Adivasis and the State Politics in Jharkhand
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Article Studies in Indian Politics Adivasis and the State Politics 6(1) 1–14 © 2018 Lokniti, Centre for the in Jharkhand Study of Developing Societies SAGE Publications sagepub.in/home.nav DOI: 10.1177/2321023018762821 http://journals.sagepub.com/home/inp Sujit Kumar1 Abstract This article attempts to analyse the political behaviour of the adivasi groups in Jharkhand as rooted in the interplay of their interactions with different religions, exposure to non-agricultural economic activities and diverse nature of association with the state. The questions considered for inquiry are: Is the political terrain in Jharkhand moving towards ‘detribalization’ of governance? And, what are the factors influencing the voting behaviour of the adivasis? The article argues that the ambivalences occupying the interstices of the intra-community political behaviour are crucial in deciphering the adivasi politics. Ostensibly, the political choices of the adivasi community are largely framed in accordance with their everyday interaction with the local state as well as remote experiences of the latter as evident in cases of resource grab. The article is based upon the close observation of events concerning adivasis, analysis of assembly election data as well as news in local and national newspapers. Keywords Jharkhand, adivasi politics, detribalization, voting behaviour, resource grab Introduction Adivasi politics, in general, is understood in terms of resistance against resource grab with very little being said about their myriad forms of interaction with the state, particularly through elections. Jharkhand, popularly perceived as an adivasi homeland, can help illuminate adivasi politics in retrospect and also to comprehend its prospect. Since its formation on 15 November 2000 till the year 2014, the state has been governed by adivasi chief ministers irrespective of their political affiliation.2 Installing of a non-adivasi, Raghubar Das, as chief minister has more than symbolic importance as the new regime has ushered in ‘detribalization of governance’ which can be understood as a twofold process having both sociocultural and political aspects. Scholars like Das (1962, p. 231) have analysed detribalization 1 Department of Political Science, St Joseph’s College, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. 2 Babulal Marandi, a Santhal adivasi, was the first chief minister followed by Arjun Munda, a Munda adivasi. Both hailed from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Shibu Soren and later his son Hemant Soren, both Santhal adivasi, from the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) became chief ministers. For a short period, Madhu Koda, a Ho adivasi, also became chief minister. For the first time, a non-adivasi in the form of Raghubar Das has become the chief minister since 2014. Corresponding author: Sujit Kumar, Department of Political Science, St Joseph’s College, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. E-mail: [email protected] 2 Studies in Indian Politics 6(1) as a sociocultural process of loosening social ties and changing cultural preferences among tribals largely owing to their interaction with other social groups. My intention, however, is to understand detribaliza- tion as a process in the political discourse of governance albeit not devoid of its inter-linkages with the sociocultural aspects. To provide a specific meaning to the term ‘governance’ in context of the adivasis of Jharkhand, it would be better to mention few of the pointers from the People’s agenda.3 The first demand states that the chief minister and his deputy as well as all the administrators who come in direct contact with the people should be local, and belong to a tribal group of the area. Second demand is that ‘tribal land should be restored and the leases of mines in the area should be taken away from non-tribals and given to local tribal groups’. The third demand relates to the cost of development and argues against displacement due to development projects. Finally, the organization demanded a committee comprising of leaders of the Jharkhand movement, intellectuals, representatives from minority communities and weaker sections, such as women, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (STs), to oversee that their interests are not compromised. These pointers will be used to analyse the process of ‘detribalization of governance’ as the Raghubar Das government tends to overlook the standpoint of adivasi legislators affiliated to different parties while framing laws concerning the community. Another noteworthy feature is virulent attack upon existing laws which the adivasis consider to be crucial in protecting their culture and resources. The initial experience of the state for adivasis in post-independence India was that of apathy, as inte- gration into the statist system was through extraction and exploitation. However, the perception of politics as a means of amelioration inspired the adivasi leaders of Jharkhand in pre-independence India to demand a separate state. Despite almost 70 years of political socialization, the adivasi community seeks to interact selectively with the state by availing the benefits of affirmative action while at the same time ‘keeping the state away’4 in pursuit of their ‘sacral politics’ under the pretext of a separate identity and adivasi world view. Adivasi politics in the state of Jharkhand has been conveniently understood from two perspectives. First, their participation in the state-conducted elections which provides more insight into their electoral behaviour and political considerations, and second, the radical politics as evident in the resistance movements organized around the issues of assault on jal, jungle and jameen (water, forest and land). These two aspects of adivasi politics, however, shall not be studied in isolation as they overlap and have both refraining and fulfilling effect on each other. Furthermore, expansion of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in Jharkhand does not infer towards a shrinking social base of the Jharkhand- based parties who still manage to derive substantial support from the community by revisiting its politics and actively associating with the people on issues of resource grab and consequent resistance. Against this backdrop, I attempt to answer questions like: How do we interpret the political behaviour of the adivasis given the fact that they vote for wide spectrum of political parties? What are the various mechanisms through which the BJP has expanded its social base among the adivasi constituency? And finally, is the political terrain in Jharkhand moving towards ‘detribalization’ of governance? But the broader questions with which I wish to engage are: have we not stereotyped the adivasi question by relegating the problems faced by the community to their status as a ‘victim’ of statist development ideol- ogy? Will it be improper to argue that activists barely engage with the political aspects of adivasi society under the compulsion to establish the inviolability of ‘uniform’ adivasi identity? To a large extent, and significantly so, we have failed to accept adivasi politics as a more dynamic phenomenon rather than a 3 A manifesto for governing the Scheduled areas of Jharkhand giving due consideration to adivasi culture and society was prepared by BIRSA (2000, p. ii), a prominent human rights organization. 4 A phrase used by Shah (2007) to argue that the Munda adivasis of Khunti district participate in the state-conducted elections to ensure the autonomy of their sacral or customary politics. Kumar 3 fixed notion. In this article, I argue that the adivasis participate in the state-conducted elections as heter- ogenous groups whose political choice is contingent upon the nature of patronage received from political parties. Another visible trend is the linkage between resistance movements and Jharkhandi parties which mostly converts into electoral support for the latter. In view of the questions posed above, the article is arranged into three sections. The first section of the article attempts to explore some misconceptions regarding adivasi politics and provide a much more nuanced view of the political behaviour of the community. As Hindutva politics not only has occupied the public imagination in state’s electoral scenario but also strives to become a social force, the second section analyses the rise and consolidation of the BJP. The third section examines the latest effort of Raghubar Das government as an attempt at gradual detribalization of the political terrain. Finally, I con- clude by highlighting the major trends emerging in the state politics and the direction of adivasi politics. This article is based upon the observation of events concerning the adivasi communities.5 Individual interviews and focus group discussions (FGDs) help to understand the community’s (adivasi) percep- tions on the issues of politics, corruption, culture and non-adivasis. Apart from this, it uses the election data as compiled by the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) and Election Commission of India. The article also builds upon close following of the series of events occurring in Jharkhand and as covered in various local and national newspapers. Secondary resources such as articles, books and reports are used extensively to arrive at various analytical points. Adivasis and Politics in Jharkhand There are nearly 85 lakhs adivasis in Jharkhand, comprising around 26.2 per cent of the population (Census, 2011). At the time of independence, the adivasis constituted around 36 per cent of the popula- tion (Maharatna and Chikte, 2004) with a