Opinion No ear to the ground

It is evident that the recent alliance between the JMM and the Congress is rooted in deeper motivations than the immediate purpose of enabling the JMM to form the government in Jharkhand. The Congress is foraging for support before the upcoming Lok Sabha elections,not just in Jharkhand but also in other states,like Bihar and Tamil Nadu. The Bharatiya Janata Party,having fallen out with its old ally,the Janata Dal (United),seems confident of winning seats on its own strength. In Jharkhand,the JMM,for its part,seems relieved that it can form the government,even if it is with the help of “diku” (outsider) parties such as the Congress and the Rashtriya Janata Dal. This is the same party that had once popularised the word diku to target industrialists,merchants,traders and bureaucrats,usually non-tribal,and had campaigned for their ouster from Jharkhand. Priorities have changed since then. Jal,jungle aur zamin is no longer the party’s slogan for mobilisation. It has been replaced by sadak,bijli aur paani. Over the years,the JMM’s rhetoric has mellowed and become more mainstream.

In contrast,the general mood in Jharkhand is still politically charged. Developmental activities are at the core of political tensions in the state. Known for its rich mineral and forest resources,Jharkhand is also one of the most “backward” areas of the country. Land acquisition by companies for industrial projects has been met by stiff resistance from gram sabhas. Local tribes have been engaged in struggles and campaigns against land acquisition for developmental projects,industries and mining. Field firing ranges,mining,national parks,wildlife sanctuaries and industries have all entailed displacement of the local tribal population. Economic growth and national security concerns were used to justify these measures,both of which seem remote to the local populations.

In all this,what seems obvious is the near collapse of a political dialogue between the people and their representatives. Sadly,this does not seem to matter in electoral politics any more. Party politics in Jharkhand — and Jharkhand is not unique in this — is characterised largely by opportunism. Broadly,politics in Jharkhand has revolved around two core concerns. The first is the politics of identity. The second is the struggle to restore tribal rights to land and forests. Unfortunately,the two are seen as independent of each other,despite the fact that tribal culture and identity is anchored in practices associated with land and forests.

Parties in Jharkhand have concentrated their efforts in the politics of identity,directing their rhetoric against “outsiders” or non-tribal people. The domicile issue is a case in point. It forms a significant item in the political agenda of the Jharkhand parties. It first came up in 2002,in the context of seeking reservations in jobs for those who could prove residence in Jharkhand,under the provisions of Record of Rights over land as on 1932 or before. The overwhelming response to the issue has scaled up its importance within electoral politics. Yet,the real challenge of translating the vision of the Jharkhand movement into government practice forever eludes political leaders. It still remains unclear how political parties in Jharkhand seek to integrate the concerns raised in local struggles into policy practice.

How do Jharkhand’s political parties envision the future of governance in the state? No one seems to be interested in this larger question,which will be critical in deciding the direction politics in Jharkhand takes in the near future. Will history repeat itself,and will people’s struggles atone for the indifference that characterises their political leaders? Or can we still hope for sense to prevail,for leaders to realise the magnitude of their apathy and fashion a more sensitive political message?

The writer is with the Tata Institute of Social Sciences,Mumbai,and the author of ‘Ecology,Equality and Freedom — Engagement with Self-rule in Jharkhand’

express@expressindia.com