Tribal 'First Citizen': A dystopia dressed in policy bling

The problem with this government, as with the previous ones, is with a homogenised, paternalistic approach to tribal welfare. The likely elevation and election of Droupadi Murmu to president of India, while a recognition of both her gender and tribal identities - in particular, her Santhali identity - might seem like the peak of affirmative action. But it’s a dystopia dressed in policy bling.

The Nehruvian legacy of affirmative action through reservation, which began in the 1950s, continues to constitutionally empower India’s tribal population that today exceeds 100 million. Their homelands spread literally from the heart of India to its every extremity. This vast number, nudging a tenth of the population, is also collectively a powerhouse of histories, cultures, languages, heritage and lessons in communion with the environment. Governments have sought to preserve this gift of over 700 tribes with several schemes that run from promotion of cultural festivals to education and government jobs.

Also Read: Droupadi Murmu: New icon of subaltern Hindutva

The current government has also tom-tommed development schemes worth several billion dollars for India’s tribal areas, claiming also that they are triple that of spends by governments before 2014. But, as with several initiatives of this government, spectacularly failed or partially delivered, there is scant audit of either election-oriented soundbites or follow-up on promised delivery.

As damaging is the aspect of deciding what is good for the tribal. Few policymakers have displayed the sensitivity of a Verrier Elwin who even wrote a handbook for bureaucrats as to how to deal with the tribes of NEFA—Arunachal Pradesh’s earlier handle. (But even Elwin had his blemishes, one being the whitewashing of India’s war with Nagas). This paternalism is most obviously evident in the pro-forma trotting out of tribal troupes during various Republic Day parades and Independence Day celebrations across India.

India’s tribals have always paid the price for the sake of the country’s modernity. Vast tribal homelands and forests in present-day Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Odisha and elsewhere have been taken for little more than a pittance. Several million tribal people remain displaced and destitute for the sake of dams, factories and mines that for decades have fuelled India’s economy with little reinvestment in tribal areas. Attendant corruption has even contributed to militancy—such as the long-running Maoist rebellion.

It will be the unkindest cut if tribes are homogeneously made to pay for their own sense of modernity and identity — as the current government appears determined to do. The government pamphleteering, and speeches by senior ministers and even the prime minister have highlighted how schemes will “modernise” tribal cultures. They repeatedly reference Ram being sheltered by tribals as a stepping stone to his stellar mythological career. This assiduous project of the Sangh Parivar, decades in the making, even attempts to link the Northeast to mythological epics.

If that so-called approach to modernity resembles the Ashokan capital intended for the new parliament building, the result will be both distorted and ugly. If this government wishes to be truly modern, it could perhaps begin by renaming Meghalaya and Arunachal Pradesh from their lyrical Sanskrit to several apt names the states’ tribes could so easily provide.

(The writer is a historian, author, and commentator on matters of conflict-resolution and the intersection of democracy and development. His latest book is The Eastern Gate: War and Peace in Nagaland, Manipur and India’s Far East.)