By Bhogtoram Mawroh
Every election is important, and the upcoming 2024 parliamentary election is no different. The BJP-led NDA government is going for a third consecutive term with the added goal of getting to the 400-seat mark, which will give it unprecedented leeway to push through its agenda. Even if it gets those numbers, they will not include the two seats from Meghalaya, which it has forfeited by pledging to support their senior partner in the state, the NPP. Realizing it had no chance of winning the election, the BJP decided instead to pin its hope on a quid pro quo arrangement in the future, despite claiming in public that the support was unconditional. There is a feeling that BJP pledging its support to the NPP will help the Congress, which will want to bank on the anti-minority perception of the BJP by projecting the NPP as nothing but a BJP-B team and presenting themselves as the only viable alternative. But will that allegation stick, and how will the electorate on the ground react to such a narrative? This is where the story gets a little complicated, and the final voting outcome may throw up a surprise.
A few months ago I was doing my fieldwork in a village that falls in a constituency that voted for a non-BJP and non-NPP candidate. My colleague, who had accompanied me, was talking to one of the residents of the village about the newly constructed school building, which was coming up quite well. They acknowledged that funds for infrastructural development had been quite forthcoming in the last few years, and both were in agreement that it helps if the same party is ruling both at the state and in the center. Considering that there is the BJP in the center and the NPP in the state, the implication would be that the people would vote for either party. However, the assembly election results showed that the combined vote share of the two parties in that constituency did not even cross 10%. How does one explain that paradox? It’s quite simple, actually, and something that has been observed at the national level as well: people vote differently depending on the type of election. For national elections, people prefer a national party or one that has a link to one they feel will be able to better represent their interests, i.e., bring more funds for the state, rather than a regional party. So contrary to what many may claim that people who vote for national parties vote for money, it is only half true. People do vote for money, but money that they believe will help improve their lives. But what about the allegation that the NPP is a BJP-B team and voting for it could jeopardize the interests of the indigenous communities of the state and the North East? That is a much more serious allegation and could actually go against the party. Let us look at some of the moves made by the BJP that directly threaten the rights of the indigenous people.
To begin with, the most obvious issue is the CAA, which is still a thorny issue for the indigenous communities in the state. Although almost all of Meghalaya and tribal (indigenous)-dominated territories elsewhere in the region have been exempted from the Act, the fact that a large number of illegal immigrants, 3-6 lakhs, might get citizenship still poses a big danger. This is more so for Meghalaya, which shares a highly volatile border with Assam, which can be used by the Assam government to settle the illegal immigrants in an effort to assert their claims over disputed borders.
Himanta Biswa Sarma, the Assam Chief Minister, has already stated that the definition of Assamese must change, which suggests that the possibility of non-indigenous communities capturing power in the state is very much a possibility in the near future. In fact, according to him, when the latest Census report comes out, Assamese people will be only about 40 percent of the population in the state, which, excluding the indigenous tribals, will come down to only 28–30%. This, if accurate, is a potentially explosive situation that could plunge the region into turmoil for many more years to come. By introducing the CAA and supporting the increase of non-indigenous people, especially illegal immigrants, the BJP has only further endangered the indigenous communities of the North East and Meghalaya.
There’s also an attempt to bring about a Uniform Civil Code (UCC), seen by indigenous tribal communities all over the country as a threat to their way of life. However, with the governments of Uttarakhand and Assam exempting tribals from the UCC, it is highly likely that this will happen at the national level as well. There is, though, another more subtle move that has taken shape in recent times. Although not confirmed as an official policy, there have been statements made by individuals associated with the BJP or groups supported by it demanding to take away the benefits of indigenous peoples who have converted to Christianity and Islam. Such demands are, on the other hand, silent on indigenous peoples who identify as Hindu, which reeks of double standards considering Hinduism is as foreign as Christianity and Islam, having its roots outside the sub-continent, arriving with Indo-Aryan-speaking Central Asian migrants much after the indigenous peoples had already settled in the region. What will happen if the demand is accepted?
In Meghalaya, where more than 70% of the population is Christian and more than 80% of the population is indigenous, only less than 10% of the population will be able to enjoy the benefits provided for tribals by the Constitution. This will also mean that Meghalaya will no longer be a tribal-dominated state. Under this circumstance, what happens to the protection that the indigenous communities enjoy in terms of preventing land alienation and becoming a minority in their own territory? Will the provisions of the Sixth Schedule still be applicable if Meghalaya is no longer a tribal majority state? For this reason, there is a demand for the Sixth Schedule in Ladakh because the people are well aware of the dangers if they are left to fend for themselves without constitutional protection. The removal of special protection might benefit some business houses and individuals who might look at cashing in on the new capital that will flow into the state in the name of investment. However, for the rest, including those who still practice the traditional faith, that will be a great catastrophe. So, the combination of CAA and derecognition of those who have converted from their traditional faith will threaten the rights and very survival of the indigenous peoples in the state and the region.
In such a situation, official steps taken by the BJP or instigated by those associated with it are very much against the interests of the indigenous peoples. Aware of this, Conrad Sangma recently announced in Arunachal Pradesh that although his party is a partner of the NDA, when it comes to the issues of the Northeast people, particularly the indigenous communities, it will always be the first to stand up for their rights. The fact that despite the NPP not contesting in Arunachal Pradesh (it is supporting the two BJP candidates), he had to give such a clarification speaks to the possible worry and repercussions Conrad Sangma fears of being associated with the saffron party in places where they are contesting, i.e., Meghalaya.
At the same time, Conrad Sangma is known to be quite close to Pradyot Bikram Manikya Deb Barma, the current chairman of the Indigenous Progressive Regional Alliance, also known as TIPRA Motha. Recently, Pradyot Deb Barma threatened fast-unto-death demanding rights for the indigenous peoples in Tripura who have been made a minority in their own homeland. Having seen what has befallen his fellow Kok-Borok brethren (Tripuri, along with Garo, and Bodo, are part of the larger Kok-Borok language group which is also related to the Kachin and Konyak groups), it is highly unlikely that Conrad Sangma would wish the same fate for his people. After all, it could be his own loved ones who may have to undergo the humiliation Pradyot Deb Barma must have endured for so many years in his fight for the rights of his people. But as it stands right now, the BJP’s announcement to publicly support the NPP could prove a liability for Conrad Sangma. In such a situation, it appears that Congress stands to benefit from this narrative, unless the NPP finds a way to change it.
The fact that Congress is a national party and the direct ideological adversary of the BJP gives it an edge over the other contenders. However, the Congress-NPP alliance in the District Council creates an impression that the state leaders are not in sync with the national leadership which does not want anything to do with BJP or affiliated parties. Can the state congress leadership be trusted then? The RDA is a regional alliance, and as discussed above, this could prove to be a liability for it. VPP, which is also a regional party, and another Jaidbynriew party, has not completely quashed the possibility of aligning with the BJP. It has also tried to make an outreach to the non-Khasi voters, but will that be enough to convince them that it will not be, as Albert Thyrniang terms it, the Christian version of the BJP or the Khasi Christian-BJP, i.e., anti-minority, but this time against the non-Khasis and the non-Christians? In fact, for a party that flaunts its love for the Jaidbynriew, not respecting the matrilineal tradition and being blamed for trying to weaken the district councils, it appears that, like the BJP, which actually doesn’t want to protect Hinduism but remould it to suit their Hindutva agenda, the VPP is trying to change the Jaidbynriew to suit what it believes it should be, not what it is. So, while the NPP is being accused of being a BJP-B team, the VPP is very much the mirror image of the BJP. On the other hand, RDA has promised to make efforts to facilitate the accordance of minority status to the practitioners of indigenous faiths, something which VPP has not done in its manifesto.
Every election, it is the silent voters who make the difference. This time also, it will be no different, and time will tell what the decision of those who are silent will be. Whatever it is, we will learn to live with it one way or another.
(The views expressed in the article are those of the author and do not reflect in any way his affiliation to any organisation or institution)