logo
Migration, religion, language: Bengal's new political churn

Migration, religion, language: Bengal's new political churn

Hindustan Times5 days ago
A lot of working-class settlements across Indian cities – including the national capital Delhi and its suburbs of Noida and Gurugram, Mumbai and others in states where the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is in power – have seen special drives to detect what the Indian state believes are illegal Bangladeshi migrants. At the receiving end of the drive are thousands of poor, blue-collar Bengali speaking Muslims. Whether or not they are illegal Bangladeshis in India is something which is difficult to ascertain. Even the authorities have been able to flag only a miniscule proportion of these people as illegal Bangladeshis. But that's cold comfort; the chilling effect and inconvenience this drive has unleashed on Bengali speaking Muslims in these cities has affected a lot more people. To be sure, poor Bengali Muslims are not the only kind of underclass to have faced police harassment in India. There are a lot of examples, from evictions in large cities to the police siding with perpetrators of caste violence in villages, where the poor are more likely to suffer at the hands of the law-and-order machinery. However, in many such cases, the poor are also able to fight back by political mobilisation. More often than not, it is by cutting deals with politicians (in return for votes) than direct agitational recourse. This is roughly what political scientist Partha Chaterjee has termed as 'political society' where the poor, even though they are in violation of some laws, are able to preserve their interests by leveraging their votes.
The current crackdown against so-called Bangladeshis (read Bengali Muslims), however, is different. The recourse to 'political society' insurance in the place where the crackdown is taking place is not really an option. The BJP is not interested in votes of Bengali Muslims or Muslims generally. In fact, the BJP being in power is something which is always despite rather than because of the Muslim vote. The 'political society' which is sympathetic to the cause of these people – the anti-BJP political spectrum in West Bengal – does not have jurisdiction in this matter. The ruling Trinamool Congress, which is the overwhelming recipient of Muslim votes in the state of West Bengal, has been extremely vocal on the targeting of Bengali speaking Muslims which is currently underway. But the best Mamata Banerjee and her government can offer these people is a right to stay safely in the state of West Bengal. The irony is, these people would have never left if their home state – assuming most of them are from West Bengal and not Bangladesh – had the kind of economic opportunities which have attracted them to more prosperous, growing and therefore income generating cities outside West Bengal.
Also Read: Bengal migrant worker alleges torture by Haryana police; minister visits him
The helplessness involved here is particularly damning for Mamata Banerjee. The BJP has polled almost 40% of the vote share in the past three Lok Sabha and assembly elections held in West Bengal since the 2019 Lok Sabha one. The Trinamool Congress, however, has managed to win each of these elections with a greater vote share than the BJP. Given the fact that almost 30% (it was 27% in 2011 census) of West Bengal's population is Muslim and assuming that they do not vote for the BJP, one can deduce that the BJP already has the support of the majority of Hindus in the state of West Bengal. The only reason it cannot defeat the Trinamool is the latter's support among Muslims. In fact, the rise in Trinamool's footprint in Muslim-dominated regions of north Bengal – it has come at the cost of the Congress and the CPI (M) in the post-2014 period – suggests that there has been a Muslim consolidation behind the Trinamool with the BJP's rise in the state of West Bengal (more on this later). While Muslim support in West Bengal is crucial for Banerjee's and her party's survival in the state, she can do precious little to prevent their harassment in BJP-ruled states where these Muslim migrants go in search of better income opportunities. If this asymmetry continues, Mamata's political capital among the Bengali Muslims is bound to diminish although the chances of Muslims deserting her or her party are still pretty low. There is nothing more demoralizing for a politician than not being able to do something for their core voter base facing persecution.
Two more questions need to be asked before concluding this column.
What does this persecution mean for India's larger political economy? Free migration for the underclass has been the biggest engine of (relative) upward mobility in post-reform India. It is the most effective engine of trickle-down growth in India's small pockets of opulence where high-income middle-class settlements employ many blue-collar workers either directly (domestic helps etc.) or indirectly (myriad forms of manual labour). This is also a process which has largely been caste and religion agnostic so far. Adding a linguistic and religious caveat to these opportunities introduces an in-built inequality in this engine which did not exist earlier.
Also read: Caught between identity, survival: Tale of a Gurugram exodus
Bengal has always had a high share of Muslims in the population and Bengali Muslims have been migrating for a long time in India. What explains this new zeal to stereotype (if not outright persecution) them now? Until 2019, which is when the BJP became a close number two in the state, Muslims were part of both sides of the political aisle in the state and were divided along the fault line of the so-called 'party-society' than the typical secular-communal binary in most Indian states. What is happening in Bengal today is bringing it closer to an Assam kind of polity. The BJP already has an edge among Hindus in Bengal and is trying hard to take it beyond a critical threshold by portraying the Muslim as a foreigner. When a state has a 70%-30% population divide between the majority and minority community and the balance is more equal in large parts of the state (if one were to exclude parts like the tribal majority districts of West Bengal bordering Jharkhand and Odisha) then a communal divide in politics can be an extremely dangerous and even destabilising force.
For all its failures and inadequacies, the CPI (M) which ruled the state from 1977-2011, the early years of which saw a far more unstable refugee/migration problem in West Bengal, was successful in preventing communalism in the state's politics. Political competition, as well as political violence in the state, was religion agnostic. While a status-quo-ante in terms of return of the religion agnostic 'party-society' model is extremely unlikely in West Bengal, business as usual will be increasingly tested in the days to come because of the fundamental asymmetry facing the Bengali Muslims and their party of choice.
To see the ongoing 'anti-Bangladeshi' drives in BJP ruled states without this larger perspective will be missing the woods for the trees.
Roshan Kishore, HT's Data and Political Economy Editor, writes a weekly column on the state of the country's economy and its political fall out, and vice-versa
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

​Bullying tactics: on India pushing back against the U.S., the EU
​Bullying tactics: on India pushing back against the U.S., the EU

The Hindu

time23 minutes ago

  • The Hindu

​Bullying tactics: on India pushing back against the U.S., the EU

After months of considerable forbearance, the statement by the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), on Monday, pushing back against the U.S. and the European Union (EU) for 'targeting' India is significant. The statement came two hours after Mr. Trump had announced penalty tariffs against India, 'substantially' above the current 25% rate set to go into place this week, for importing, processing and selling Russian oil. A day earlier, a senior Trump aide had accused India of 'financing' Russia's war in Ukraine. And on July 18, the EU had announced sanctions on India's Vadinar refinery (partially Russian owned), and secondary sanctions that will affect Indian refiners. The MEA spokesperson said that the measures were 'unjustified and unreasonable' as the U.S. and the EU continue to trade with Russia for goods including LNG, critical minerals and nuclear fuel requirements. The statement also said that it was the U.S. that had encouraged India to keep buying Russian oil to stabilise global markets, something the Biden administration had confirmed. The government said that in comparison to the western countries, India's Russian oil purchases are a 'vital national compulsion' as a result of the conflict in Ukraine, adding that India would '... safeguard its national interests and economic security'. The MEA's statement is the first such clear response on the issue since the Ukraine conflict. Taken with Union Minister Piyush Goyal's statement last week on the U.S. announcement of 25% reciprocal tariffs on India from August 7, Monday's statement indicates New Delhi's growing frustration with the U.S.'s increasingly offensive positions against India, including on immigration, trade negotiations, Operation Sindoor and Pakistan, and India's BRICS membership. It is unclear how and to what extent the government is prepared to stand up to the bullying tactics of Mr. Trump. Mr. Trump said on Tuesday that India has not been a 'good trading partner' — a possible reference to trade talks and the failure of a mini-deal, ostensibly over India's resistance on agricultural market access, dairy products and GM foods. While it is hoped that New Delhi will continue to engage Washington and Brussels to conclude their respective trade talks, the MEA statement is meant to make a larger point. Neither the U.S. nor the EU can decide which country India will partner or trade with. That message is being underlined in visits by Security Adviser Ajit Doval and External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar to Moscow, to prepare for the Russian President's visit to India later this year. India's sovereignty is non-negotiable and its foreign policy choices cannot be manipulated by other countries, no matter how significant their own ties with India are.

The technocratic calculus of India's welfare state
The technocratic calculus of India's welfare state

The Hindu

time23 minutes ago

  • The Hindu

The technocratic calculus of India's welfare state

With a billion Aadhaar enrollments, 1,206 schemes integrated into the Direct Benefit Transfer system, and 36 grievance portals across States/Union Territories, India's welfare orientation is transitioning into a technocratic calculus. The promise to deliver social welfare at scale, bypassing leaky pipelines and eliminating ghost beneficiaries, might have led to a 're-casting' that delivers 'efficiency' and 'coverage' at the cost of 'democratic norms' and 'political accountability'. An offloading Are we witnessing the emergence of a post-rights based welfare regime? Is the Indian digital welfare state headed towards a systemic impasse? What is the technocratic calculus behind all this? Recent game-theoretic work shows that technocratic rule thrives where parties are polarised. Evidently, our questions have changed. We have shifted from 'who deserves support and why?' to 'how do we minimise leakage and maximise coverage?' Our politicians across party lines have rationally offloaded hard-choices onto data-driven algorithms without questioning the complexities of constitutional values. Contextualising Habermas's 'technocratic consciousness' and Foucault's 'governmentality', India's welfare architecture is increasingly shaped by measurable, auditable, and depoliticised rationality. Schemes such as E-SHRAM and PM KISAN embody a uni-directional, innovation-led logic that is streamlined, measurable, and intolerant of ambiguity or error. Conversely, we have deliberative calls for participatory planning and local feedback embodying the long forgotten core of democratic thinking resonating Giorgio Agamben's notion of homo sacer — a life stripped of political agency. Seemingly, welfare, in the contemporary context, has ceased to exist as a site of democratic deliberations. On a microscopic level, a rights-bearing citizen has been replaced by the auditable beneficiary. Thus, it calls for an urgent need for the state to revisit (in a Rancierean sense) whether it is curating who is visible, who can complain, and whose suffering is computable. Despite claims of a 'socialistic state', we observe a decade-low decline in India's social sector spending that has dwindled to 17% in 2024-25 from the 2014-24 average of 21%. Further, there are some interesting observations beyond plain statistics. Key social sector schemes have borne the brunt of such decline where minorities, labour, employment, nutrition and social security welfare saw a significant decline from 11% (in the pre-COVID-19 phase) to 3% (in post-COVID-19 phase). Parallely, social commentators often comment the Right to Information (RTI) regime to be in 'existential crisis' and further uncovering the cloak on RTI exposes a critical issue within the institution of dysfunctional information commissions. As of June 30, 2024, the number of pending cases crossed the four lakh tally across 29 Information Commission's (ICs), and eight CIC posts were vacant (annual report of CIC, 2023-24). The Indian welfare regime must recover its capacity for reflexivity and situated knowledge, elements that are very peculiar to gram sabhas and frontline bureaucratic discretions. To draw Rancière's critique on democracy, we highlight one major impending concern, that 'democracy depends on whose suffering is rendered visible and contestable, not merely computable'. This concern is further highlighted in Justice D.Y Chandrachud's Aadhaar dissent (2018), that warned precisely against such decontextualisation of identity which served as a caution against reducing citizens to disembedded, machinic data who are devoid of care, context, or even constitutional assurance in some cases. Another instance of algorithmic insulation Another worrisome trend is the Centralised Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System's flattening of the federal hierarchies into ticket-tracking systems. Although it is a novel initiative resolving tickets and routing complaints across state agencies, empirical data show that lakhs of grievances were disposed of between 2022-24. But on a closer examination it might just be centralising the visibility but not the responsibility — a form of algorithmic insulation that renders political accountability increasingly elusive. These observations are not to dismiss the value of such initiatives. Rather, they invite a deeper conversation on how welfare governance can evolve for a more resilient and responsive state. The government should now think along the lines of 'democratic antifragility' so that our systems built on perfect data and flawless infrastructure do not fail catastrophically under stress (consider Taleb's 'hyper-integrated systems'). We need to empower States to design context-sensitive regimes where federalism and welfare push for pluralism as a feature. Institutionalising community-driven impact audits (as reiterated by the UN Special Rapporteur on Extreme Poverty), by looping in the Rashtriya Gram Swaraj Abhiyan and Gram Panchayat Development Plans should be the core target. All States must be made capable to build platform cooperatives where self-help groups act as intermediaries; functionally, lessons can be learnt from Kerala's Kudumbashree. Civil society must be incentivised to invest in grass-roots political education and legal aid clinics in order to strengthen the community accountability mechanisms. Lastly, it is time we strengthen and codify our offline fall-back mechanisms, human feedback safeguards, and statutory bias audits by embedding the 'right to explanation and appeal' — as proposed by the UN Human Rights for digital governance systems. Focus on the citizen We, as citizens of India, must realise that a welfare state stripped of democratic deliberations is a machine that works efficiently for everyone except those it is meant to help. For a Viksit Bharat we will have to reorient digitisation with democratic and anti-fragile principles so that citizens become partners in governance, and not mere entries in a ledger. Anmol Rattan Singh is the Co-founder of the PANJ Foundation, a Punjab-based policy research think tank. Agastya Shukla is a Programme Associate at the PANJ Foundation, a Punjab-based policy research think tank

Touchdown In Jaipur: Ukraine's First Lady Refuels Diplomacy En Route To Tokyo
Touchdown In Jaipur: Ukraine's First Lady Refuels Diplomacy En Route To Tokyo

India.com

time23 minutes ago

  • India.com

Touchdown In Jaipur: Ukraine's First Lady Refuels Diplomacy En Route To Tokyo

New Delhi: Jaipur stirred at dawn. Wrapped in a soft morning haze, Rajasthan's pink city turned briefly into a stage of diplomacy. At 6:30 am on August 3, wheels touched the tarmac as a sleek aircraft arrived with a 23-member Ukrainian delegation. First Lady Olena Zelenska stepped off. Her presence was composed and poised. Walking beside her was Ukraine's Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha, who also serves as deputy head of the Presidential Office. Senior officials from Kyiv followed with measured steps and focused expressions. Their suits were sharp and movements purposeful. The mission continued toward Tokyo, passing through the warmth of Jaipur's still-sleeping skies, leaving behind the trace of protocol. The unscheduled stop was not for diplomacy on Indian soil. It was for fuel. However, it did not go unnoticed. The Ministry of External Affairs had cleared the protocol well in advance. On August 1, India's Foreign Ministry issued instructions to the Bureau of Civil Aviation Security to ensure full courtesies. The delegation was exempted from frisking and pre-embarkation checks. Following the official directive, Jaipur airport staff arranged VIP services for the brief halt. The visiting team included Ukraine's Permanent Representative to the United Nations Sergiy Kyslytsya and Minister for Economic Affairs Oleksii Sobolev. They exited the aircraft and spent time in the VIP lounge. Ukrainian Embassy officials from Delhi had reached Jaipur early to receive them over light refreshments and conversations. Immigration clearance was not required. Around 8:15 am, the delegation boarded the plane again and resumed their journey to Tokyo. The visit to Japan carries weight. Ukrainian officials are expected to meet their Japanese counterparts to reinforce ties. The focus is likely to fall on two priorities: increased sanctions on Russia and support for Ukraine's war-ravaged economy. India's connection to Ukraine runs deep. Back in December 1991, India was one of the first nations to recognise Ukraine's independence. Diplomatic relations followed just a month later, in January 1992. Since then, ties have expanded across trade, education and mutual cooperation. Jaipur's brief appearance in Ukraine's journey to Tokyo may not make the front pages. But on the map of international diplomacy, it marks another moment where protocols, preparation and partnerships aligned, long enough to refuel.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store