Territories beyond geography: an alternative approach to the demands for new states in India (original) (raw)
Related papers
Regional and Federal Studies, 2018
This article examines the politics of State formation in India by taking up the case of Telangana. Drawing from the emerging literature on the politics of recognition and territorial accommodation in multinational federations, I argue that territorial accommodation of Telangana was made possible by the convergence of strategic interests and role of multiple actors to recognize Telangana’s distinctive territorial identity and accommodate its Statehood demand when an opportune ‘political opportunity structure’ emerged in the late 1990s till 2014. It extends the insights of ‘actor-centred’ institutionalism and contributes to an emerging literature which emphasizes the ‘multi-centred origins’ of border change and State formation in India in particular, and in multinational federations in general. By underscoring State formation as a complex process, this article cautions against a simplistic reading of the politics of State formation in India as an act of one-upmanship whereby the Centre can unilaterally make or break State borders.
Redrawing the Body Politic: Federalism, Regionalism and the Creation of New States in India
Commonwealth & Comparative Politics, 2002
The Nuffield Foundation provided funding for a fieldtrip to India in February-April 1999 which allowed me to extend and update previous research, and which is very gratefully acknowledged. My thanks also to Stuart Corbridge and Glyn Williams for their comments and criticisms. The arguments in this paper have been presented at seminars and conferences in Jawaharlal Nehru University, Edinburgh, SOAS and Bristol, and in each place I received very helpful feedback. Thanks also to the anonymous reviewers. The usual disclaimers apply. Word count: 9294 2 Redrawing the Body Politic: Federalism, Regionalism and the Creation of New States in India. In 2000 the federal map of India was redrawn to create three new States, signifying a significant shift in the attitude of many of India's major political parties towards territorial reorganisation. This paper suggests that a new era in the political economy of Indiaassociated with economic liberalisation; the rise of the Hindu Right; the regionalisation of politics; and the emergence of a coalitional system of government in New Delhiprovides a new 'field of opportunities' for regions demanding State recognition. The paper concludes that, in this matter, the major political parties are primarily by expediency and opportunism rather than, as is claimed, by an evaluation of the democratic and developmental potential of smaller States.
Territorial (sub-state) autonomy in India
Territorial autonomy in India, 2017
The paper provides for an overview on territorial autonomy in India, focusing on the autonomy scheme regulated by the Fifth and Sixth Schedule of the Constitution. Almost all of those territorial autonomies are located in India's Northeast (Assam, Mizoram, Meghalaya, Tripura) and also one in West Bengal, while the only ADCs existing in the former state of Jammu and Kashmir (Ladakh and Kargil) have shifted to the status of a Union Territory in 2019. The paper also discusses the issue whether India's sub-state autonomies are "new ethnic spaces" and which could be useful amendments of the Sixth Schedule autonomy.
Reorganisation of States in India: Exploring the Factors
The paper focuses on the emerging demands for new states in India. In the process an effort has been made to find out the reasons that led to the rise of such demands. Among all the factors explored, the most significant has been the lack of balanced development of the regions. The paper also focuses on the response of the union and the state governments towards the new states demands. The later part of the paper undertakes the study of two sets of demands-for and against reorganisation of states.
2017
Before giving an overview on territorial autonomy in the Indian Union, it is useful to recall a suitable definition of territorial (in Europe also “regional”) autonomy as used in the present essay: “Autonomy can be defined as a means of internal power-sharing aimed to preserve the cultural and ethnic variety, while respecting the unity of a state. It consists in permanently transferring a certain amount of powers suitable for those purposes to a certain territory, giving its population the possibility of selfgovernment, and leaving only residual responsibilities to the central state.” As a general rule, autonomous territories possess no international character, and are not treated as states for the purposes of international law. Thus, autonomy can be defined as a means of internal powersharing aimed at preserving cultural and ethnic variety, while respecting the unity of a state. According to another scholar, who has been a consultant for autonomy issues around the world including N...
Indian federalism at the crossroads: Limits of the territorial management of ethnic conflicts
India Review, 2017
This article critically examines territorial strategies adopted by the Indian state to accommodate territorially concentrated minority groups in two very recent cases: the formation of Telangana (2014) and the Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC) (2003). We situate both cases within the broader context of linguistic state reorganization in India since the 1950s. We argue that while the formation of states on the basis of linguistic principle was necessary given the long history of demand for linguistic states in India, it is, as Telangana and BTC clearly bear out, not sufficient to accommodate minorities. This is especially the case when, inter alia, language is: (1) appropriated by the dominant group within a state (or states) as a vehicle to perpetuate political majoritarianism, (2) supplemented by weak power-sharing arrangement, and (3) occasioned by longstanding popular perceptions of historical injustices and relative deprivation.
Indian federalism at the crossroads: Limits of the territorial management of ethnic conflict
Routledge eBooks, 2018
This article critically examines territorial strategies adopted by the Indian state to accommodate territorially concentrated minority groups in two very recent cases: the formation of Telangana (2014) and the Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC) (2003). We situate both cases within the broader context of linguistic state reorganization in India since the 1950s. We argue that while the formation of states on the basis of linguistic principle was necessary given the long history of demand for linguistic states in India, it is, as Telangana and BTC clearly bear out, not sufficient to accommodate minorities. This is especially the case when, inter alia, language is: (1) appropriated by the dominant group within a state (or states) as a vehicle to perpetuate political majoritarianism, (2) supplemented by weak power-sharing arrangement, and (3) occasioned by longstanding popular perceptions of historical injustices and relative deprivation.