A Gorkhaland State:
How Justified?
*Saumitra Mohan
At
a time when the Indian economy is in a tailspin with the rupee maintaining a
sustained southward penchant to Newtonian forces, it is really quite disturbing
and disconcerting to see some dormant statehood movements rearing their heads
in the wake of the recent decision to form a new Telangana state through
division of the extant state of Andhra Pradesh. Such demands inter alia include
demands for a separate state of Gorkhaland (comprising Darjeeling and adjoining
areas of Terai and Dooars), Kamtapur (comprising areas of Assam and North
Bengal) and Greater Cochbehar (comprising most of North Bengal) in West Bengal,
Bodoland and Karbi-Anglong in Assam, Harit Pradesh, Bundelkhand and Purvanchal in
Uttar Pradesh, Mithilanchal in Bihar, Vidarbha in Maharashtra and Saurashtra in
Gujarat.
It
is really quite painful to know that even after 67 years of our hard-earned
independence, we are yet to complete our State-building process, not to speak
of the nation-building process. One feels that all these statehood movements of different genres are nothing but
morbid expressions of these incomplete processes. Having seen, at least, one
such movement at close quarters and having followed many others quite closely,
one can definitely say that most of these statehood movements are more of a
reflection of the selfish and egotistic desires, steeped in self
aggrandisement, of the local elites of different hues than being embedded in
the genuine aspirations of the local inhabitants. Most of the times, such
movements are inspired by the politics and politicking of one or the other kind
rather than being rooted in the real desire for a holistic development and good
governance of the area concerned.
In
West Bengal, the demand for a separate state of Gorkhaland is claimed to be as
old as 107 years. The proponents of this movement advance many reasons in
support of their demands. They argue
that Darjeeling geographically was never a part of West Bengal, that Darjeeling
has been hugely exploited and underdeveloped by West Bengal and that Gorkhas
being a different ethnic community, they
deserve a separate state of their own.
Then, the Gorkhaland supporters also demand the 398 contiguous and
non-contiguous mouzas (read villages) of adjoining Terai and Dooars
areas of Siliguri and Jalpaiguri to be added to the proposed Gorkhaland state,
mostly against the will and desire of the people therein. The argument
proffered for such inclusion is the inhabitance of a substantive Nepali
speaking population in these areas though there is already a counter movement
by majority of the population in these areas against any such thinking or
attempted move.
Now,
if we dissect and discuss all these reasons along with some other more important
associated factors of statecraft dispassionately, the demand for a separate
Gorkhaland state definitely does not
appear more than emotional outpourings of the people of Darjeeling. If we
really consider the historicity of Darjeeling as a ground for formation of a
separate state of Gorkhaland, then all the hard work done by our founding
fathers led by the redoubtable Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel of unifying those 565
motley princely states into a united Indian federal state might come apart. The
real idea behind consolidating all these small princely provinces into a larger
unit to be part of a larger federal entity called India was to put together a
unified and a more cohesive country. However, once we allow this logic of
historicity, India should actually be having hundreds of states today with West
Bengal itself being broken into many. Such regressive revisionism would be a
very negative development and might unravel our composite co-existence as a
modern nation-state.
Now,
let's consider some other issues involved here. The hill areas of Darjeeling
(Gorkhaland movement is primarily confined to the three hill sub-divisions of
Darjeeling district of West Bengal
district namely Darjeeling Sadar, Kurseong and Kalimpong) has a population of around 9.75 lakhs of
which around seven lakhs people can roughly fall into the category of Gorkhas,
the remaining being Lepchas, Bhutias, Marwaris, Biharis, Tibetans and other
non-Gorkha communities. So, the proponents of this movement are actually
seeking a separate state for these seven lakh people, the others perforce being
part of the movement with no choice being available to them. In fact, the
Lepchas have already been expressly complaining of being shortchanged by the Gorkhaland champions. The term
'Gorkhaland' itself is not a hold-all concept and ergo, does not do justice to
the identities of the various other ethnic communities as residing in
Darjeeling.
So,
if a recognition were to be given to a statehood demand for a people of seven
to nine lakh population, then how many constituent states or provinces should
we be having in this country of over 125 crore people. If our mighty Gorkhas
were to be given a separate state, then how many states are we actually
bargaining for in a country where we have over 5000 ethnic communities and
castes with around 850 languages. If this demand is recognized, then what
justification shall we have to deny a state for the Yadavas, the Jats, the
Rajputs, the Santhals, the Meenas and
what not, with most of them having a sizable population, in fact, many of them
being much more numerous than the Gorkhas.
Again,
the demand for ceding the contiguous mouzas or areas with sizable Gorkha
population attacks the very concept of pluralism which is the hallmark of
our salad-bowl or Ganga-Jamuni
co-existential culture. The Gorkhaland proponents desire that all the nearby
areas with substantial Nepali speaking population also be given to the proposed
Gorkhaland state. Even if we ignore this most important factor of our societal
pluralism being compromised as a result of such a parochial demand for a while, still such a demand is
very difficult to be accepted for some practical
considerations.
First,
this is plainly wrong to assume that all the Nepali speaking people are ipso
facto Gorkhas or want Gorkhaland. Secondly, most of the demanded areas have a
predominant majority of the people other than the Nepali speaking population.
Thirdly, even some of the areas where the Nepali speaking people are in majority are mostly
enclaves within another district or other community dominated areas. Annexing
these areas to the extant Gorkhaland Territorial Administration (GTA) or later
to the demanded Gorkhaland state is administratively not a feasible proposition
as also observed by the Justice Shyamal Sen Commission which was constituted to
explore the feasibility of such inclusions. Also, the Nepali speaking
population in most of these mouzas
is estimated to be not more than 20-30 per cent meaning thereby that by ceding
such areas to the new entity, a great disservice shall be done to the desire of
the other communities who are in majority in those mouzas. In fact,
there is already a strong counter movement against this desired merger with the
proposed Gorkhaland state.
Besides,
once we recognize such a demand, a Pandora's Box shall be opened. It not only
jeopardizes the plural character of our society by artificially trying to make
it monochromatic, but also opens the flood-gates for similar such demands from
vested interests in different parts of
the country. After all, every state has some population of one or the other
ethno-linguistic groups which can suitably be demanded by other states. By this
logic, all the Bengali speaking areas of Assam should come to West Bengal or
the Hindi speaking or tribal dominated areas of latter should go to Bihar or Jharkhand respectively. By the same logic,
the entire Hindi heartland of North India should become a huge monolithic
state. The resultant outcome of acceding to such a demand may indeed be very
chaotic. It is a very archaic and regressive thinking which ought not to be
given any further encouragement.
Again,
the alleged historical exploitation of Darjeeling by the state of West Bengal
does not hold because Darjeeling has the best of social development indicators
in the country and is definitely among the best in West Bengal. As per the West
Bengal Human Development Report, 2004 prepared under the supervision of the
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), Darjeeling was ranked 2nd
and 4th in terms of the gender and human development indices respectively, among all the districts of West Bengal.
If underdevelopment and
exploitation of Darjeeling can be cited as a justification for statehood, then
Darjeeling ought to fall much behind in the queue for promotion to statehood as
there are many more regions in the country which would have the first claim to
statehood. Be it the income, literacy
rates, educational attainments, nutritional status, percentage of BPL (below
poverty line) population, longevity, infant and maternal mortality, overall
health status of people and infrastructures, Darjeeling fares much better
compared to most parts of the country or the different districts of the state
of West Bengal. Be it noted that Darjeeling has for the past more than two and
a half decades been under such autonomous local self-government bodies as
Darjeeling Gorkha Hill Council (DGHC) and GTA.
But
still, if the statehood proponents believe that Darjeeling needs more
development, then statehood is definitely no solution. We are all well
conversant with the experiences of some of the already existing states whose
development record is just pathetic, to say the least. Jharkhand became a state
against the same background of alleged underdevelopment, but even after a lapse
of more than a decade's time, it is still much far off from realization of the
developmental goals it set out to achieve way back in the year 2000. Jharkhand
today fares very badly among the newly created states and has only become worse
since its creation. The fact remains that the proponents of any such statehood
movements including those of Gorkhaland should
actually be talking of good governance and good administration than
anything else. A statehood trapping sans the desideratum of good governance
will achieve nothing but zilch.
Then,
given its size, both demographically and geographically, Darjeeling already
receives a disproportionate per capita share of resources compared to many
other parts of the country. And a substantial share of these resources come
from the state of West Bengal meaning thereby that West Bengal has
traditionally been providing disproportionate resources to Darjeeling, often at
the expense of the more backward and deserving areas of the state. The extant
Gorkhaland Territorial Administration's revenue from all sources is assumed to
be not more than three crores annually. If we also include the revenue received
by the state government from such sources as land, excise, transport,
professional and sales tax, then at most the figure is likely to go up to around 30 crore rupees. At the most and at
its best, tapping all the obtaining and potential sources of revenue, it can
barely go up to 100 crore rupees annually in the most ideal of situations. In
the shorter run, however, a 50 crore rupee annual revenue appears a more
practical figure.
Moreover,
GTA reportedly has a non-plan expenditure of around 600 crores at the moment
which with plan and schematic expenses would come to around 1400 crores. If at
all Darjeeling comprising the three hill sub-divisions becomes the cherished
Gorkhaland state, the combined plan and non-plan expenditure is likely to shoot
up to, at least, 2000 crores factoring the expenses for general and police
administration, not to speak of various attendant expenses which comes with the
formation of a new state. So, if a region which has the best of developmental
indicators and which has the revenue generation potential of only around 50
crore rupees, why should they be getting a disproportionate 2000 crores at the
expense of the more deserving parts of the countries, particularly those areas
of Chhattisgarh, West Bengal, Orissa, Bihar, Jharkhand, Maharashtra, Andhra
Pradesh and other states reeling under extremist menace.
The
Gorkhaland proponents should show that they are in a position to bear all the
non-plan and, at least, a portion of the plan expenses of the proposed
Gorkhaland state before demanding the same. If such a new entity expects to be
spoon-fed through the Central government's doles, would not there be similar
justified demands from different parts
of the country. And if we allow this for one particular region, can we
deny the same to others. We ought to understand that an eponymous Gorkhaland
state is not just about emotional wishes of our countrymen in Darjeeling, but
has much far-reaching insidious implications for the rest of the country as the
same would only spur more and more such demands as already seems to be
happening in the wake of the announced creation of a new state of Telangana.
The
Gorkhaland proponents often compare their status with the neighbouring Sikkim
or the smaller states of North East when they claim statehood or
disproportionate share of the developmental pie. We are all aware of the
historical reasons and circumstances which led to the statehood or special
status of these north-eastern states. If Telangana has today been proposed to be a
state, it is because of its
geographical compactness, a suitable
demographic size, administrative
viability and self-sufficient resources.
But the same does not apply
to many such demands elsewhere including Gorkhaland. If all of us keep
demanding statehood on such grounds,
then our state-building process shall never come to an end, not to speak of the
nation-building process. The Gorkhaland proponents should actually aim at
making the GTA work successfully, which came into being through a tripartite
agreement between the Central Government, the Government of West Bengal and the
dominant hill party i.e. Gorkha Jan Mukti Morcha (GJMM) on 18th July, 2011. GTA
is an autonomous and empowered body which has just completed one year of its
existence and can be suitably harnessed to fulfill the developmental
aspirations of the local people, if development is what they are looking for.
One
really feels that our policy makers should really do some serious thinking to
consider all such statehood demands dispassionately once and for all through
the instrumentality of a second States Reorganization Commission or any other
such mechanism as might be practically possible. Any such decision by the said
Commission should be predicated on some logical pre-determined criteria
including geographical contiguity and compactness, administrative cohesiveness
and financial viability. If we continue dithering on such issues and allow them
to be decided by the narrow forces of politics and politicking, then we are
certainly doomed as a modern nation-state with the entrenched vested interests
slowly but surely eating into the vitals of our beloved country.
________________________________________________
*(The views expressed by the author
in this article are completely personal and do not reflect those of the
Government. )
