Mamata Banerjee shouldn’t trivialise claims of identity. Homeland and identity have a long and bloody history because the issues involved have an emotional core
Irrespective of who says it, reducing political discourse to inanities damages the polity. Dismissing the demands for a separate State as the “miffed” reactions of a small party, namely the Gorkha Jana Mukti Morcha, is an act of denial which suggests that West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee is refusing to acknowledge the history of violence and the tenacity of multiple political actors and parties in the Darjeeling hills.
Such denials, however politically convenient they may be for leaders like Ms Banerjee, are bad in principle and could be dangerous for the polity. No matter how small the GJMM may be, it is a party that derives its legitimacy from the politics of identity. More alarming is Ms Banerjee's ploy of offsetting the claims of the Gorkhas of Darjeeling to a homeland by instigating the Lepchas to stake their claims as the original inhabitiants of Darjeeling. Her method of instigation is both cruel and callous; by holding out the bait of a Lepcha Development Council, she is clearly playing off one claim to identity against another.
By trivialising and brushing aside the claims of identity, Ms Banerjee is at fault. Identity and homeland have a long and bloody history because the issues are born out of an emotional core that is volatile and intangible. It smacks of the kind of majoritarian politics that has provoked the marginalised and the minority to hit back. Having agreed to recognise the legitimacy of the claims of Gorkhaland within the tripartite agreement, converting the reiteration of the demand into a petulant and miffed response indicates that Ms Banerjee is missing the point. From Kolkata it may appear that by cancelling his boycott of Ms Banerjee's ceremonial inauguration of the West Bengal Government organised Hill Festival, Bimal Gurung blinked. Seen from Darjeeling, the decision to be present at Ms Banerjee's function is to underscore the proprietary claims of GJMM.
Competing political leaders in Darjeeling are not going to play along with her if there is the least chance that ratcheting up the agitation on the demand for a homeland will serve their political purposes. The timing of the revival of the demand is carefully calibrated to the progress of the politics of carving out a Telangana State from Andhra Pradesh.
The mistake is in failing to read the danger signals and threatening to take drastic action if the GJMM converts its demand into a serious challenge to her vision and version of the Gorkhaland issue. It is a mistake because it disregards the moves that GJMM has already initiated that cock a snook at the authority of the State and the division of powers between West Bengal and the Gorkhaland Territorial Authority. The raising of a quasi police force by Mr Gurung and paid for out of funds allocated for other purposes is a pointer to the illegitimate interpretation of authority by GJMM. By neither taking note of the raising of this force nor confronting Mr Gurung over it, Ms Banerjee has exposed her unwillingness to handle the unpalatable.
It is politically inane to pretend that Mr Gurung and his band of followers are childish and junior partners in the Gorkhaland deal that was signed in 2012. In Darjeeling, Mr Gurung is not the junior partner and he knows it. Based on this very clear-sighted understanding of the territorial distribution of political power, GJMM has raised the police force of so-called volunteers. The West Bengal Government's inability to question Mr Gurung on the matter is a weak response that allows actors like the GJMM to challenge the authority of the State, which alone has the authority to tackle law and order by establishing the coercive arm of the administration.
Either Ms Banerjee is willfully ignoring the fact that Mr Gurung has openly flouted the rules of Government or she is ignorant of the dangers. Whichever way it is analysed, the situation in Darjeeling is inexorably moving towards a confrontation, because Ms Banerjee cannot forever deny that what GJMM is doing is constitutionally invalid. With both Ms Banerjee and Mr Gurung trampling the boundaries of legitimate authority of the State, the confrontation may have been postponed, but only for now. Neither is willing to openly challenge the other because no one is strong enough to do so. Mr Gurung is biding his time and waiting for a more opportune moment.
Irrespective of who says it, reducing political discourse to inanities damages the polity. Dismissing the demands for a separate State as the “miffed” reactions of a small party, namely the Gorkha Jana Mukti Morcha, is an act of denial which suggests that West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee is refusing to acknowledge the history of violence and the tenacity of multiple political actors and parties in the Darjeeling hills.
Such denials, however politically convenient they may be for leaders like Ms Banerjee, are bad in principle and could be dangerous for the polity. No matter how small the GJMM may be, it is a party that derives its legitimacy from the politics of identity. More alarming is Ms Banerjee's ploy of offsetting the claims of the Gorkhas of Darjeeling to a homeland by instigating the Lepchas to stake their claims as the original inhabitiants of Darjeeling. Her method of instigation is both cruel and callous; by holding out the bait of a Lepcha Development Council, she is clearly playing off one claim to identity against another.
By trivialising and brushing aside the claims of identity, Ms Banerjee is at fault. Identity and homeland have a long and bloody history because the issues are born out of an emotional core that is volatile and intangible. It smacks of the kind of majoritarian politics that has provoked the marginalised and the minority to hit back. Having agreed to recognise the legitimacy of the claims of Gorkhaland within the tripartite agreement, converting the reiteration of the demand into a petulant and miffed response indicates that Ms Banerjee is missing the point. From Kolkata it may appear that by cancelling his boycott of Ms Banerjee's ceremonial inauguration of the West Bengal Government organised Hill Festival, Bimal Gurung blinked. Seen from Darjeeling, the decision to be present at Ms Banerjee's function is to underscore the proprietary claims of GJMM.
Competing political leaders in Darjeeling are not going to play along with her if there is the least chance that ratcheting up the agitation on the demand for a homeland will serve their political purposes. The timing of the revival of the demand is carefully calibrated to the progress of the politics of carving out a Telangana State from Andhra Pradesh.
The mistake is in failing to read the danger signals and threatening to take drastic action if the GJMM converts its demand into a serious challenge to her vision and version of the Gorkhaland issue. It is a mistake because it disregards the moves that GJMM has already initiated that cock a snook at the authority of the State and the division of powers between West Bengal and the Gorkhaland Territorial Authority. The raising of a quasi police force by Mr Gurung and paid for out of funds allocated for other purposes is a pointer to the illegitimate interpretation of authority by GJMM. By neither taking note of the raising of this force nor confronting Mr Gurung over it, Ms Banerjee has exposed her unwillingness to handle the unpalatable.
It is politically inane to pretend that Mr Gurung and his band of followers are childish and junior partners in the Gorkhaland deal that was signed in 2012. In Darjeeling, Mr Gurung is not the junior partner and he knows it. Based on this very clear-sighted understanding of the territorial distribution of political power, GJMM has raised the police force of so-called volunteers. The West Bengal Government's inability to question Mr Gurung on the matter is a weak response that allows actors like the GJMM to challenge the authority of the State, which alone has the authority to tackle law and order by establishing the coercive arm of the administration.
Either Ms Banerjee is willfully ignoring the fact that Mr Gurung has openly flouted the rules of Government or she is ignorant of the dangers. Whichever way it is analysed, the situation in Darjeeling is inexorably moving towards a confrontation, because Ms Banerjee cannot forever deny that what GJMM is doing is constitutionally invalid. With both Ms Banerjee and Mr Gurung trampling the boundaries of legitimate authority of the State, the confrontation may have been postponed, but only for now. Neither is willing to openly challenge the other because no one is strong enough to do so. Mr Gurung is biding his time and waiting for a more opportune moment.
Source: dailypioneer.com/
Post a Comment
We love to hear from you! What's on your mind?