GORKHALAND : English Booklet by Laaliguraas

Editorial : Democracy & Gorkhaland!

“We want Gorkhaland and nothing else” is what the people of Darjeeling hills are shouting and we too echoed it, agreeing with the demand. The movement sparked with the announcement of implementation of Bengali language as a compulsory one, and reignited the century-odd old dream for recognition of identity. And this time, it is a peoples’ movement. Peoples’ huge participation, vigilance over the leaders’ steps and outbursts of protests against any hint of opportunistic negotiations has led this movement to another level. 

We participated in the 'Pahal Walks' along with songs, poems, street plays, slogans and posters to support the liberation struggle of the Gorkha nationality and to condemn the state terror unleashed. Gorkhas are oppressed minority and are demanding a separate state of Gorkhaland within the Union of India. The government should listen. In India, the formation of States were initially done on the basis of languages, although certain policy changes were done later. But why can't there be another State Reorganisation commission formed and several other such demands reviewed? India acts like a jail to many oppressed ethnicities. Various nationality or linguistic struggles across the country proves it.

Darjeeling region was under the control of the kings of Sikkim, Bhutan, Nepal in phases, sometimes a autonomous region, sometimes in Bihar and lately was incorporated in  Bengal. Who are the aboriginals of this place? Historians might have different opinions about it, but yet it is for certain that the Gorkha/Nepali people are dwelling in this region for centuries. This topic might be discussed further, but we must understand that, only history cannot determine the future of people living in some place. Today people have thrown away the kings and colonial rules in the bins of history and is struggling with the system of capitalism, while writing the history of common people. In this journey, the voices of the people rendering their bloods and sweats must be heard. If we can't understand this, then history would deny the struggle and establishment of life of black Americans or Bengali refugees too. Can history afford to deny that? Should it do so?

After many long struggle and sacrifices, the Nepali people in this region have established their language-literature-culture, which is much different from the rest of Bengal. During British period, on the one hand, freedom movement was ongoing and on the other, was the struggle of the toiling mass. On one hand, voices of dissent and on the other, the quest for identity. This is how the history of Darjeeling took its shape.      

When we feel proud calling our country a 'democracy' and while the majority people of this region are demanding separate state for their nationality, then 'democracy' should recognise it. The government of West Bengal, the present one or the previous, has always acted against the voices of the hill people. The Chief minister, who used to say that 'the hill is smiling', is now unleashing havoc state terror, her police is killing innocent lives, internet and local medias blacked out, foodgrains and medical supplies being interrupted, and sending armed forces in consultation with the centre. We know the role of this Central government and BJP is dangerous to the unity and progress of the people of the country and now it is becoming clear in the context of Darjeeling also.

In this movement communal violence must be avoided. Democratic rights of ethnic minorities must be protected. We must expose the role of State Government and the ruling party for trying to develop opposition in the Bengali community, towards this movement and creating division among the Gorkha community by forming various tribal boards, so as to destroy the inner force of the movement. We must steer this movement for enhancement of our identity, for democracy, for the betterment of the toiling class, for employment of youths, for education of students, for better health system for the common people and for overall development of society.

Not mere emotion, but far-vision should be the driving force of the movement. We shall advance our struggle to build a 'Democratic Gorkhaland' and a 'Democratic India' in its true sense.

The legacy we uphold : Gorkhas in Freedom Struggle

Ambika Rai

Gorkhas are ‘brave’! This imposition of an imagery limits or portrays the entire community in a monolithic manner. The popular narratives uttered frequently in society are mostly created by the ruling class, and as they have a strong campaign machinery, these narratives spread widely too.
Britishers identified the Kharia & Sabars as a "criminal" tribe, as they did identify Gorkhas as "brave". But can a community as a whole be identified in such a homogeneous manner? This narrative of 'brave' revolves around the idea of the Gorkhas as an exclusive ethnic group juxtaposed with the liberal nationalist imagination of the ‘Indian nation’. ‘Brave’ are those in history who serve the purpose of the then ruling class. And it goes on changing with the handover of the baton of rule.
But is it that black and white? People in a community are of different types. Various aspirations, dreams, livelihood steer the lives, and the objective reality as well as ideological beliefs often pave the thought processes. So we need to tear apart this veil and look upon deeply into the narrative.
We need to denounce this colonial construction of the Gorkha identity, which is prevailing till date. The ‘glory’ of fighting (for the masters) on the borders of the countries all over the world, doesn’t at all corroborate with the repression unleashed by the same masters, while demanding the recognition of identity. Let us not ignore the sacrifices made, but we would like to view the history from the other side. We are in a peoples' struggle now. So let us shed light from that angle. Here is an account of Gorkha peoples' participation in the freedom movement in British India. 

In the year 1907, the ‘leaders’ of the Hills submitted their charter for a separate administrative setup outside Bengal for the first time. They consisted of the retired army and police officers, who were supported by the landed aristocrats and rich traders. Their leader was S. W. Ladenla, an Additional Superintendent of Police in Darjeeling. They expressed their loyalty towards the British and stated their dislike about the ‘nationalist movement’.

But it is interesting to note that, almost at the same time, the partition of Bengal and the Swadeshi movement gave birth to a strong anti-British movement and the wave of which started to entangle the Gorkha people too. A number of revolutionary magazines were published from the different parts of the country. Gorkha Sathi was published from Kolkata in 1907. The editor of this Nepali magazine was Pritiman Thapa and Han Singh Thapa, the publisher. Pritiman Thapa gave a call to Gorkha soldiers to fight against the British in India. Regarding Thapa’s acts, the Commissioner of Police in Calcutta sent a telegram to the Director of Criminal Intelligence on May 28, 1907. It reads: “A Nepalese, Prithiman Thapa, addresses a meeting at Calcutta Square, 27th. Evening, about 200 present, advocated publishing monthly newspapers for distribution to Gorkha soldiers to ascertain situations and their duties for the motherland, case of poverty in India and true connection between Gorkhas and Bengalese and English. Unfortunately Nepali gentleman visiting Calcutta found difficulty in mixing with Bengalese not knowing Bengali. He will strive to bring Bengalese and Nepalese together....” (Foreign Dept. External lB Proceedings, Sept.1907, Nos. 1019, National Archives of India)

Parasmani Pradhan, Suryabikram Ghewali, Dharanidhar Sharma and many others established Nepali Sahitya Sammelan, aimed at the development of Nepali language and literature. And in 1920, they placed the demand for self rule within Bengal. During this time, Gandhian non cooperation movements started flourishing in the tea plantations, under the leadership of Dal Bahadur Giri and other educated Nepalis like Partiman Singh Lama, Savitri Devi, Putali Devi, Agam Singh Giri, Man Bahadur Giri, Bhagat Bir Tamang. In the entire course of the struggle for Independence, Gaga Tshering Dukpa, Mitra Sen Thapa, Major Durga Malla, Chabilal Upadhyay, Captain Dal Bahadur Thapa, Jungbir Sapkota, Ram Singh Thakuri, Krishna Bahadur Mukhia and Pushpa Kumar Ghising were the others to mention. Dal Bahadur Giri was arrested in June and November of 1921 in Darjeeling on charges of anti-government activities. He breathed his last in 1924 at the age of just 36. Partiman Singh Lama, a close friend of Dalbahadur Giri, was a Forest Range Officer. He quit government service and plunged into the movement. He organized activists in Kurseong and Mirik. He was served a notice asking him to refrain from leaving Kurseong town without the permission of the police. Helen Lepcha, who was renamed as Savitri Devi by Gandhiji, was the prominent Gorkha woman freedom fighter from Kurseong. She helped Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose in the famous escape from imprisonment in Kurseong. She, along with her twelve Gorkha volunteers, was arrested and put behind bars.

On the 8th May 1934, Bhawani Bhattacharya and Rabindranath Banerjee, the young revolutionaries made an assassination attempt on the Governor of Bengal John Anderson at Darjeeling. Bhawani Bhattacharya was eventually sentenced to death and Rabindranath Banerjee sentenced to life in prison. Later other revolutionaries who were found co-conspirators were also sentenced to prison. Though it is not clear as to where they lived or who hosted them, it is known that they met frequently with the underground revolutionaries and supporters at the Nipendra Narayan Hindu Public Hall and practiced firing at the forests below the Shrubbery Park. Darjeeling was truly humbled by the blood of these great revolutionaries. A great spurt thence was noticed among the local people who took up the cause of the motherland.

Chobilal Upadhyay, a Gorkha, was the first president of the Assam Provincial Congress Committee (APCC). Bhaktabahadur Pradhan, Dalbir Singh Lohar, Pratap Singh Subba were the other prominent freedom fighters there. Upadhyay, along with others, hoisted the Congress flag at Behali Thana in 1942. The police arrested him and sent him to jail.

Under the leadership of Subhas Chandra Bose Gorkhas joined the Indian National Army (INA) and fought against the British government. He appealed to the Indian Nepalis in the Darjeeling hills to join him, at a meeting of the Bengal Provincial Congress held in Jalpaiguri in 1939. Responding to the appeal, an estimated 1,000 people from remote hill areas enrolled.

Captain Durga Malla, a Gorkha from Dehradun and an eminent freedom fighter of INA, was caught in forest of Malaya by the Japanese forces, and was hung in the central jail of Delhi on the 25 August 1944. He was charged with “Waging War against King emperor” and “Committing a civil offence contrary to the section 41” under the Indian Army Act. He fought alongside Captain Mohan Singh, who himself was the General and Commander in Chief of Army for liberation of India. Captain Mohan Singh even chose Captain Durga Malla as the Major of INA and he was assigned for gathering information from the British group.

Special mention must be made of Captain Ram Singh Thakuri, who remains immortal as the military musician for the Azad Hind government-in-exile because of the tunes he set to the INA’s marching songs.

Captain Dal Bahadur Thapa, another great Gorkha rebel was the commander of an elite unit within the INA. During the battle at the Kohima-Manipur Front, he was captured by the British forces and was charged with “Waging War” during a trial held at Red Fort, Delhi.

Major Purna Singh Thakur was the first Gorkha to join the initiative of Captain Mohan Singh. Puran Singh Thakur was given the task of recruiting troops from the Indian Prisoners of war for INA. In June 1942, he along with fellow members were captured in Rangoon and was imprisoned for as seven years.

The INA had a group comprising of teenagers known as ‘Bal Sena’ or ‘Janbaz Dal’. One of the functions of the group was akin to modem day suicide squads or human bombs. Indreni Thapa and Sabitri Thapa, the two Gorkha teenagers of ‘Janbaz’ reached the zenith of martyrdom by blowing up British tanks, making themselves human bombs by strapping mines on their bodies and crawling under the British tanks camouflaged as bushes. Reportedly, non other than Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose was the eye-witness of this supreme sacrifice.

Pushpa Kumar Ghising participated in the Naval Uprising of 1946. He resigned from the Navy on September 8, 1946 to plunge into the independence movement now on its ultimate stage. He got into the naval ammunition dump alone and taken its control after bringing down at least three British soldiers stationed there. The weapons thus procured were used by the Indian sailors to hold back the British for 5 days. On the fifth day, Ghising and his friends were arrested and taken to the Mulundi Jail where he was court-martialed but acquitted during the trial.

The name of such brave Gorkhas does not end here. The list holds other names too who participated in the freedom struggle, Bhaktabahadur Pradhan, Dalbir Singh Lohar, Pratap Singh Subba, Deo Narayan Pradhan, D. B. Pradhan, Jungbir Sapkota and Krishna Bahadur Mukhia among many others.

As a matter of fact, they are the ones who truly deserves to be called as “Brave” among the Gorkhas. But there may be just a handful of us who know about these people. Like every other freedom fighter of our country, they have fought for the freedom from the British clutch, so why their effort and sacrifices does goes out in vain? Don’t they deserve the place in history? 

A Prisonhouse of oppressed Nationalities : INDIA

Parag Banerjee

Today’s India was not like it always. It has gone under several mergers, some forcefully and some diplomatically, both were for the benefit of the ruling class of the then India. As history is largely used to justify the oppressive unification of nationalities in one nation, we need to revisit the history of formation of India as a nation-state, and the formation of different states within India.

Indian sub-continent: before colonial rule

To trace the movements of different nationalities, with respect to Indian nation-state, we need to trace a brief history from many a years before to 1947. In pre-colonial India, there was no one language or culture in this sub-continent. There were no well defined geographical borders between one set of objective identity parameters (like ethnicity, language, culture, religion, caste etc) and another. Though there was a vague idea about a country named India, reflected in the writings of then eminent persons, it was largely derived from the concept of a massive landmass from the Himalayas in the north to the ocean in the south, which got manifested from time to time. The major determining factor in the course of history, behind the unification of all these differences to a single nation-sate with same legal structure and tax-system was the interest of the colonial rulers, to plunder the natural resources of this country and to create a market for their imported goods. If the British had not come, the fate of these ethnic groups and nationalities of this sub-continent would have been different.

Movements during colonial India

The movements of different nationalities started beginning within colonial India with ‘Andhra MahaSabha’ demanding for a separate Andhra Pradesh in 1911. For language-based creation of states and education in mother tongue, movements were building up among the Tamil, Malayali, Marathi, Gujarati, Bengali and Oriya in the tumultuous times of the anti-imperialist struggles of 1918-1922. From the Nagpur session of Congress in 1920, their organisation building started to be based on linguistic provinces. In 1929, headed by Motilal Nehru, the Nehru committee presented to the Simon Commission their demand for language based provinces. But the national leadership of congress started backtracking slowly and the assertion of a nation-state came to focus alongside with the rise of anti-colonial struggle throughout the country.

1947 and creation of Indian nation-state

The aftermath of the ‘Two nation theory’, demand for a separate state for Muslims, the bloody riots following the Partition drowned the voices of different nationalities. After the exit of the British the brown-skinned rulers started terming the voices of the nationalities as signals of separatism and denied the demands for language-based provinces. At this stage, the nationality movements were growing mainly in the princely states ruled by feudal kings. The feudal interest of these princely states, which earlier used to get support from the British, for retaining their control over their subjects, started to switch to Indian state, dreaming their interest would be saved. As a result the Indian state got consolidated and the jubilant native rulers started injustice towards the demands of the nationalities forgetting their earlier promises. In the constitution of the ‘independent’ India, drafted in 1950, there were no rights of self-determination, self-governance, and secession for the states. Almost all powers rested in the hands of the central government. Instead of being a republic based on self-governance, India built itself as a ‘prison-house of nationalities’.

The annexation of territories to India

Under the June 3 plan, 562 princely states were given the option of joining either India or Pakistan or choosing Independence. Indian nationalists and large segments of the public feared that if these states did not accede, a vast majority of the people and territory would be fragmented. The rulers of the princely states were not uniformly enthusiastic about integrating their domains into independent India. By far the most significant factor that led to the princes’ decision to accede to India was the policy of the Congress, with Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel  and V.P Menon playing the leading role. In July 1946, Nehru pointed that no princely state could prevail militarily against the army of independent India. In January 1947, he said that independent India would not accept the ‘Divine Right of Kings’, and in May 1947, he declared that any princely state which refused to join the Constituent Assembly would be treated as an enemy state. There was the use of both threat and diplomacy to the kings but the question of peoples’ aspiration was never taken seriously. In most of the cases these kings were very unpopular among their subjects, and their choice was according to some vested interest and did never reflect the aspirations of the people.

The reorganisation of states within India

The States Reorganisation Commission (SRC) was the body constituted by the Central Government, in 1953, to recommend the reorganization of state boundaries according to linguistic basis. After nearly 2 years of study, the Commission recommended that that India’s state boundaries should be reorganized to form 16 states and 3 union territories. Throughout the two years of its work, the Commission was faced with meetings, demonstrations, agitations, and hunger strikes. The strongest reaction against the SRC’s report and the States Reorganization Act came from Maharashtra where widespread rioting broke out and eighty people were killed in Bombay city in police firings in January 1956. From then on, there were reflections of peoples’ aspirations in movements on behalf of people of Kashmir,  Tamilnadu, Karnataka, Kerala, Vidarbha, Gujarat, Sikkim, Uttaranchal, Punjab and peoples from different origins of north-east. There is continuous state repression and a virtual ‘Army-rule’ and continuous violation of human rights in parts of Kashmir and north-eastern states like Assam, Manipur, Mizoram, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh to suppress the peoples’ right to self determination.

Some cases of reorganization

The first re-organisation of states on linguistic basis was merging Telangana with Andhra. Nehru commented– ‘An innocent girl called Telangana is being married to a naughty boy called Andhra. It is their choice to continue or get separated.’ Even it was the will of Telangana to get separated but it was only after huge bloodshed it was carved off Andhra Pradesh, that too keeping in view 2014 Lok Sabha Election and other calculations. The motive behind the merger was to exploit the natural resources of Telangana, which later on became the cause for its separation.

The reason cited for the formation of Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand was mainly ‘administrative advantage’, hich turned out to be advantage of the MNC’s in plunder of mines and other natural resources and advantage to control the dissenting voices from the people. The case of Kashmir is probably among the worst examples. Both the Indian and the Pakistani state along with Chinese, fought with each other and caused to kill many civilians for decades, but none care to give the people of Kashmir their right to self-determination.

The case of Gorkhaland is somewhat different; demand of Gorkhaland and various other aspects are discussed on other articles. The agenda here is to bind all the nationality based movements. The State enunciates suppression if the movement is against its political will.

Demand of self-determination and its FIght

Among the upholders of Indian nationalism there are debates regarding whether the formation of more small states on language or nationality basis within Indian Territory will strengthen Indian nationalism or weaken it. In the realms of administration and education the all-India big bourgeoisie foists the English and Hindi languages throughout the country and thereby stunts the development of the languages of the nationalities. The language question may only be resolved by permitting equality of the national languages. The Indian ruling classes attempts to promote unity of the state on the basis of Hindi identity; it targets the minority communities through anti-Muslim and anti-Sikh pogroms.

A consistent democratic approach to the nationality question necessitates support for the Kashmiri people, the demand of the Gorkhas etc and the nationalities of the North-East. The solution to the problem of nationality struggles are connected to end of the current centralized economic and political control by the central government, the use of national languages in the administration and education in the mother-tongue, a struggle against big national chauvinism of the bigger nationalities and against fundamentalism particularly Hindi fundamentalism. The establishment of a voluntary federation of the nationalities based on the right to secession, autonomy for the minority nationalities in each national republic is needed to proceed in the direction of social equality and progress.

The nationality question & the right to self-determination of oppressed nationalities

Kapil Tamang

To delve into the Nationality question and the demand for self-determination, to chalk out a gross outline regarding our position with respect to it as a progressive force, we need to enter deeper into the subject.

Formation of a Nationality

In the primitive era, people used to dwell in some relatively small collectives (clan) or some of those clans lived together (tribes), the foundation of which was kinship or blood relation. With time, these tribes merged together to form a race or a nation, whose members are not only connected by blood relations, but generally it took shape by the integration of several tribes bearing different racial features.

In the pre-capitalist era, under the discrete rule or laws, nationalities that were formed encompassing several isolated collectives did not bear any economic or political tie at all. The flare of nationalistic consciousness was first seen while the process of elimination of feudalism and development of capitalism were going on. In the era before the birth of modern capitalist countries, there were established colonies in different parts of the world. Under the confinements put by the imperialists, in their interests, the nationalities started to get their shapes and it yielded in distorted economic and political development.

Capitalism created modern nations

The development of capitalism created modern nations.

.... “Nationality ... is not a racial or tribal phenomenon. It has five essential features: there must be a stable, continuing community, a common language, a distinct territory, economic cohesion, and a collective character. It assumes positive political form as a nation under definite historical conditions, belonging to a specific epoch, that of the rise of capitalism and the struggles of the rising bourgeoisie under feudalism.” [Based on J. V. Stalin, Marxism and the National Question, 1913].

The call of free market was alluring the emerging bourgeoisie to overcome the native boundaries of feudalism. They, to ensure mass support, gave a political effort to make ‘their own people’ conscious about ‘their own culture and politics’, and in this quest, new myths were discovered; several phrases and motifs were used to convert this identity consciousness into a powerful and effective emotion. This is nationalism. This is the very trump card for the nascent bourgeoisie to get into the throne of power.

Now in case of nationality-based oppression, it is for the gains of a small section of the oppressor nationality. However in doing this they try to include the oppressive nationality in its entirety and even don’t hesitate creating animosity throughout the society or promulgating riots, if required.

Nationalism- a bourgeois philosophy

Nationality struggle- a FIght for freedom

Nationalism, be it of the oppressor or the oppressed, or of any nationality, is nothing but a bourgeois philosophy. And it is based on “National Unity” which is the unity of the proletariat & the bourgeoisie of one nationality against all the other.

The struggle for nationality is generally led by the local bourgeoisie. Often they are in clash with the bourgeoisie of the dominant nationality for the control of local businesses, which eventually translates into the demand for right to self-determination. This demand can only become all-prevailing when in reality their social-cultural expressions get trampled and their socio-economic development is hindered. Then only people from all walks of life join in the fight of liberty from the oppressors. So the fight of freedom being against the oppressive ruling class of the dominating nationality, every democratic person needs to support these struggles and the baton of leadership can be carried over to the hands of one class to the other. It is imperative for the working class and oppressed people and the democratic voices in these struggles to participate and create debates within, and to influence the course of the movement. Whence these battles get concluded, struggles against other exploitations ubiquitous in the society will become inevitable, especially the class-struggle.

Right to self-determination :

A fundamental democratic right

For every nationality right to self-determination is a fundamental democratic right. It means the right of a people of a nationality living within a boundary to create a sovereign state for them within that boundary. Right to self-determination is the right to secede as well.

If at the end, we ‘Imagine all the people sharing all the world’, an essential condition to that end is the struggle of nationalities for equal rights which means revoking all the special privileges relished by the oppressor nationality along with the inequalities suffered by the oppressed. “From their daily experience the masses know perfectly well the value of geographical and economic ties and the advantages of a big market and a big state. They, therefore, resort to secession only when national oppression and national friction make joint life absolutely intolerable and hinder any and all economic intercourse.”

“We demand freedom of self-determination, i.e., independence, i.e., freedom of secession for the oppressed nations, not because we have dreamt of splitting up the country economically, or of the ideal of small states, but, on the contrary, because we want large states and the closer unity and even fusion of nations, only on a truly democratic, truly internationalist basis, which is inconceivable without the freedom to secede” (Lenin, collected volumes, English, vol-21, page 413-14).

conFLicting nationalisms :Problems in them

Time and again we see two conflicting errors on the question of nationalism. The first is the nationalism of the oppressor nationality. Those who are contaminated with the chauvinism of the oppressors, namely their brand of nationalism, only utter the question of voluntary unity. They don’t speak up against the unity historically determined by imperialism; neither do they support the right to secede, though they speak of equal rights. It is unfathomable to them that as long as the right of nationalities to self-determination is not addressed, there won’t be any real unity or equality between the people of the oppressed & the oppressor nationalities.

Those plagued with the problematic nationalism of the advanced nationality, often consider today’s countries and their boundaries to be everlasting. The right of political “secession” seems incredulous to them. But under any circumstance or time the right to politically secede, the opinion being of the majority or expressed through a referendum, ought to be supported & whether it has any basis in reality is hardly a valid question here. What is impossible today can become inevitable tomorrow.

The other problem is getting entangled in the bourgeois nationalism of the oppressed nation. Here the problem is of opposite nature. They only consider the emancipation of their own nationality, only envisage what the bourgeois of their own nationality see— but deny understanding that this very struggle has a distant goal of voluntary unification of the nationalities too. And often, failing to keep the correct orientation, this struggle gets derailed, and endangers the unity of the working class.

These two problems of two nationalisms creeping among the oppressor and oppressed nations are the reflections of the dominance of the bourgeoisie, bourgeois thought over the whole sphere, and we should oppose them.

But while opposing bourgeois nationalism of all nations, we find that there is a democratic essence in the nationalism posed by the oppressed nationality, as this one grew out of the struggle against aggression of imperialism or big capital. Thus we support this struggle against nationality based oppression. The effect of bourgeois thought on the oppressor nation is more problematic as behind it lay the imprint of the bourgeoisie of dominant nation, the bourgeoisie in power. And along with that, added is the long nurtured idea of domination among the toiling people belonging to the oppressor nation.

How relevant is nationality Question right now?

Global capital is now concentrated in the hands of a few hundred global conglomerates. Centralization of capital is at its zenith. Every day, trade worth lahks of crore dollars gets conducted between multinationals. Monopolistic capital is increasing its stranglehold over this planet and astronomical amount of money is being spent for this purpose. These few hundred corporations are aggressively pursuing a disastrous strategy with the only goal to maximize profit. At the receiving end is the working class. Every new merger brings to it news of closure, layoffs or more work load.

Without going into too many details it can be said that though no end to poverty, illiteracy or failing health throughout the globe seems to be in sight, the corporations seem to seamlessly merge into the capitalistic states and their tools of oppression. A conflict becomes apparent at this juncture. A section of the bourgeoisie and petty-bourgeoisie theorists have began to opine that in the present backdrop of globalization, ethnic identity is no longer as important as it had been in the past. In reality, with the strengthening of global market, the contradictions between nations have become even more intense. The history of last century is that of the revolt of production power against the limits of national boundaries. World economy has evolved in this direction and in its wake brought economic crises and world wars. The natural contradictions of capitalism have further provoked it to show it’s tooth and nail. But, not only in erstwhile colonies but even in developed capitalist countries the ethnic question has come to the fore in many cases. These questions are often getting raised in places where it had been earlier thought to be having been resolved. There is no doubt that capitalist exploitation will be on further rise.

On the other hand, the desire for freedom within the oppressed will increase with social progress. We need to realise that there is a contradiction in the formation of nationality due to the bourgeoisie or trickledown effect of capitalism on the one hand, and the process of fusion of nations or to wipe out their variations in the era of globalisation, on the other. We observe instances of backward nationalities advancing and getting more consolidated with time, and simultaneously we see some nationalities being smashed or getting extinct with time. It depends upon where the contradiction would lead.

But those who seek the ultimate solutions in this secessions or formation of small states or autonomous bodies might look at the previous instances of such formations. It is clear that the quantitatively increasing lures of self-rule will not convert to the qualitative taste of freedom for a race. 

The mode of capitalist production utilizes, among many other methods of exploitation, the practice of unfair exchange based on a repressed group’s lack of consciousness, helplessness of various forms and rampant unemployment. So to reach the desired horizon, the emphasis should be more on the issue of class struggle than on nationalist movements. But if however, the nationality movement comes to the fore, the question of identity motivates people superseding the class struggle, we need to respond to it positively, instead of turning it down. The sense of deprivation looming large needs to be attended to go ahead for a glorious destiny.

The Right to self-determination across the globe

Priyasikha Rai

At the international level, the right to self-determination of all nationalities is considered to be a fundamental right. It is important to notice the peoples' demand. Whether the demand is good or bad, whether it is instigated by separatists or terrorists, whether it is economically viable or geographically problematic, whether such demand will render people to more oppression, suffocation, distress or exploitation can be discussed and debated, but at the end of the day, the right to determine their destiny should lie with the people over there.

In the post-colonial era, in the era of advent of capitalism, these things came into discussion in theoretical manner and while framing the constitution in Socialist Soviet Russia, this right to self-determination including right to secede was introduced as a fundamental right officially for the first time in history.

But despite its inclusion in the human rights covenants or in the declarations of United Nations after the 2nd World War, the implementation of these principles continued in a slow and incomplete manner. Thus several people are deprived of this right.

In 1941, Allies of World War II signed the Atlantic Charter and accepted the principle of self-determination. In January 1942, twenty-six states signed the Declaration by United Nations, which accepted those principles.

The ratification of the United Nations Charter in 1945 at the end of World War II placed the right of self-determination into the framework of international law and diplomacy.

Chapter 1, Article 1, part 2 states that purpose of the UN Charter is:

“To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace.”

Article 1 in both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), read:

“All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.”

Though India has reserved to the matter of right to self-determination in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966, however, this reservation is on right of secession under the umbrella of right to self-determination.

The necessary implication in ICCPR and ICESCR is that the fundamental freedom guaranteed by various international instruments is to be encouraged by implementation of the right of self determination. This is an expression of basic democratic principles and means that people cannot be deprived by their own regime of the right of self-governance.

Initially the concept of right to self-determination gained importance in decolonization process post World War II and its concept has been evolving with changed circumstances. As of today, the internal aspect of this norm is much more emphasized and as such goes beyond the classical or post-colonial context.

Internal aspect of Right to self-determination includes right to self government or self rule, that is, the right for people to choose freely their own political, cultural and economic regime which is choosing the best that suits their own conditions rather than accepting something thrust from outside, due to political oppression.

However, there is a huge gap between the legal right and political reality. In today’s world when in one hand all the movements for self-determination, are suppressed in the name of curbing terrorism and separatism, on the other hand questions are also raised that which is more important, self-determination rights of the nationalities or an unperturbed border?

An attempt sponsored by Spain and Argentina to qualify the right to self-determination in cases where there was a territorial dispute was rejected by the UN General Assembly, which re-iterated the right to self-determination was a universal right.

In the post-colonial era these arguments on self-determination continue to live on within the United Nations through the numerous struggles of different nation-states and diverse oppressed nationalities.

In 1976 Universal Declaration of the Rights of Peoples was signed in Algiers which stated that,

“Every people has an imprescriptible and unalienable right to self-determination. It shall determine its political status freely and without any foreign interference. Every people has the right to break free from any colonial or foreign domination, whether direct or indirect, and from any racist regime. Every people has the right to have democratic government representing all the citizens without distinction as to race, sex, belief or colour, and capable of ensuring effective respect for the human rights and fundamental freedoms for all.”

But in reality, a lot of struggle is yet to be done.

STATEMENT BY HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANISATION

Human Rights violation in Darjeeling

ASSOCIATION FOR PROTECTION OF DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS (APDR)

18 Madan Boral Lane, Kolkata 700 012, Phone 9432276415

Email : apdr.wb@gmail.com             Website : apdrwb.in

                                             Press Release                           22/07/2017

'A Single Spark Can Start a Prairie Fire'-- This is what was concluded by the delegation team of APDR after visiting the turmoiled regions in the hills.

On 21 & 22 July 2017, the central investigation team of APDR got divided into two groups and visited different places in Darjeeling Hills. In each and every place like Kurseong, Sonada, Darjeeling, Bijanbari, Kalimpong, we got several instances of human rights violations. We spoke to the family members of agitators who got killed, to the joint leadership of the parties involved in the movement, contacted the administration and above all spoke with the general people.

Our Experiences

1) The number of people killed in firing in Singmari, Sonada and Mirik counts to 9. In most of the cases, the bullets had hit on the upper part of the body, even in the face also. While doing postmortem, videography too was not done. The state government is not admitting that police had fired the bullets. But the witnesses are emphasising that police only did so.

2)  Food crisis is severe in hills. People aren't getting their rations because the government is not willing to fetch, citing the strike by the agitators as a lame excuse. Whereas, the government didn't make any delay in sending the extra police and paramilitary forces! We conclude that there is severe violations about the right to food of the people of the hills.

3)  The crisis of recognition of the identity of the Gorkha people is a problem since a long time. They are also complaining since long that they are being deprived on the line of their separate nationality. The recent decision by the Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee that, in every school in the state of West Bengal, learning Bengali should be mandatory did add fuel to the fire. Basically, we feel that, this very spark turned into prairie fire. Apart from it, the way in which the government continuously tried to malign the highest leadership of the movement, also made the situation more complex.

4) We clearly feel that, some agitators also did or are doing things that are against the norms of civilization and profound thought. APDR strongly condemns the incidents of  demolishing the heritage buildings and libraries.

5)  At the same time, APDR is also concerned about the future of the famous tea industry of the Darjeeling hills. Since the high quality tea estates are closed now, it was not and is still not possible now to carry out the maintenance jobs in the tea gardens. There are apprehensions about deterioration in the quality of darjeeling tea.

6)  There are allegations about transparency in the functioning of the GTA. But at the same time, the role of the government too, regarding GTA, is also not proper. We demand that, white paper should be published on behalf of the West Bengal government in this matter.

In this overall context and after the ground investigation, APDR demands that :

a)  There should be a judicial enquiry regarding incidents of  death in police firing. The police, the administration and the government should stop giving statements regarding this matter in the meantime.

b) Withdraw all the false cases registered in the name of the agitators including the leaders of the movement. Release all the arrested people. Withdraw the armed forces from the hills.

c)  The right to food cannot be violated in any case. The responsibility of supplying food is on the government. The state government should immediately play their without citing any excuse.

d) The government should stop behaving in a revengeful manner with the government office staffs who failed to join their duties, due to the ongoing strike. Goverment should restrain themselves from executing punishment transfers and other means to heckle them.

e)  The APDR wants to unequivocally convey the agitators also that demolishing heritage buildings and libraries are highly condemnable. They should look into the matter.

f)  Keeping in mind the fame of Darjeeling tea and the associated financial aspects, we request the agitators to formulate the movemental steps by profound thinking. The real situation of the tea garden workers should also be kept in mind.

g)  Above all, APDR believes that the audacious behaviour of the state government has a major role behind developing this situation. The entire matter should be envisioned in a human and democratic manner and tried to be solved with flexibility and through proper discussion among the stakeholders. This is not a matter to exhibit and satisfy personal ego. The role of the central government is also very important in this case. They should leave their ill attempts to catch fish in muddy water and should take immediate steps to resolve the matter with sympathetic attitude.

Dhiraj Sengupta

General Secretary, APDR

[This press release was issued at Siliguri, just after the visit. According to them, now, they are preparing a detailed report, in which issues like ban on internet services and local TV channels, disruption in medical services and supply, and several other issues along with the matters mentioned above are being jotted down to furnish before all concerned.]