|
Open Forum
BEYOND SONS OF SOIL
MIGRANTS PROSPER, LOCALS SUFFER
By Prakash Nanda
New Delhi, October 22, 2008
The periodic provocative remarks of the “Maratha champion”
Raj Thackeray against the North Indian, particularly Bihari
and Uttar Pradeshi migrants in Mumbai have rekindled the
so-called “sons of the soil” controversy. Usually, the phrase
“sons of the soil” is considered as a pejorative term as it
implies “separation” from the national mainstream. However,
such an assessment would be a simplistic one.
Contrary to the traditional notion, some dimensions of the
phenomenon of “sons of soil” are healthy and if
sympathetically viewed and addressed then they promote the
cause of national integration. Only when these dimensions are
overlooked contemptuously, the phenomenon takes a nasty turn
towards the disintegration of the nation.
Bihar, over many years now, has been exporting manpower to
various parts of the country. The middle and lower middle
classes of Bihar, have over the years become highly
“examination-driven”. They have done really well not only in
the IAS and the IPS but in other States’ public service
commission-conducted jobs. But, it is a mixed bag when the
jobs turn out to be in the lower category.
Bihari labourers comprise nearly 30% of Delhi's slum dwellers.
They are an important component in Punjab’s agricultural
success. Likewise, in factories of Tamil Nadu and Gujarat, the
Biharis constitute the bulk of the labour force.
Interestingly, there are no protests against them in these
States. Rather they are welcomed there. In contrast, there is
immense antipathy against the Biharis in States such as Assam
and Maharashtra. Why?
Examples from some other countries will help us understand the
problem better and find an answer. When Sri Lanka became
independent in 1947, the two largest ethnic groups were the
Singhalese, 74% of the population; and the Tamils, 19%. The
Sri Lankan Tamils were far better educated than the
Singhalese, and dominated both the higher civil service and
the business world. In 1956, amidst an economic recession, the
upstart Sri Lankan Freedom Party defeated the old guard United
National Party by blaming the Tamils for grabbing the best
jobs. Shortly after its victory, the new government brought in
the Official Language Act, which declared Sinhala the one
official language.
This evoked an instant reaction among the Tamils, who
perceived a threat to their language, culture and economic
position. Though it induced a Satyagraha among the Tamils, it
was not enough to make the ethnic division of the country so
acute as to lead to a civil war, which is continuing even
today. All told, the Act essentially affected the upper
sections of the Tamils. However, in reality, the seeds for the
division were sown when the Lankan government created the Gal
Oya Development Board for settling landless peasants into the
fertile area of the Eastern Province.
At first, most of the migration was by Tamils and Muslims from
the poorer areas of the province, followed by a group of
“Kandyan” Singhalese villagers from the Central Province, and
finally by Singhalese from other provinces. These Singhalese,
however, managed to receive better land and their migration
into the Eastern Province provoked among the Tamils a sense of
demographic threat. It got compounded by the fruits of
modernity too being grabbed by the migrants. Under the
demographic challenge, protest groups, parties, and
self-protection (or provocation) militias began to be formed,
leading to the birth of the dangerous LTTE.
Similarly, 95% of the population of Pakistan’s Sindh province
was Sindhi at the time of partition. However, by 1951, 50% of
the urban population was made up of Mohajirs (who came from
India) with Urdu as their mother tongue. This proportion went
up to 80% in Karachi and 66% in Hyderabad. The migrants also
took over the property of the Hindus, who had fled to India.
But state policy quickly entered the equation, as early as
July 1948, when Pakistan’s Governor General ordered the
separation from Sindh of Karachi (and surrounding district),
the seat of its provincial government. It thus turned Karachi
into a separate federal area, under the jurisdiction of the
central government. This also led to a considerable financial
loss for Sindh, as it was deprived of its most productive area
from the point of view of its revenue-yielding capacity.
As a result, the urban-rural divide in terms of development
widened, with Karachi receiving, almost exclusively,
infrastructural support and new investment both in industry
and the manufacturing sectors, and rural Sindh being almost
ignored. Worse, the abstraction of a centre dominated by
Punjabis was further brought home to the Sindhis by way of
Punjabi landholders, who were occupying a substantial portion
of the choicest lands in Sindh. Thus, the Sindhis began to see
themselves as the sons of the soil, demographically challenged
by Mohajirs and Punjabis. Clearly, the resultant tensions have
been such that many Pakistani analysts believe that Sindh may
well follow the example of what is today Bangladesh.
One can give similar examples of Chakma peoples in the
Chitttagong Hills of Bangladesh, the Moros in the Philippines,
the Uighurs in Xinjiang province, China and Achenese in
Indonesia. The point that emerges from all this is: the cause
of national integration is not strengthened by helping
“migrants” to prosper amidst poverty and backwardness of the
locals. If in the name of national integration, a Punjabi sets
up a factory in Telengana region of Andhra Pradesh and fills
up all the posts of sweepers and lower-level clerks with
candidates from outside the State, then it is the surest way
to promote national disintegration.
In other words, the “sons of the soil” slogan can only be
confronted successfully by dealing more with the sources of
migration (long decades of misrule, lack of land reforms and
the much deeper class and caste divides that further
marginalise the poor and illiterate people) than with its
consequences.
If Biharis face no problem in Punjab or Tamil Nadu or Gujarat,
it is mainly because there is a perennial shortage of manual
labour, with more people graduating to better paying jobs in
these States. But in a State like Assam, Biharis are targeted
because the number of jobs they seek or do is shrinking fast,
a problem that has been further compounded by the influx of
the alleged illegal migrants from Bangladesh. Similarly, there
have been instances of resentment against Biharis for trying
to get subordinate posts in the government and education
sector in other States with substantial number of the educated
being unemployed. Few years ago, the then Congress government
in Rajasthan decided not to recognize Bihar degrees as the
Biharis were flooding their subordinate posts.
Viewed thus, if the Biharis, or for that matter those from
Uttar Pradesh are being disturbed in Mumbai, then the real
reason goes beyond the aggressiveness of the Shiv Sainiks,
who, all told, did send a first-generation Bihari migrant like
Sanjay Nirupam, or a first generation Bengali migrant like
Pritish Nandy to Parliament, not long ago. It is sad that the
overall economy of Maharashtra, once among India’s richest
States, is not doing well. It will be worth analysing the
migration pattern of poor Maharashtrians from rural areas to
Mumbai, in search of jobs that the Biharis are doing. It is
not just a coincidence that farmers in Maharashtra are
committing suicide in a large scale.---INFA
(Copyright India News & Feature Alliance)
E-Mail :
newseditor@sarkaritel.com
|
