Aheli Moitra
The Indian Union is a Union of Unequals. This applies both to the people who reside in this entity, as well as the federal structure that works under the umbrella of ‘unity and integrity.’ To keep up with this, the margins must remain in silent peace with the mainstream.
This plays out every day in the margins. In more blatant examples, the life/death of one North Indian Caste Hindu in Delhi is more important than the lives/deaths of nine Zomi Christian people in Lamka. But the discrimination goes on in subtle forms, perpetrated by the structure of the Union itself.
It was exemplified during the visit of a Union Minister to Nagaland State recently. Following a review meeting with Food Corporation of India (FCI), Union Minister for Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, Ram Vilas Paswan, assured the people of Nagaland of more grains by way of the National Food Security Act. Under this, allocation of food grains to the State will increase from 1,27,668 metric tonnes to 1,38,000 metric tonnes (for now at least). A Hill Transport Subsidy Scheme would ensure the reduction of transportation costs.
While stressing on the need to revamp the distribution system and plug loopholes—regular rhetoric from the centre—the Minister simultaneously said that he was not aware of the practices leading to a large part of these foodgrains disappearing in Nagaland. The recent audit of the Comptroller & Auditor General has reported financial misappropriation in the Nagaland Food & Civil Supplies Department amounting to over Rs. 400 crore—clearly it is not the people feeding on these supplies. The CAG report poses no concern to the centre. Promptly, he said, it is the prerogative of the State Government to check financial anomalies.
The Union Minister was apparently trying to “protect” the Federal Structure of the Indian Union wherein the centre can dole out any amount to a “beneficiary” State without a care if the people benefitted from this in any way. It keeps the State happy, the people who run it remain immune and thus happy—with total (sometimes artificial) dependency on the centre, the State never becomes independent, democracy & rights always remain in peril, local leaders do not think beyond themselves and their clans, and people at the bottom of the chain always remain in a situation of powerlessness.
This is replete throughout the Union. Author Kiran Batni explains that in the Indian Union “States are irresponsible because the present structure of the federation requires them to be; because the very existence of the centre as defined today requires them to be (irresponsible).” Today, he writes, India’s unity and integrity are postulated on irresponsible states and a bloated centre.
The moment the picture of an all-powerful and strong centre disappears, the states will be forced to do (take measures), observes Batni. Power holders in Delhi will revolt to this. In ethnic, religious, financial and caste margins, the centre gains its legitimacy through the show of strength—the unaccounted crores, the arm(our)y, the patronising.
All states in the way of India’s Look & Act East policies continue to languish in prisons of corruption in which local leaders have become fixed cogs in the wheel. The movement of the central hub keeps the cycle going, the people bearing the brunt a tyre does—the chances of a Naga being a cyclist in such a polity could only be imagined.
But what if this cycle was remodelled? Given the way these structures have become entrenched alongside existing ones, can a Union of Equals emerge? In the face of 'sovereignty,' will the Nagas do what the Indians could not when unchained from the British? How? If they dig beyond the system, local anti corruption watchdogs could formulate an answer. To share, please write to moitramail@yahoo.com
