Apno se mat lado balke apne haq wa adhikaron ke liye un logon se lado jo tumhare adhikaron par kabza kiye baithe hain- Birsa Munda
Jairam Mahto's entry in Jharkhand politics has sparked a renewed debate on identity politics, governance, and leadership in the state.
Jharkhand, the 28th state of India, was established 24 years ago after separating from Bihar with the aim of promoting regional development. It has a population of 3.9 crore, with 26.2% being tribal people who have diverse characteristics such as religion, language, dialects, and lifestyles. These tribes have a distinct regional culture that sets them apart from the rest of India. Despite being one of the wealthiest states with abundant mineral resources and a rich history of commercial and cultural prosperity during the earlier stages of industrialization after gaining independence, it still suffers from severe issues such as poverty, illiteracy, inadequate infrastructure, and limited access to healthcare services.
The prevalent politics consistently exploit the socio-economic division, which is deeply rooted in the popular narrative of Bahariya-Bhitriya (inside-outside). This story continues to resonate with the local population, as it fosters a strong sense of regional identity that sets them apart from others. However, the state administration after separation is predominantly led by local tribal leaders, regardless of political parties. However, neither was effective in delivering governance nor resolving the identified issue. A prevalent form of politics has created a conservative alliance based on clientelism, which undermines democratic principles.
The Politics of Othering
The term "othering" refers to the process of excluding and marginalising certain communities in Jharkhand. Although the state has made a commitment to improve the conditions of its tribal population, these groups frequently continue to be marginalised in terms of political, social, and economic progress. This marginalisation is the result of both historical neglect and ongoing political dynamics. "Othering" refers to the deliberate and systematic exclusion of certain groups based on their identities. This process has historically been associated with the diverse indigenous people of the state, who have experienced neglect and discrimination due to various political, social, and economic issues (Banerjee, 2011).
Over time, this attitude has transformed into a sense of unity inside a certain region, which is strategically employed against migrants from outside the region. There are claims that the state's marginalisation and impoverishment are caused by the outsiders' act of taking over resources or privileges (Gupta,2014). An example of the politics of othering can be seen in the case of land rights in Jharkhand. Indigenous groups have always engaged in persistent efforts to safeguard their hereditary territories from industrial endeavours and mining activities. Although the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act and the Santhal Parganas Tenancy Act provide legal protection by limiting the transfer of tribal land to non-tribals, these regulations are sometimes undercut by the influence of governmental and business entities (Singh, 2015). The 2016 proposed revisions to these acts triggered extensive demonstrations among tribal groups, who perceived them as efforts to expedite land acquisition by external entities and businesses, exacerbating the marginalisation of the native community (The Wire, 5 April 2017).
Furthermore, there is clear evidence of the marginalisation of significant segments of the population, including as the Adivasi (26%), SCs (12%), and OBCs (46%) populations, both in terms of socio-economic status and political participation (Census 2011). However, their representation in state politics and administrative roles remains imbalanced. The absence of representation sustains emotions of estrangement and hinders the proper addressing of their problems at the policy level. The political manipulation of identity, in which tribal and non-tribal, insiders and outsiders (Bahariya-Bhitariya) identities are set in opposition to one another, worsens these problems. During elections, political parties frequently rally support by highlighting both tribe and local identity, and by fostering unity against perceived threats from non-tribal migrants in urban areas. They also exploit uneven development in order to attract people, thereby exacerbating societal divisions (Banerjee, 2011).
Afterwards, a significant network of clientelism emerged in each region, characterised by party-based affirmation. Over the past twenty years, the politics of marginalisation in Jharkhand has been evident in recurrent conflicts related to land ownership, insufficient political representation, and the use of identity for political advantage. Contrary to expectations, several influential local leaders have amassed extensive land, properties, and fortune under the guise of development. Tiger Jairam Mahto has politically brought up these highly contradicting conditions (Indian Express, 17 June 2024). The ongoing dynamics perpetuate the marginalisation of impoverished local and tribal groups, it is failing imperative for inclusive and fair governance that could effectively caters to the needs of all its inhabitants.
Questioning the Identity and Governance
Jharkhandi identity is shaped by historical and socio-political forces that influence the daily realities of its diverse population. The state was founded with the commitment to meet the distinct needs of its indigenous inhabitants, but the actual practice of governing has repeatedly failed to meet expectations. Identity is intricately connected to rights over land, the preservation of culture, and representation in political matters (Mishra, 2017). Governance in Jharkhand necessitates the establishment of frameworks, procedures, and processes that facilitate the exercise of authority and decision-making (Singh, 2013). Government bodies and administrative organizations are included within this category, such as the Panchayati Raj system, the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act, the Right to Information Act, and initiatives aimed at including tribal perspectives in governance. However, delayed implementation of infrastructure projects poses challenges to the effectiveness and efficiency of these endeavours.
The principle of legal governance is crucial, as evidenced by continuous efforts to counter Naxalite insurgency and guarantee impartiality and protection for every individual in society. The promotion of ethical standards and integrity is achieved through the implementation of anti-corruption measures, such as the establishment of the Jharkhand Lokayukta. Preserving tribal rights and interests involves implementing initiatives like the Jharkhand Tribal Development Society, Mukhyamantri Krishi Ashirwad Yojana, the Jharkhand State Commission for Scheduled Tribes, improving political participation by guaranteeing tribal representation in local and state elections, and enhancing social cohesion by implementing cultural initiatives and policies that unite disparate communities. The political discourse and narratives exhibit fluidity, contingent upon regional variations and rural-urban disparities. The state politics is predominantly conducted in a conservative framework, characterized by a clientelist network of relationships between the state and society. However, there has been a significant increase in the crisis of governance, with the government failing to provide essential public services, employment opportunities, and social justice. The political environment in the state is characterised by intense struggle among different factions striving for control and access to resources, often leading to the exploitation of identity politics (OXFAM, 2018).
The Way forward
In order to tackle these problems, Jharkhand requires a comprehensive and multifaceted strategy. First and foremost, it is crucial to make a deliberate and coordinated attempt to encourage inclusive governance that actively engages all communities in the process of making decisions. This involves guaranteeing equitable representation of indigenous populations in political positions and governmental establishments. Additionally, it is crucial to prioritise the transparent and accountable execution of affirmative action programmes to guarantee that the advantages are received by the intended recipients. Furthermore, it is crucial to cultivate a culture characterised by mutual respect and comprehension among the various populations. Education programmes that emphasise the interconnected history and contributions of different groups might have a significant impact in this regard. It is imperative to involve civil society organisations and community leaders in conversations to overcome divisions and foster social unity. Finally, it is imperative for the state and central governments to cooperate in developing comprehensive plans that directly tackle the underlying factors contributing to marginalisation, including poverty, limited access to education, and insufficient healthcare. Customised economic development initiatives designed to address the specific requirements of tribal groups have the potential to offer long-lasting resolutions to their socio-economic difficulties.
In a Nutshell, the politics of othering and identity governance in Jharkhand requires a compassionate solution. By promoting inclusive governance, promoting social cohesion, and addressing structural inequities, Jharkhand can establish a fair and peaceful society, benefiting its diverse population and serving as an example for other areas facing similar challenges. Recognizing this pressing issue is crucial for a promising future for all Jharkhand residents.
The writer is a faculty in the department of Political Science, MANUU, Hyderabad. He has penned many articles in Journals, research papers in national/international seminars/conferences and regularly writes on socio-political subjects for various online/ print domains. Views are personal. Email: afrozjamia@gmail.com.
