Opinion In defence of ‘Bharat’: It’s not just semantics

The interchangeable use of a nation’s different names also underscores the complexity of such decisions and the need for careful consideration of historical, cultural, and political factors. Ultimately, these changes reflect the evolving dynamics of nationhood and cultural identity in a globalised world.

The changing of India’s official name from “India” to “Bharat” in its Constitution would be a matter of profound significance, encompassing historical, cultural, and political dimensions. “Bharat” carries a deep historical and cultural legacy, rooted in Hindu mythology and ancient texts, symbolising India’s rich traditions and identity. However, the debate over changing the name highlights the complex interplay between history, identity, and language. India, like many countries, has been known by multiple names throughout its history, reflecting its diverse cultural and linguistic landscape. Names such as “Hindustan”, “Aryavarta”, and “Jambudvipa” have been associated with the subcontinent, illustrating the multifaceted nature of its nomenclature. Therefore, any decision to alter the country’s name would need to balance the cultural significance of “Bharat” with the international recognition and historical continuity associated with “India”.

This debate is not just semantics; it resonates with the broader themes of decolonisation and cultural identity. The proposal to adopt “Bharat” as the official name can be seen as part of a wider effort to decolonise the minds of the people and promote linguistic sovereignty. For many Third World nations, the historical legacy of colonial oppression is a deeply ingrained aspect of their identity, and renaming the country can serve as a symbolic step towards reclaiming their cultural heritage. This move acknowledges the importance of indigenous languages, cultures, and traditions in shaping a nation’s identity and fosters inclusivity in a culturally diverse society. While the name change may not directly address all the historical injustices, it aligns with the broader goals of recognising and valuing diverse cultural perspectives.

Moreover, in the context of the ongoing soft power struggle between countries, preserving and protecting cultural identity can serve as a strategic advantage. A nation’s cultural heritage is a unique and authentic source of influence on the global stage. By showcasing and preserving their cultural traditions, countries can distinguish themselves internationally and convey their identity, values, and contributions more effectively. In an era where cultural diplomacy and cultural exchange play significant roles in shaping international relations, the choice of a name carries far-reaching implications. Retaining and projecting cultural identity becomes a potent tool for nations seeking to assert their presence and impact in the global arena, as it fosters a sense of pride and unity among citizens while also attracting international attention and cooperation.

The decision to change India’s name to “Bharat” should be made through a transparent democratic process that respects the cultural significance of “Bharat” while considering the historical and international dimensions associated with “India”. It is a symbolic step towards acknowledging the historical legacy of colonial oppression and promoting inclusivity, aligning with the goals of a culturally diverse and equitable society in the modern world.

The writer teaches history at Delhi University