Wednesday, July 17, 2019

Linguistic Reorganization of States and the Changing Federal Structure of India

India is a partnership of solid grounds and these every last(predicate)eges ar branchd on the hindquarters of major(ip) languages. The Indian leading right afterwards license make it clear that they cute a federal official secernate. A federation is the existence of treble polity. It is a theme of regions or evinces joined in spite of appearance a Central authorities. It is a dual form of g everywherenment where the powers argon ramifyd amongst the centre and the offer disposals.They each enjoy considerable indep support backence within their sphere of Governance so as to avoid whatever clangour amid the 2. However the basis on which this federal structure would be apply was non certain. Right after independence, Jawaharlal Nehru, foreign the ecesis of decl bes set in motion on lingual lines. According to him this would lead to the emergence of sub-nationalities that would occasion agitation and then to the rising of self-reliant states.Thus, init i tot each(prenominal)yy after Independence the unpolished was dual-lane into states sounding to 3 classes word form A states, which were make up of the spring British Provinces, such as Uttar Pradesh, watt Bengal and Bihar course of instruction B states, which were do up of former large(p) golden states and large amalgamated unions of states, such as Hyderabad, Mysore and Rajasthan and Class C states, which were those make aside of little princely states, such as Bhopal, Delhi and Vindhya Pradesh. The Dar bang, which was nonice up to deal with the question of lingual states, expressed itself a formst the lingual shakeup of states.In November 1948, the JVP committal was set up to review the Dar Commission report because of the insistence from the delegates of Andhra, Kerela, Karnataka and Maharashtra. This report as thoroughly was against the lingual reorganization of states. In 1953 adjacent(a) the fast unto death by Potti Sriramulu in support of Telugu utter Andhra the congress was force to change its position and Andhra was created in October 1953. In response to the mounting flood of superfluous conducts the State reorganization commission was accomplished on December 1953.The report of SRC give in 1955 created 14 reinvigorated states from the alert 27. In 1956 the act was enacted. This was the starting line shape of lingual reorganization, new(prenominal)(a) phases followed during the period from 1960 to 1980 when these 14 states were further subdivided into parvenue states. As the display suggests setting up states on linguistic lines was non the aim of the leaders kind of they were forced to. They wanted the states to be economic each(prenominal)y and administratively viable in all case they wanted to avoid further communalism which cleverness be ca apply due to the states being reorganized on linguistic basis.Integration and democratic participation were the historic aims of the leaders then. There was an at tempt for inclusive agglomeration of diverse identities and groups finished inter-segmental and inter fragmentary adjustments and changes. After Independence the task of putt the sunrise(prenominal) nation in to workingss set out, dealing with the lions of refugees, of coping with the conflict in Kashmir, of integrating and consolidating into governable units the myriad of princely states and framing constitutions became the nigh urgent items on the Governments agenda. Unity and guarantor were the slogans of the day. (J. E. Schwartzberg) However this constitution proved inadequate when it encountered the large currents of era of mass government activity.. The divulge of Linguistic states in token became the focus of popular agitation (A. S. Narang). withal minorities com unsheatheded of discrimination by the local government. It was as well stated that the semi policy-making parties repeatedly apply cultural minorities anxieties and desires. The Dar Commission dis carded the linguistic reorganization on the basis that a state can non be created having lone(prenominal) 70-80% of the macrocosm speaking the same language.The commission verbalize that it could non be cal direct a linguistic group solely or else a considerable majority. It was however a coarse this big majority lines that the 14 states were carved out in 1956, thus eliminating the categories of states as class A, B and C. only when it gave ride to reinvigorated capers, for example the SRC did not, at that conviction, divide the provinces of Bombay and Punjab because they bring no neat linguistic lines for division. A offprint state of the Punjabi Suba was demanded based on the spectral differences ming take with the Hindus and Sikhs.Nehru did not agree with this idea scarcely or else express that additional flying fields should be compound into the certify state of Punjab to dilute the Sikh presence and marginalize the separatists within the province. This wa s primarily because Punjab was a knell state and any tampering with the slews interests might jeopardise the security of the surface scope. But as yettually the in the altogether state of Punjab was formed in 1966 when the Sikh leadership aban maked the religious criteria and demanded the formation of Punjab on ethno linguistic lines.Along with the forward-looking state of Punjab other 2 new states formed Haryana- which consisted main(prenominal)ly of the Hindi speaking belt of erstwhile Punjab and Himachal Pradesh- which were mainly the hammock districts. The province of Bombay was alike bifurcated amongst the Gujarati and Marathi speakers in 1960. The first federal renewing thus discarded the design of administrative divisions that Nehru had favoured for independent India, a design which did not recognize the need for congruence among pagan identity and territorial reserve homelands.The first reorganization did precisely the opposite it honorfully ac k in a flas h leadged India as a federation of social subunits. In a sense, Nehru and India had give-up the ghosted to the ethnic fault line conceded by the telling crusade during the struggle for national independence. (Maya Chadda). This was not the end of all conundrums. The new switch off arose in the north-easterly states. The pairing-eastern states were the close dribbleed of all the states in India.The British followed a policy of seclusion that had left(p) the region restless(prenominal) and suspicious of all governments that had want to go over the due northeast from New Delhi. Along with that the co-occur of the Naga and Mizo tribes across Burma and the Indo-Chinese b target, closely linked the divulge of ethnic autonomy to national security and territorial ascendancy. If India was to keep these atomic number 18as downstairs her control it was necessary to appease the people animate in those areas. And the appropriate answer was found in separating the state of As sam into carve up tribal provinces.The Nehru government created the ordinal Schedule to the governing body which divided the Northeast into three all-encompassing areas with particular(prenominal) arrangements of power sharing for each. This scroll created district councils which had power over local economy, culture, religion and customs. Eventually with the North-Eastern Area (reorganization) suffice 1971, at that pip came in to existence close to(prenominal) states from the undivided state of Assam. Tripura and Manipur which were primitively break out of Assam became gist Territories in 1956 and then fail states in 1972.Meghalaya became an main(a) state within Assam and then a fully fledged state in 1972. Mizoram was declared a concretion Territory. While there were agitations in Tripura and Manipur for reprint statehood wish the Nagas, Meghalaya and Arunachal Pradesh never demanded a crystalise statehood. These states were simply created to stop China from cl aiming these border territories. The state of Mizoram was created in 1987 after signing of accord between the Mizo National preceding and the Govt of India after 20 years of insurgence by the predominate Mizo tribe.But this did not end the paradox as umteen linguistic minorities matte up that in the states with a dominant language they were outcasts, they were being neglected by the dominant groups and this was leading to the deterioration of not lonesome(prenominal) their culture only withal their languages. This identity crisis among the various nonage groups is solace leading to upheaval in varied parts of the country. Many linguistic minorities are asking for branch states citing the example of the north-eastern states. LINGO-ETHNIC UPHEAVALS IN DIFFERENT STATESEven though the states of India require been from epoch to time reorganized on the basis of linguistics, some problem incessantly suckms to crop up regarding one area or other. At present upheavals are practically regarding ethnic reorganization rather than linguistics alone. Here is an account of 2 such actions. THE NAGALIM PROBLEM- One of Indias oldest act arm conflict is between the Govt of India and the Nagas. The armed conflict has persisted with two interruptions one in 1960 and another when an accord was sign in 1975. The pact of 1975 was signed between the Govt of India and some unbidden leaders of Nagaland.This was interpreted as a sellout and thus gave fire to the al expeditious heated up issue. The conflict was that of the presentation of Nagalim, an desegregated land for the Nagas which not only included the present state of Nagaland save in any case those districts of Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh and Assam containing Nagas as majority. According to J. P. Hutton (1922), Nagaland (Nagalim) has continuously been a sovereign nation occupying a compact area of 120,000 sq. km of the Patkai simulacrum in between the longitude 93E and 97E and the latitude 23. 5N and 28. 3N.It lies at the tri-junction of China, India and Burma. Nagalim, without the knowledge and consent of the Naga people, was apportioned between India and Burma after their respective declaration of independence. The part, which India illegally claims, is subdivided and located beneath four different administrative units, viz. , Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur and Nagaland states. The eastern part, which Burma unlawfully claims, is pose under two administrative units, viz. , Kachin State and Sagaing Division (formerly known as the Naga Hills).Nagalim, however, transcends all these arbitrary demarcations of boundary. The integration of the Naga areas of Burma with the areas in India was not the Naga political agenda, but bringing the Nagas of India together has been an issue that unites nearly Nagas. Even the Nagaland Assembly has passed a function of resolutions expressing support for that cause. The policy of non-interference by the British was followed by area expedit ions that were resorted to in order to quell opposition of the hummock communities to the colonial extension of commercial activities in and through their land.Eventually the hill communities were brought under different territorial administrative authorities and hence the fancy of territorial politics was thus introduced, nonetheless unknown to the hill communities. The so-called administrative convenience, do some of the ethnic groups plump under one or another political unit. In the process the Naga areas were brought under four administrative units Assam, Manipur, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh. The contiguous Zeliangrong Nagas were divided among the states of Assam (North Cachar Hill district), Nagaland and Manipur.Such whimsical administrative divisions and mental hospital of territorial politics shattered all ethnic aspirations (U. A. Shimray) and gave rise to ethnic stirrings The problem with the Nagas are that they are not a linguistic companionship, they speak as legion(predicate) as 30 different languages which belong to several distinct forms of Tibeto-Burmese language group. The languages mouth by some tribes are unknown by the other Naga tribes. Thus, whether or not some of these groups should be included in to the Nagas is a very big concern. The other major problem is with that of Manipur.The intent of creating a single political unit out of all Naga-inhabited areas puts the Naga check of nationhood in striking course with a parallel Manipuri project. Indeed, the issue is so sensitive that until June 2001 the Indian government left the territorial scope of the 1997 ceasefire purposely vague. Eventually, things came to a head when the NSCNIM insisted on a clarification, and in June 2001 a joint description confirmed that the ceasefire was between the Government of India and the NSCNIM as two entities without territorial limits.The announcement led to a veritable political ebullition in Manipur and significant expression of anim osity in the other moved(p) states. seeking guarantees from the Indian government that Manipurs territorial integrity would not be sacrificed on the altar of Naga peace has now do a major theme in Manipuri politics (Sanjib Baruah). The United Naga Council (UNC) has issued a relation that calls for a peaceful parting between the Nagas and the Meiteis. But theUNC statement exit only aggravate the tense situation in Manipur because it threatens a break-up of the tiny state, a prognosis no Meitei will be hustling to get into. The Centre on the other go on has made it absolutely clear that Manipurs territorial integrity or Assams and Arunachal Pradeshs cannot be neutralized to influence the Naga problem. It is therefor time for the NSCN and other responsible Naga courteous society groups to state if they are willing to accept a solution without a Greater Nagalim that will think up slice up of existing states like Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh.If they accept then an ext ensive autonomy out-of-doorize that give Nagas a chance for socio-cultural integration without changing of state boundaries, should be prepared by the state govts to give something like supra-state body a chance. That may mean that the Nagas will control the areas of Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh that they inhabit in a majority but that is a price the three states may prolong to pay for finally solving the Naga problem that threatens to engulf the whole region.THE GHORKHALAND PROBLEM- Another big problem for India is that of the Gorkhaland issue. The word Gorkha is historically associated with the Kashas of North India. But it was after the establishment of the Gorkha Dynasty in1559 by Drabya Shah, the word began to be referred to the inhabitants of the Gorkha ruled region. Daniel Wright (1877) says, The Gorkhas or the Gorkhalis so named from the former capital of their country are the dominant race. They formerly busy the district around the town of Gorkha, which is s ome 40 miles from the city of Katmandu.They are said to be of Rajput descent and to have been compulsive out of Rajputana on the occasion of an onset by Musulmans. They first settled close Palpa, having passed through the Kumaon hills, and gradually ext endpoint their dominion to Gorkha. The Gorkhas were originally Indo-Aryan in character but after the Anglo-Nepalese war the British place them as distinctly mongoloid in character. With time the term Gorkhas have been apply interchangeably with the Nepalis. The struggle for Gorkhaland, it seems, started since 1907 by the leaders of the hill people for a go bad administrative setup.In 1917 there was a mistakable demand to create a start out territory from wolfram Bengal. Similar arise followed in 1919, 1920, 1930. In 1943 the every last(predicate) India Gorkha league was formed which wanted the govt to recognize the gorkhas as a fragment nonage. Then in 1949 they demanded a break state for themselves. But these were all disregarded by the authorities. The main agitation for the Gorkhaland started in the 1980s under the leadership of Subhas Ghising belonging to the Gorkha National firing Front. The GNLF-led agitation for the creation of a separate state of Gorkhaland happened at a time when the Communist Party of India, Marxist CPI(M) was firmly in power in the state of West Bengal. Given the CPI(M)s pro-poor ideology, leading(p) achievements in land reforms, rural growing, and company empowerment in West Bengal, and prior public commitments to grant autonomy to the Gorkhas, it was strike that sentiments for a separate Gorkhaland grew s teadily in the Darjeeling district (Rajat Ganguly). at once the agitation started it left many people dead, many hundreds homeless, there was throwion to the local economy due to strikes etcetera More importantly it drove a deep chasm between the majority Bengalis and the minority Gorkhas in West Bengal. All this led to an agreement between the GNLF and Gov t of West Bengal & Govt of India in August 1988 that aa autonomous Darjeeling Gorkha Hill Council will be established, but in re warp the GNLF would have to drop the demand of separate state. However this hardly changed the situation of the hill district.There were hardly any development project carried out by the DGHC and the people felt cheated. The DGHC blamed the West Bengal Government for not providing the necessary bills and for trying to undermine the DGHCs image and authority in Darjeeling. At times, Subhas Ghising, the GNLF P lodge innt and Chairperson of the DGHC, even talked of resurrecting the Gorkhaland agitation, which were dismissed by his political opponents as merely pressure tactics to stop up more(prenominal) than funds from Kolkata. Ghisings political opponents in turn accused him and the DGHC of being corrupt and wasteful and operating in an undemocratic manner.The struggle for Gorkhaland accepted a new boost 2008 when a new troupe called the Gorkha Janamu kti Morcha under the leadership of Bimal Gurung. Once a trusted aide of Subhas Ghising, Bimal Gurung immovable to break away(predicate) from the GNLF and started a new agitation for Ghorkhaland. A new party was formed called the Gorkha Janamukti Morcha and on April 2011 they signed a pact with the central and state govts forming the Gorkhaland territorial reserve Administration, a semi- autonomous body that would flip-flop the DGHC.The reasons why there is a demand for Gorkhaland are 1. Although states in post-independent India were reorganized on the basis of ethno-linguistic criteria, the policy failed to eradicate the problem of entrapped minorities as many states within the Indian federation continued to include off-base minority ethnic groups that were linguistically and culturally different from and politically and economically grade to the majority ethnolinguistic communities that wielded power in the states.Many of these entrapped minority groups had a long history of d emands for political autonomy or separate political identity and had come to believe that the States Reorganization Commission would consider their case with sympathy. When that did not happen, many of these minority ethnic groups felt frustrated and aggrieved. In the years following the states reorganization, these iso lated and peripheral minority ethnic groups came to resent their endemic beggary and underdevelop status and became convinced that they were being deprived ( intentionally or otherwise) by the majority communities that controlled the state governments.The only way out of this poverty and underdevelopment, these groups felt, was by creating their own state and entree into a direct relationship with the Indian central government for assistance and commission for instance, Gorkha leaders in Darjeeling cited the example of Sikkim, which had three of Darjeelings tribe but get windd almost ten times more central grant than Darjeeling. (Rajat Ganguly) 2.The isolation and under development has been aggravated by the point that that their homeland has been infiltrated by members of the dominant community and other ethnic groups thereby creating an exploitive cultural division of labour in which valued roles and resources are allocated mostly to the outsiders. The ethnic communities have also failed to successfully repugn with the dominant outsiders for valued resources, such as access to fostering, health care and employment. 3. The agitators argued that the West Bengal state government have deliberately kept Darjeeling isolated and neglected.They also claimed that much money was spend on the development of Siliguri but very little of these funds went to the hills for the development of Darjeeling, Kalimpong, and other hill towns. For eg- there is calm acute shortage of irrigate and the supply is not enough to allow for to the demands of the growing population as well as the tourists. The conditions of the roads are appall and there is a huge deficit of electricityor problems of voltage. 4. The area had no facilities for higher education, the North Bengal University being the only University in that region.But it was set(p) in Siliguri and not in the hills. 5. This neglect of the region has led to the surrender in the tourism industry, which has further led to the decline in employment among the local people. 6. It was also claimed that the Govt offices set up in the area did not benefit the locals as most of the posts went to the outsiders from the plains. Along with that the lack in education facilities did not facilitate the locals in acquire the jobs. 7. West Bengal government based in furtheraway Kolkata appeared to be remote, opaque and incomprehensible to the local people of Darjeeling.The CPI(M)s episodic response to the various grievances and problems of the people in Darjeeling also strengthened the local detection that the party neglected the hills in privilege of the plains. BODOLAND ISSUE, ASSAM The Bodos belong to the Tibeto-Burman speaking Indo-Mongoloid ethnic group and are the most commonly found in the Brahmaputra plains of Assam. The term Bodo is also used to denote a large military issue of tribes-the Garos of Meghalaya, Tippera of Tripura, and Boro Kachari, Koch, Rabha, Lalung, Dimasa, Hajong, Chutia, Deuri, and Moran of Assam and other parts of the Northeast. M. N. Brahma, The Bodo Kacharis of Assam-A legal brief Introduction, Bulletin of the tribal Research bring in Gauhati, 11 1983, p. 52. ). These tribes ruled over Assam until about 1825 but at present they are found in the Federal areas of the Brahmaputra Valley, mainly in Kokrajhar, Darrang, Goalpara, and Kamrup districts. Theirs is a patriarchal society and they mostly follow Bathauism, which is a form of animism, as religion. They mainly nice Jhooming cultivation but off late have ventured into settled agriculture.Industrial activities are miss but there may be some silkworm culture done by the Bodos . The demand for a separate Bodoland started during the British rule. It took a major turn after independence and mostly after the formation of Nagaland and other north-eastern states. The bodos formed Plains Tribal Council of Assam (PTCA) in 1967 and demanded the formation of a separate state for the Bodos and all other plain tribes of Assam. The All Bodo Students Union also formed in the same year as a part of PTCA. But with time they all lost hopes upon the party and started working separately.In the 1980s Assam saw another style by the All Assam Student Union (AASU) and Assam Gana Parishad (AGP) about the eviction of foreign nationals from the state. The ABSU worked on base the AASU with the hope that their cause would receive a boost. The movement ended with the formation of the new AGP Govt. But the ABSU soon realized that the posture of the new Govt about towards the Bodos is no less different from the preceding Govts. Thus, in 1987 they renew their struggle for Bodoland, a creation of full-fledged state for the Bodos.The two districts of Kokrajhar and Darrang became the nerve centres of the struggle. initially the ABSU had a list of 92 demands but later it mainly centred around 3 main agendas (1) formation of a separate state named Bodoland on the north coast of the Brahmaputra (2) establishment of autonomous district councils in the tribal dominant areas on the southeast bank of the Brahmaputra (3) incorporation of the Bodo Kacharis of Karbi Anglong in the Sixth Schedule of the Indian Constitution The main reasons for this agitation were 1.The Bodos constituted 49% of Assams population in 1947 but by the 1971 nose count they had dropped to 29% due to internal and external migration. The migrant labours from Bangladesh affected the population of the Bodos. They got most of the jobs while the Bodos were left jobless. 2. Another major problem was that the Bodos mostly depended on agriculture for sustenance. The land that belonged to them have been mostly interpreted away form them by the migrants or for the establishment of tea plantations pushing them away into the woodwind instruments and thus reducing to poverty and indebtness.The new regulation by the Assam Govt reduced a rule forbidding any settlements inside the forest. All of these led to the entrapment of the tribals and was a major cause for the agitation. 3. In 1950s the Govt of Assam had made a rule forbidding the impaction of the migrant population in to the special area demarcated for the Scheduled Tribes and Castes. But this was not strictly maintained leading to the damage of land among the tribal and a life-threatening competition for the scarce resources. 4. In sixties the Assam Govt. declared the Assamese language to be the official language of the state.The effort to impose the language drove a dumbfound between the two communities. 5. The effort by the Assam Govt to assimilate the different identities and not integrate them led to the fear among the tribals about loosing their identity. This to a large extent led to the agitations. 6. further 10% of jobs are reserved for plains tribals, including the Bodos. On top of that the requirement of knowledge of the Assamese language to obtain a government job in the state was a further barrier to employment opportunities for Bodo youth. . The emanation achieved by hill tribes in inhabit Meghalaya, Mizoram, and Nagaland and the relative advances made by the two hill districts of Assam-Karbi Anglong and North-Cachar Hills with their autonomous district councils made the Bodos and other plains tribes feel that, despite their bigger population, they have been ignored. 8. The creation of separate tribal states for populations smaller than the Bodo in the 1960s and 70s made the demand of the plains tribals seem legitimate. 9.The crafty draft of the constituencies merging the tribal and non-tribal majorities makes it impossible for the tribals to gain a seat in the state legislators. 10. L astly, the unrestrained suppression by the law enforcement agencies against Bodo agitators in 1987 fuelled the movement further. The ABSU resorted mostly to bandhs and closures, disrupting the quetch and road links of Assam and the rest of the north region. The agitation also saw extortion and harassment of nontribals, non-Bodo school teachers, clerks, foresters posted in tribal areas, and tea plantation managers and employees.But the most unspoiled development of the movement was the formation of the get up insurgent Bodo Security military force (Bd. SF), comprising a hard core of the Bodo youth habituated to violent tactics to achieve the goal of Bodoland. The prolonged movement seriously affected the economy of Assam and the entire northeastern region. The chief(prenominal) ministers of the six northeastern states that were affected by the frequent bandhs urged the movement leaders, the Assam government, and the center to move quickly toward a settlement.Political parties of all hues unequivocally condemned the violence perpetrated by some of the protestors and the incident police reprisals. The AGP government came down to a heavy(p) extent on the agitators, ruling out any need to form a separate Bodoland state to ameliorate the grievances of the plains tribes. It also sought to drive a wedge between the Bodos and other tribes by avowing the need to nurse the interests of all tribals in the state, the Bodo- dominant movement notwithstanding. (Sudhir JacobGeorge) The agitations continued well into 1993 with the Bodo Security Force gaining more power and at places marginalising the ABSU and other parties. There were also a add of failed attempts to talk by the Assam Govt and the central Govt. Efforts to solve the Bodo issue continued involving a great deal of ground work and behind-the-scenes effort on the part of floor Affairs Minister Rajesh Pilot, the Bodo Congress (I) legislator, Jaman Singh Brahma, and an envoy extraordinary of the prime minister. These efforts ultimately resulted in the Bodo Accord, signed at Guwahati on February 20, 1993, formally ending the prolonged Bodoland agitation.The main aspects of the Bodo accord was 1. intromission of a Bodoland Autonomous Council (BAC). This is only an autonomous hill council and not a separate state. 2. The legislative power of the BAC is to be vested in a 40-member council, out of which 35 members are to be elected on the basis of adult franchise and the remaining fivesome are to be nominated by the governor of Assam. 3. executive director powers are to reside in a smaller Bodoland Executive Council (BEC), similar to a state-level cabinet. 4. There would also be elections for the BAC. 5.The territory of the BAC included the areas between the Sankosh River and Mazbat Pasnoi River, which roughly mark the western and eastern boundaries on the north bank respectively. The more complex southern border of the BAC, lots impinging on nontribal areas, appears to have been left unspecified. Comprising 2,750 villages and several small towns, the BAC includes 25 tea plantations. 6. A benchmark for the inclusion of areas in the BAC was that Bodos should constitute 50% or more of a villages population. However, villages with lesser Bodo populations have also been included to ensure territorial continuity. . The BAC is to be organized with 38 departments, mostly same to the subjects earmarked for autonomous district councils, such as education, forests, health, land, and revenue. But law and order was retained by the state, along with the right to dismiss the elected council under exceptional circumstances. (Legislative Branch, Assam deport No. 11, 1993) 8. The Accord also provided for the leaders of the movement to ensure the surrender of all arms, explosives, and ammunition by their followers, and bring those who had departed underground back into the national ainstream. All the rights of nontribals living in the BAC area were to be protected, and t heir language, culture, and land kept intact. Memorandum of Settlement (Bodo Accord). So was the agitation really worth it? The 7 or 8 year long agitation, did it end in the fulfilment of the demands? An epitome of the Bodo accord reveals that the Bodos did not get all that it wanted. Firstly, they did not get the state degage as they would have wanted. Secondly, it was not a tripartite deal rather a bipartite deal with the state and the BAC.Thirdly, it was not a political accord as it was only an administrative institution. The law and order was to be maintained by the state government. Fourthly, the leaders had to accept only half the area of they actually demanded. It includes 2750 villages only rather than the 4635 initially demanded. Also the area of the BAC is still not defined. All these shortcomings have led to discontent among the Bodo people. The situation is very dangerous and an outburst again is not far away. Infact a strife did take place in mid 2012 in Assam again. So we see that the there was unnecessary killing of people. The people of different religions and communities were rendered homeless. They had to live in refugee camps. The strife led to the remainder of the valuable forest and wildlife resources because the Bodo security force took shelter in the Manas wildlife reserve. The area was exploited indiscriminately by the security forces. But it seems that the lines of agreement did not do justice to the struggle. All the passing game of lives seemed to be in vain the destruction of forests were in vain because they did not receive even half of their want.CONCLUSION We see that even if the state had earlier yielded to the linguistic reorganization of states in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s they are opposing now. The increasing opposition by the Central and State governments in the modern times has shown that the country is not ready for further divisions. Where they have initially back up the tribal groups in the border areas for the fo rmation of states they are not supporting it now for further division. Thus, the Bodoland, Gorkhaland and Nagalim movement did not hold good. All these movements failed and statehood was not granted.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.