Click to play videoDarjeeling Gorkha Hill Council chief Subhash Ghising's name is no longer synonymous with the Gorkhaland movement. Now, there is a new generation of leaders who are desperate for change and attention.
The Gorkha Janmukti Morcha (GJM), formed in October 2007, captured people's imagination last year with its campaign for the Indian Idol heartthrob Prashant Tamang.
Now, it has asked its cadre to carry khukris, but restrain from using them in their fight for a separate state that also includes Siliguri, Terai and Dooars. The GJM is on an indefinite strike in the Darjeeling Hills but the West Bengal government has rejected its demand for a separate Gorkha state.
The demand for Gorkhaland, some say, is as old as the hills. For the GJM, the focus is on the people who they believe have been left waiting by the state administration.
And that brings us to the question of the day that was asked on CNN-IBN show Face the Nation: In view of the Gorkhaland agitation, should India be carved into smaller states?
In the panel of experts to debate the issue threadbare were Congress Spokesperson Jayanthi Natarajan, BJP Spokesperson Ravi Shankar Prasad, Kolkata Mayor Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharyya and Political Editor of Financial Express Swaraj Thapa.
Smaller states: An uphill task?
Some of the key reasons for a separate statehood by the Gorkhas are developmental issues like drinking water and electricity. But do we need a separate state to deal with these issues?
Swaraj Thapa, who is a supporter of the Gorkhaland agitation, said that “development is not the only issue as far as Darjeeling in concerned.”
“If you consider all the demands for statehood across India then everyone has got development as their prime issue except Darjeeling. In Darjeeling one of the strongest reason is the identity of the Gorkhas. And when I talk about Gorkhas it’s about being an Indian. They are as Indian as anybody else. But the there is always a confusion that all Gorkhas are from Nepal,” Thapa explained.
BJP is a supporter of small states and the party gave sates like Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Uttarakhand their independent status, but doesn’t granting statehood lead to parochialism and identity politics in India?
Replying to the question, Ravi Shankar Prasad explained that there is a “provision in our Constitution, which acts as a bulwark. Under Article 3 of the Constitution the Parliament can create new states but the President shall revert the bill to the state assembly whose state is going to be affected. Be it the case of Chattisgargh or Uttarakhand, the consent of the respective assemblies were taken.”
Agreeing that small states are important, he added, “No one can dispute that logic but good governance cannot be a substitute for a smaller state. Look at Jharkhand. Five independent MLAs are ruling the government and the Congress party is supporting it from outside. Even Chhattisgarh is doing a very good job. Therefore good governance is equally important.”
However, many feel that the majority of the Bengali community have been arrogant to the Gorkhas. In the all-party meeting of the Left it was observed that the GJM was not even included in it. We have seen the manner in which Siliguri and Kolkata have ben developed but that is not the case with Darjeeling.
Reacting sharply to the argument, Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharyya said, “These sort of allegations are giving hands to the Gorkhas who are not yet aware of what their basic demands are. Mere demand for a separate state is not going to give them a movement. Now what are the reasons behind their demand? According to them the basic problem is economic deprivation. If economic backwardness is the issue then the CM has made it very clear that whatever is needed for their upliftment will be done.”
Strongly disagreeing with the Kolkata Mayor, Thapa said, “The demand for statehood is nothing new so there is no ‘confusion’ as he indicates.”
Speaking against the attitude of the state government, Thapa asked, “What I would like to ask is why does the Bengal government not want to bifurcate the state? What is the reason behind their opposition?”
State of political affairs
Analysts have pointed out that the BJP is governed with political considerations as far as statehoods are concerned. Like the party is considering the Vidarbha state demand because it is a Congress bastion and so BJP wants to make inroads there.
Chattigargh is also about political considerations. Is that why BJP is proliferating tiny states? But many argue that small states will damage the federal principle because it will create lots of village republics.
“At the very outset I had mentioned that no smaller state can be formed without the recommendation of the state assembly,” Prasad said.
“We have the experience of Assam. It was divided into seven states popularly known as the seven sisters. But can we say that the problems of Assam are over?” Prasad asked and then added, “What does one mean by identity politics? It is not just about Gorkhas. There is not just language identity but geographical identity also.”
But are small states conducive or detrimental to the federal principle?
To which Prasad said, “That is a larger issue. Federal principle will have to take into account the Centre and the state. But if states are being broken into smaller ones because of the whims and fancies of some politicians then it will just lead to fragmentation of India.”
Concluding the debate, Thapa said, “This demand for Gorkhaland is like any other demand but still it is seen in a very dubious light by most politicians. We take strong objection to the fact that most consider this agitation as a secessionist one.”
Final results of the SMS poll:
Yes - 57 per cent
No - 43 per cent
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter and Google+)
displayed with permission. Use of the CNN name and/or logo on or as part of CNN-IBN does not derogate from the intellectual property rights of Cable News Network in respect of them.