NATIONAL POLITICS
C.P. Bhambhri on Social and Ethnic Fragmentation
Political class has engineered the social and political fragmentation of India and its adverse consequences can be witnessed in the North-East. The fifty years of Indian democratic experiment had led to a situation where socio- cultural bonds have become weak, and the politics of identity versus identity has emerged in a big way. Universal adult franchise in India has raised the levels of political consciousness in the whole country and the old social and cultural equilibrium has been disrupted.
The story of North-East India is being repeated in Uttar Pradesh, some facts about the forthcoming State Assembly elections may contextualize the ongoing phenomena of artificially manufactured social cleavages. First, every political party or group is forming coalitions for contesting the State Assembly elections of 1996, and it is clear that Uttar Pradesh does not have any political party which can contest all the 425 Assembly seats. The Congress and the Bahujan Samaj Party electoral alliance is based on a calculation that in a segmented society, the high caste vote will be the prerogative of the Congress and the real Dalits are the BSF's vote bank. Abdullah Bukhari, the Shahi Imam of Jama Masjid, Delhi, also has been brought in to influence the Muslim vote in favour of the BSP. In spite of the tall claims of the BJP, it has not only shared seats with the Samata Party. it also knows that only a section of Hindus will support the party during the elections. Mulayam Singh Yadav and other groups like the Janata Dal, CPI, CPI-M and Ajit Singh are clear that they have social acceptance in some castes and some districts. Ajit Singh will mobilize votes of the Jats in Western Uttar Pradesh, the Mulayam Singh will depend on the upper Backward Castes in Central and Eastern Uttar Pradesh and Narayan Dutt Tiwari (Congress) has been given charge of Uttarakhand territory.
Second, it is crystal clear that Uttar Pradesh does not have any socio-cultural identity which cuts across castes, communities and regions. Is Uttar Pradesh, an artificial social construct belonging to regional chieftains?
Third, V.P. Singh, Mulayam Singh, H.D. Deve Gowda, and every other leader big or small- are all committed to secular politics and their goal of elections in Uttar Pradesh is to ensure a victory for secular forces and a defeat for the communal politics of the BJP. Have they been able to present a reasonably united secular front to confront the BJP? The answer is a big "No" And has the BJP shown an effective political presence to confront and defeat the pseudo-secular forces of the Congress and the Janata Dal, and the casteist political fronts of Mulayam Singh or Kanshi Ram? Narayan Dutt Tiwari, a former Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, has been reduced to the status of a district level politician, and Ajit Singh and Mahendra Singh Tikait are declared leaders of a single caste and a limited territorial area of Uttar Pradesh.
Politically stable Uttar Pradesh has become totally fragmented and all political parties, groups and leaders are on tenterhooks to evolve some viable coalition to win the election.
Political forces and groups opposed to the domination of the Congress party used the process of social change to create their political support base. The haphazard implementation of land reforms led to the displacement of traditional high caste landed gentry by the peasant classes represented by the backward castes. Since multiple jatis and upjatis are found in Indian society, the political class of Uttar Pradesh targeted some jatis and upjatis spawning many political claimants for assuming the leadership of the multiple social fragments. If Charan Singh and Ajit Singh emerged as leaders of the Jat peasantry, Mulayam Singh Yadav mobilized upper backward caste peasants like Yadavs, Kurmis, Koeris etc., and Kanshi Ram and Mayawati won the support of "very backward" castes who were the victims of upper backward castes. Since multiple castes were mobilised against each other by different political leaders, politics of caste versus caste emerged in a big way in Uttar Pradesh rural areas.
The most important consequence of multiple social divisions in Uttar Pradesh is the use of muscle power for capturing political power. It is for the first time that private Senas are ready to take on their political opponents during the forthcoming State Assembly elections. Rule of Law and formal institutional arrangements for governance have either collapsed, or are under severe strain because of casteism and communalization of politics.
If Uttar Pradesh elections cannot be held without the presence of outside police forces, it means that the state's civil and administrative systems have collapsed. The only goal of current political leaders is to get to the seats of power. But social strategies adopted by the political class will not give them dividends, because political instability will be the order of the day. The country will suffer because political leaders will have neither the time nor the inclination to resolve the problems of 450 million people living below the poverty line. This phase of Indian democracy will witness sectional patronage based on governance as a quid pro quo between castes and their leaders. Government for the people is not possible if elections are won on the basis of limited sectional or territorial support structure.
(Source: The Hindustan Times, 23 September, 1996)
