhney case’, after the name of one of the petitioners. InNovember 1992, the Supreme Court gave a ruling upholding the decision ofthe government. There were some differences among political parties aboutthe manner of implementation of this decision. But now the policy of reservationfor OBCs has support of all the major political parties of the country.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Recent Developments in Indian Politics 183Political falloutsThe 1980s also saw the rise of political organisation of theDalits. In 1978 the Backward and Minority Classes EmployeesFederation (BAMCEF) was formed. This organisation was not anordinary trade union of government employees. It took a strongOBC and minorities. It was out of this that the subsequent DalitShoshit Samaj Sangharsh Samiti and later the Bahujan SamajParty (BSP) emerged under the leadership of Kanshi Ram. TheBSP began as a small party supported largely by Dalit voters inPunjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh. But in 1989 and the 1991elections, it achieved a breakthrough in Uttar Pradesh. This wasthe first time in independent India that a political party supportedmainly by Dalit voters had achieved this kind of political success.In fact, the BSP, under Kanshi Ram’s leadership was envisagedas an organisation based on pragmatic politics. It derivedconfidence from the fact that the Bahujans (SC, ST, OBC andreligious minorities) constituted the majority of the population,and were a formidable political force on the strength of theirnumbers. Since then the BSP has emerged as a major politicalplayer in the State and has been in government on more than oneoccasion. Its strongest support still <strong>com</strong>es from Dalit voters, butit has expanded its support now to various other social groups. Inmany parts of India, Dalit politics and OBC politics have developedindependently and often in <strong>com</strong>petition with each other.Willthis benefitleaders of all thebackward and Dalit<strong>com</strong>munities? Or will thegains be monopolised by somepowerful castes and familieswithin these groups?The real pointis not the leaders butthe people! Will this leadto better policies and effectiveimplementation for the reallydeprived people? Or will it remainjust a political game?Kanshi Ram(1934-2006):Proponentof Bahujanempowerment andfounder of BahujanSamaj Party (BSP);left his centralgovernment job forsocial and politicalwork; founder ofBAMCEF, DS-4and finally theBSP in 1984;astute politicalstrategist, heregarded politicalpower as masterkey to attainingsocial equality;credited with Dalitresurgence in northIndian States.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>184 Politics in India since IndependenceCommunalism, Secularism, DemocracyThe other long-term development during this period was the rise ofpolitics based on religious identity, leading to a debate about secularismand democracy. We noted in Chapter Six that in the aftermath of theEmergency, the Bharatiya Jana Sangh had merged into the JanataParty. After the fall of the Janata Party and its break-up, the supportersof erstwhile Jana Sangh formed the Bharatiya Janata Party ( BJP) in1980. Initially, the BJP adopted a broader political platform than thatof the Jana Sangh. It embraced ‘Gandhian Socialism’ as its ideology.But it did not get much success in the elections held in 1980 and 1984.After 1986, the party began to emphasise the Hindu nationalist elementin its ideology. The BJP pursued the politics of ‘Hindutva’ and adoptedthe strategy of mobilising the Hindus.Hindutva literally means ‘Hinduness’ and was defined by itsoriginator, V. D. Savarkar, as the basis of Indian (in his languagealso Hindu) nationhood. It basically meant that to be members of theIndian nation, everyone must not only accept India as their ‘fatherland’(pitrubhu) but also as their holy land (punyabhu). Believers of ‘Hindutva’argue that a strong nation can be built only on the basis of a strong andunited national culture. They also believe that in the case of India theHindu culture alone can provide this base.Two developments around 1986 became central to the politics ofBJP as a ‘Hindutva’ party. The first was the Shah Bano case in 1985.In this case a 62-year old divorced Muslim woman, had filed a case formaintenance from her former husband. The Supreme Court ruled inher favour. The orthodox Muslims saw the Supreme Court’s order as aninterference in Muslim Personal Law. On the demand of some Muslimleaders, the government passed the Muslim Women (Protection of Rightson Divorce) Act, 1986 that nullified the Supreme Court’s judgment. Thisaction of the government was opposed by many women’s organisations,many Muslim groups and most of the intellectuals. The BJP criticisedthis action of the Congress government as an unnecessary concessionand ‘appeasement’ of the minority <strong>com</strong>munity.Ayodhya disputeThe second development was the order by the Faizabad district courtin February 1986. The court ordered that the Babri Masjid premisesbe unlocked so that Hindus could offer prayers at the site which theyconsidered as a temple. A dispute had been going on for many decadesover the mosque known as Babri Masjid at Ayodhya. The Babri Masjid Mughal emperor Babur’s General. Some Hindus believe that it was builtafter demolishing a temple for Lord Rama in what is believed to be hisbirthplace. The dispute took the form of a court case and has continuedfor many decades. In the late 1940s the mosque was locked up as thematter was with the court.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Recent Developments in Indian Politics 185As soon as the locks of the Babri Masjid were opened, mobilisationbegan on both sides. Many Hindu and Muslim organisations triedto mobilise their <strong>com</strong>munities on this question. Suddenly this localdispute became a major national question and led to <strong>com</strong>munaltensions. The BJP made this issue its major electoral and politicalplank. Along with many other organisations like the RSS and theVishva Hindu Parishad (VHP), it convened a series of symbolicand mobilisational programmes. This large scale mobilisation led tosurcharged atmosphere and many instances of <strong>com</strong>munal violence.The BJP, in order to generate public support, took out a massive marchcalled the Rathyatra from Somnath in Gujarat to Ayodhya in UP.Demolition and afterIn December 1992, the organisations supporting the construction ofthe temple had organised a Karseva, meaning voluntary service by thedevotees, for building the Ram temple. The situation had be<strong>com</strong>e tenseall over the country and especially at Ayodhya. The Supreme Court hadordered the State government to take care that the disputed site willnot be endangered. However, thousands of people gathered from allover the country at Ayodhya on 6 December 1992 and demolishedthe mosque. This news led to clashes between the Hindus andMuslims in many parts of the country. The violence in Mumbaierupted again in January 1993 and continuedfor over two weeks.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>186 Politics in India since IndependenceCredit (Clockwise):The Pioneer, The Pioneerand The Statesman.The events at Ayodhyaled to a series of other developments.The State government, with the BJP as the rulingparty, was dismissed by the Centre. Along with that, other Stateswhere the BJP was in power, were also put under President’s rule.A case against the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh was registeredin the Supreme Court for contempt of court since he had givenan undertaking that the disputed structure will be protected. TheBJP officially expressed regret over the happenings at Ayodhya.The central government appointed a <strong>com</strong>mission to investigate intothe circumstances leading to the demolition of the mosque. Mostpolitical parties condemned the demolition and declared that thiswas against the principles of secularism. This led to a serious debateover secularism and posed the kind of questions our country facedimmediately after Pthe majority religious <strong>com</strong>munity dominated over the minorities?Or would India continue to offer equal protection of law and equalcitizenship rights to all Indians irrespective of their religion?During this time, there has also been a debate about usingreligious sentiments for electoral purposes. India’s democraticpolitics is based on the premise that all religious <strong>com</strong>munities enjoythe freedom that they may join any party and that there will not be
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Recent Developments in Indian Politics 187<strong>com</strong>munity-based political parties. This democratic atmosphere of<strong>com</strong>munal amity has faced many challenges since 1984. As we haveread in Chapter Eight, this happened in 1984 in the form of anti-Sikhriots. In February-March 2002, similar violence broke out against theMuslims in Gujarat. Such violence against the minority <strong>com</strong>munityand violence between two <strong>com</strong>munities is a threat to democracy.“These proceedings have the echo of the disastrous event that ended in the demolition on the 6th December,1992 of the disputed structure of ‘Ram Janam Bhoomi-Babri Masjid’ in Ayodhya. Thousands of innocent lives ofcitizens were lost, extensive damage to property caused and more than all a damage to the image of this great landas one fostering great traditions of tolerance, faith, brotherhood amongst the various <strong>com</strong>munities inhabiting theland was impaired in the international scene.It is unhappy that a leader of a political party and the Chief Minister has to be convicted of an offence of Contemptof Court. But it has to be done to uphold the majesty of law. We convict him of the offence of contempt of Court.Since the contempt raises larger issues which affect the very foundation of the secular fabric of our nation, we alsosentence him to a token imprisonment of one day.Chief Justice Venkatachaliah and Justice G.N. Ray of Supreme CourtObservations in a judgement on the failure of the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh to keep the promise that hehad made before the National Integration Council to protect the ‘Ram Janam Bhumi-Babri Masjid’ structure,Mohd. Aslam v. Union of India, 24 October 1994“Anti-Muslim riots in GujaratIn February-March 2002, large-scaleviolence against Muslims took place inGujarat. The immediate provocation for thisviolence was an incident that took place ata station called Godhra. A bogey of a trainthat was returning from Ayodhya and wasfull of Karsevaks was set on fire. Fiftysevenpeople died in that fire. Suspectingthe hand of the Muslims in setting fireto the bogey, large-scale violence againstMuslims began in many parts of Gujaratfrom the next day. This violence continuedfor almost a whole month. Nearly 1100persons, mostly Muslims, were killedin this violence. The National HumanRights Commission criticised the Gujaratgovernment’s role in failing to controlviolence, provide relief to the victims andprosecute the perpetrators of this violence.The Election Commission of India orderedthe assembly elections to be postponed.As in the case of anti-Sikh riots of 1984,
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>188 Politics in India since Independence“On 27 February1947,at the very first meeting ofthe Advisory Committee ofthe Constituent Assembly onFundamental Rights, Minoritiesand Tribals and Excluded Areas,Sardar Patel asserted:“It is for us to prove that it is abogus claim, a false claim, andthat nobody can be more interestedthan us, in India, in the protectionof our minorities. Our mission isto satisfy every one of them. Letus prove we can rule ourselvesand we have no ambition to ruleothers”.“The tragic events in Gujarat,starting with the Godhra incidentand continuing with the violencethat rocked the state for over twomonths, have greatly saddenedthe nation. There is no doubt, inthe opinion of the Commission,that there was a <strong>com</strong>prehensivefailure on the part of the stategovernment to control thepersistent violation of the rightsto life, liberty, equality and dignityof the people of the state. It is,of course, essential to heal thewounds and to look to a futureof peace and harmony. But thepursuit of these high objectivesmust be based on justice andupholding of the values of theconstitution of the republic andthe laws of the land.“National Human RightsCommission, Annual Report2001-2002.Canwe ensurethat thosewho plan, executeand support suchmassacres are broughtto the book? Or atleast punishedpolitically?Is this goingto continue to be ourfuture? Is there no way wecan make all this a matter ofpast?
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Recent Developments in Indian Politics 189Gujarat riots show that the governmental machinery also be<strong>com</strong>essusceptible to sectarian passions. Instances, like in Gujarat, alertus to the dangers involved in using religious sentiments for politicalpurposes. This poses a threat to democratic politics.Emergence of a new consensusThe period after 1989 is seen sometimes as the period of decline ofCongress and rise of BJP. If you want to understand the <strong>com</strong>plexnature of political <strong>com</strong>petition in this period, you have to <strong>com</strong>pare theelectoral performances of the Congress and the BJP.“My one messageto the Chief Minister [ofGujarat] is that he shouldfollow ‘raj dharma’. Aruler should not make anydiscrimination between hissubjects on the basis of caste,creed and religion.“Prime Minister Atal BehariVajpayee, Ahmedabad,4 April 2002.Now let us try to understand the meaning of the information given inthe figure. <strong>com</strong>petition in this period. What is the difference between
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>190 Politics in India since Independencetheir electoral fortunes if you <strong>com</strong>pare these with the 1984elections? the two parties, Congress and the BJP do not add up to more thanfifty per cent. The seats won by them too, do not add up to morethan half the seats in the Lok Sabha. So, where did the rest of thevotes and seats go?parties. Which among the parties that exist today are neither partof Congress family of parties nor part of Janata family of parties?the coalition led by BJP and the coalition led by the Congress.Can you list the parties that are not part of any of these twocoalitions?Lok Sabha Elections 2004In the elections of 2004, the Congress party too entered into coalitionsin a big way. The NDA was defeated and a new coalition governmentled by the Congress, known as the United Progressive Alliance came topower. This government received support from the Left Front parties.The elections of 2004 also witnessed the partial revival of Congressparty. It could increase its seats for the first time since 1991. However,in the 2004 elections, there was a negligible difference between thevotes polled by the Congress and its allies and the BJP and its allies.Thus, the party system has now changed almost dramatically fromwhat it was till the seventies.The political processes that are unfolding around us after thethat are in coalition with the Congress; parties that are in alliancewith the BJP; Left Front parties; and other parties who are not part ofany of these three. The situation suggests that political <strong>com</strong>petitionwill be multi-cornered. By implication the situation also assumes adivergence of political ideologies.Growing consensusHowever, on many crucial issues, a broad agreement has emergedamong most parties. In the midst of severe <strong>com</strong>petition and manyconflicts, a consensus appears to have emerged among most parties.This consensus consists of four elements.Fare opposed to the new economic policies, most political partiesare in support of the new economic policies. Most parties believethat these policies would lead the country to prosperity and a statusof economic power in the world.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Recent Developments in Indian Politics 191Note: This illustration is not a map drawn to scale and should not be taken to be an authenticdepiction of India’s external boundaries.Second, acceptance of the political and social claims of the social and political claims of the backward castes need to beaccepted. As a result, all political parties now support reservationof seats for the ‘backward classes’ in education and employment.Political parties are also willing to ensure that the OBCs get adequateshare of power.
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>192 Politics in India since IndependenceThatis mydemocracysurvive?Third, acceptance of the role of State level parties in governancelevel parties is fast be<strong>com</strong>ing less important. As we saw in thischapter, State level parties are sharing power at the national leveland have played a central role in the country’s politics of last twentyyears or so.Fourth, emphasis on pragmatic considerations rather thanideological positions and political alliances without ideologicalparties from ideological differences to power sharing arrangements.Thus, most parties of the NDA did not agree with the ‘Hindutva’ideology of the BJP. Yet, they came together to form a governmentand remained in power for a full term.All these are momentous changes and are going to shape politicsin the near future. We started this study of politics in India with thediscussion of how the Congress emerged as a dominant party. Fromthat situation, we have now arrived at a more <strong>com</strong>petitive politics,but politics that is based on a certain implicit agreement amongthe main political actors. Thus, even as political parties act withinthe sphere of this consenus, popular movements and organisationsare simultaneously identifying new forms, visions and pathways ofdevelopment. Issues like poverty, displacement, minimum wages,livelihood and social security are being put on the political agendaby peoples’ movements, reminding the state of its responsibility.Similarly, issues of justice and democracy are being voiced by thepeople in terms of class, caste, gender and regions. We cannot predictthe future of democracy. All we know is that democratic politics ishere to stay in India and that it will unfold through a continuouschurning of some of the factors mentioned in this chapter.1990: Will V. P.Singh survive?1990: WillShekharsurvive?1990: Will Raosurvive?1990: WillGowda survive?Or may bethe real questionoffer meaningfulpolitical choices?1990: WillGujral survive?1990: Will Vajpayeesurvive?2000:Will Indiasurvive?Credit: Ravishankar/India Today
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Recent Developments in Indian Politics 1931. Unscramble a bunch of disarranged press clipping file of Unni-Munni…and arrange the file chronologically.(a) Mandal Re<strong>com</strong>mendations and Anti Reservation Stir(b) Formation of the Janata Dal(c) The demolition of Babri Masjid(d) Assassination of Indira Gandhi(e) The formation of NDA government(f) Godhra incident and its fallout(g) Formation of the UPA government2. Match the following.(a) Politics of Consensus i. Shah Bano case(b) Caste based parties ii. Rise of OBCs(c) Personal Law and iii. Coalition governmentGender Justice(d) Growing strength ofiv. Agreement on EconomicRegional partiespolicies3. State the main issues in Indian politics in the period after 1989. Whatdifferent configurations of political parties these differences lead to?4. “In the new era of coalition politics, political parties are not aligning or realigningon the basis of ideology.” What arguments would you put forwardto support or oppose this statement?5. Trace the emergence of BJP as a significant force in post-Emergencypolitics.6. In spite of the decline of Congress dominance the Congress party continuesto influence politics in the country. Do you agree? Give reasons.EXERCISES7. Many people think that a two-party system is required for successfuldemocracy. Drawing from India’s experience of last twenty years, writean essay on what advantages the present party system in India has.8. Read the passage and answer the questions below:Party politics in India has confronted numerous challenges. Not onlyhas the Congress system destroyed itself, but the fragmentation of theCongress coalition has triggered a new emphasis on self-representationwhich raises questions about the party system and its capacity toac<strong>com</strong>modate diverse interests, …. . An important test facing the polity isto evolve a party system or political parties that can effectively articulateand aggregate a variety of interests. — ZOYA HASAN
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>194 Politics in India since Independence(a)(b)(c)Write a short note on what the author calls challenges of theparty system in the light of what you have read in this chapter.Given an example from this chapter of the lack of ac<strong>com</strong>odationand aggrigation mentioned in this passage.Why is it necessary for parties to ac<strong>com</strong>modate and aggregatevariety of interests?
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Notes
<strong>www</strong>.<strong>GOALias</strong>.<strong>blogspot</strong>.<strong>com</strong>Notes
Change language