WORLD POLITICS

Ch-1 End of Bipolarity

Introduction
The Berlin Wall And the unification of "Germany"
In 1989, the people of Berlin took down the Berlin Wall, which had been constructed
during the Cold War and served as its most enduring symbol.

The wall was built in 1961 to separate East Berlin from West Berlin and to create a
division between the capitalist and communist worlds.

The event was followed by one of the most dramatic events in history: the collapse of
the Second World and the end of the Cold War.

As a result of this dramatic event in history, the Cold War came to an end. A similar
dramatic and historic sequence followed shortly after the Second World War.

After the Second World War, Germany was unified. The German Democratic
Republic became part of the Federal Republic of Germany to form the reunited
nation of Germany.

Eventually, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic or Soviet Union fell apart on its
own.

The Soviet System

What was the Soviet System?
The Union of Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR) was formed after Russia's socialist
revolution in 1917. The revolution was sparked by socialist ideals and the desire for
a more equal society as opposed to capitalism.

The system believed in the abolishment of private property and the creation of a
society based on equality. The designers of the system, the state and the party
designed it in such a way that they acquired prominence among them all.

The Soviet system was entirely dominated by the communist party, with no room for
any other players. Also, the existing government had a firm grip on the economy, as
they dictated every aspect of it.

The East European countries that were liberated by the Soviet army during World
War II were annexed by the USSR just after the war. All of these countries were also
very much influenced by the political and economic system of the Soviet Union.

The countries in this bloc were collectively referred to as the "Second World" having
the Soviet Union as their de facto leader. All of these countries were held together by
a military alliance named the 'Warsaw Pact'.

Why did the USSR pose as a significant global player?

The Soviet Union rose to prominence as a major global player after the Second
World War. The Soviet economy was advancing at a much higher rate than the rest
of the world, except the economy of the United States.

Resources such as oil, iron and steel were abundant in the country, and the
manufacturing sector produced machinery and transported goods to and from the
country's outlying areas with efficiency.

Resources like oil, iron, and steel were abundant in the country, and the
manufacturing sector also produced machinery and transported goods efficiently.
Consumer products ranged from pins to cars, but the quality lacked the rigour of
Western capitalist countries in this area.

The soviet state also ensured a minimum standard of living for all citizens, and the
government subsidised necessities such as health care. There was no shortage of
job opportunities.

How did the soviet state become increasingly oppressive?

The soviet state also controlled the land and other productive assets which was a
dominant form of ownership. The life of an average citizen became increasingly
bureaucratic and oppressive, there was a lack of democracy and freedom of speech
which often manifested itself in jokes and cartoons.

All institutions were tightly controlled by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union,
which was not answerable to the people. There was a party that refused to
acknowledge the desire of people in all fifteen Soviet republics, including the arts, to
run their affairs.
However, even though the Soviet Union was composed of fifteen republics on paper,
Russia ruled the country, and the rest of the world felt left out and even oppressed.

The Soviet Union was able to keep up with the United States in the arms race on
occasion but at great expense.

Technologically, in terms of infrastructure (such as transportation and power), and

most importantly in terms of fulfilling citizens' political and economic aspirations, the
Soviet Union lagged far behind the West.

This system was further weakened by the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979.
Despite rising wages, productivity and technology in the developing world lagged far
behind those in the developed world.

As a result, there were shortages of just about everything for the general public.
Imports of food have risen steadily over time. By the end of the 1970s, the Soviet
economy was in free fall and had all but collapsed.

Gorbachev & The Disintegration

Who was Mikhail Gorbachev?
Mikhail Gorbachev was the general secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet
Union in 1985. Amid this chaos happening in the union , sought to reform the soviet
system. The reforms were required to keep the USSR up to date with the information
and technological revolutions occurring in the West.

Gorbachev introduced economic and political reform policies of:

 Perestroika (restructuring) originally referred to increased automation and labour
efficiency
 Glasnost (openness) refers to the policy or practice of more open consultative
government and wider dissemination of information.

There were some unintended consequences of Gorbachev's decision to normalise

relations with Western countries while also democratically reforming the USSR. As a
result of the Soviet Union's control over Eastern Europe, people began to protest.
These changes adversely affected the crisis of the USSR.

There was some opposition towards these reforms as some top communist leaders
opposed Gorbachev's reforms. A political coup. was also aided in 1991 by the
hardline communist party.

The primary issue was that the people had already tasted the fruit of freedom and
did not want to return to old style communist party rule. Boris Yelstin, opposed the
coup widely which resulted in his win in the Russian Election.

The decentralisation of the Russian government also began under Yelstin.

Europeanized Union
The Soviet Union became more Europeanized during the cold war, and the power
shifted from Moscow to the republics. On the other hand, Instead of demanding
independence, the Central Asian republics wanted to stay in the USSR.

Three major republics of the USSR declared their dissolution under the leadership of
Yelstin in 1991. There was a complete ban on the soviet communists. Also, the post-
soviet economies and governments structured themselves on a scale of capitalism
and democracy.

There was a set back across the world especially in the region of central Asia when
the Soviet Union collapsed and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) was
announced.

The CIS quickly resolved the issue of these countries being excluded by making
them founding members. Also, Russia gained international legitimacy and replaced
the USSR on the UN Security council.

Russia ratified all of the USSR's international treaties. It was the only nuclear power
in post-Soviet space, and it cooperated with the US on nuclear disarmament.

As a result, the USSR was declared extinct.

Why Did The Soviet Union Disintegrate?

The collapse of the soviet union was unquestionably caused by internal weaknesses
in its political and economic structure that failed to meet people's expectations.
The economic stagnation that persisted for the longest time resulted in severe
shortages for soviet consumers, and a large segment of society began to doubt the
system openly.

The soviet economy also diverted significant resources to keep its military and
nuclear arsenal operational and expand its influence in Eastern Europe, which
slammed the soviet economy.

Ordinary people became more aware of the West's economic progress as well.
These people were aware of the differences in systems between theirs and the
Western ones.

The people experienced a political and psychological shock because through many
years they were being told that the Soviet system was superior to Western
capitalism.

As far as administration and politics were concerned, the Soviet Union had reached
a standstill.
During the Soviet Union's 70-year rule, the Communist Party was not accountable to
the people.

In the eyes of the general public, the government was slow and stifling because of
widespread corruption, the system's inability to correct mistakes it had made, and a
reluctance to allow greater transparency.

Ordinary citizens lost out to the party bureaucrats in terms of privileges. People lost
faith in the government as a result of their disillusionment with the system and the
rulers.

Gorbachev's Reforms
Gorbachev promised economic reform, Western integration, and administrative
reform. It was nearly impossible to control Gorbachev's reforms and the loosening of
the system once they were put in motion.

A significant portion of Soviet society thought Gorbachev should have moved more
quickly and was dissatisfied with his approach.

There was a lack of or a lag in the benefits that they had anticipated. The opposite
was held by others, particularly Communist Party members and those in the
system's employ.

The impression was that Gorbachev was moving too quickly and their privileges and
power were being eroded.

There was a tug of war due to which Gorbachev was betrayed by allies and
opponents alike. Even his supporters lost faith in him because they thought he failed
to adequately defend his policies.

Most observers and even many insiders were surprised by a development that may
have prevented the Soviet Union from collapsing.
 Rise of Nationalism
Rising nationalism and a desire for self-determination among the former Soviet
republics, such as Russia, the Baltic States (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania), Ukraine,
Georgia and others, was the final and most immediate reason for the collapse of the
Soviet Union.

There are multiple opinions of this. For some, Soviet nationalism was a constant
force throughout the country's history, and whether or not reforms had taken place, it
would have triggered a civil war within the country. This is a historical "what-if," but
given the size and diversity of the Soviet Union and its growing internal problems, it
is surely not unreasonable.

Alternatively, some people believe that after the Gorbachev revolution, nationalist
dissatisfaction only grew and grew until it was uncontrollable.

Consequences of Disintegration
What were the consequences of the disintegration of the USSR?
The Soviet and socialist systems in Eastern Europe fell apart, with far-reaching
consequences for world politics. It brought about three major types of long-term
changes that had the following effects:

First, it signalled the end of hostilities during the Cold War. The ideological debate
over the superiority of a socialist system over a capitalist one ended.

 There was an ultimate need to put the arms race to an end and establish a new
peace order to end the military bloc that was created.
 Second, the balance of power took a shift in international politics, also affecting the
relative weight of ideas and institutions. The world was left with only two options after
the end of the Cold war, either a unipolar system would be created by the lone
remaining super power or different countries and groups of countries could become
significant players in the international system, bringing about an eventual multipolar
system in which no single power can dominate.

 Capitalism emerged as the world's dominant economic system due to the clout and
reputation of the United States.

 The organisations like the World Bank & International Monetary Fund have become
important advisors to all of the newly developing countries as these institutions
provided them with loans to help them make the transition to capitalism.

Third, the dissolution of the Soviet Union ushered in a slew of new nations. All of
these nations had their own unique goals and preferences. In particular, the Baltic
and Eastern European states desired to join the European Union and join NATO
(North Atlantic Treaty Organisation).

The Central Asian countries sought to maintain close ties with Russia while also
building new relationships with the West because of their geographical location.

Shock Therapy In Post-Communist Regimes

What is Shock Therapy?
Shock therapy aims to increase economic output, employment rates, and living
standards by shocking people into action. It refers to a painful transition from an
authoritarian socialist system to a democratic capitalist one following the fall of
communism in the majority of the countries of the soviet bloc.
In Russia, Central Asia, and Eastern Europe, the World Bank and the IMF's model of
transition was known as shock therapy. Although the intensity and speed of shock
therapy varied among the former third-world countries, its direction and features
remained remarkably consistent.

It meant that private ownership of property would take over as the most common
form of ownership.

Government asset privatisation and changes to corporate ownership were both on

the table right away. Private farming and agricultural capitalism were supposed to
take the place of cooperative farms.

This shift ruled out any other option besides a socialist or capitalist system controlled
by the state. Shock therapy also entailed a significant shift in these economies'
external orientation.

Because more trade was expected to drive development, it was deemed necessary
to make a sudden and complete switch to free trade.

It was hoped that the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and FDI would be the main
drivers of change. Foreign investment, financial opening, and currency convertibility
were all part of this.

Finally, the soviet bloc broke up their existing trade alliances as a part of the
transition, resulting in the bloc me.

As a result, the bloc's member states were no longer interconnected. As a result, the
Western economic system was to gradually absorb these countries. As a result, the
capitalist states of the West rose to the position of leadership and used various
agencies and organisations to direct and control the development of the region.

Consequences of Shock Therapy

What are the consequences of shock therapy?
People were not led to the promised utopia of mass consumption by the shock
therapy used in the 1990s. It wreaked havoc on the economies and devastated the
lives of the people throughout the region.

Russia's massive state-controlled industrial complex was on the verge of

disintegrating after 90% of its industries were sold to private individuals and
corporations.

Entire industries vanished as the restructuring was driven by the market rather than
industrial policies set by the government. Undervalued industries were sold for
throwaway prices at what was dubbed "the world's largest garage sale".

However, even though all citizens were given vouchers to participate in sales, the
majority of citizens turned to the black market to raise cash. The ruble's value
dropped precipitously against the dollar.

People's savings were wiped out by skyrocketing inflation. Also, due to the collapse
of the collective farm system, people in Russia lost their source of food and began to
import it.

Russia's real GDP in 1999 was less than half of what it was in 1989, according to
official figures. There was no replacement for the previous trading structure, which
fell apart.

Welfare System
The previous social welfare system had been dismantled piecemeal.

Many people fell into poverty as a result of the government's decision to stop
providing subsidies. Affluent individuals were pushed out of the centre of society
while the workforce's academic and intellectual base withered or migrated.

In the majority of these countries, a mafia arose and began to exert control over
numerous economic activities. As a result of privatisation, there are now more
inequities.

Russia, as well as other former Soviet states, was split down the middle between
prosperous and impoverished regions. In contrast to the previous system, the
economic disparity between the rich and the poor had widened.

Economic transformation was given more attention and priority than democratic
institution-building. All of these countries' constitutions were rushed to completion,
and most of them, including Russia, included a strong executive president with broad
powers that left elected parliaments in a weak position.

Presidents in Central Asia wielded enormous authority, and a number of them grew
increasingly authoritarian. Turkish and Uzbek leaders, for example, appointed
themselves as presidents for ten years, then extended their terms. They didn't
tolerate any criticism or disagreement.

Most of these countries had not yet developed a judicial culture or established the
independence of the judiciary. Around ten years after their independence, most of
these economies, especially Russia's, began to grow again in the year 2000.

The export of natural resources like oil, natural gas, and minerals was a major factor
in the recovery of most of these countries' economies. Countries like Azerbaijan and
Kazakhstan are major suppliers of oil and gas, as well as Uzbekistan.

These oil pipelines pass through other countries' territory, bringing them revenue.
Manufacturing has partially resumed in some areas.

Tensions And Conflicts

Many former Soviet republics have faced civil wars and insurgencies. Also, the
increased involvement of the foreign powers complicated the matter further.

Russian republics Chechnya and Dagestan have seen bloody secessionist uprisings.
Many human rights violations have resulted from Moscow's strategy of indiscriminate
military bombing against the Chechen rebels despite their aspirations for
independence.

Tajikistan was the scene of a ten-year civil war in Central Asia until 2001; there is a
lot of sectarian conflict in the region. Also, some Armenians in the Azerbaijani
province of Nagorno-Karabakh were considering secession.

The demand for independence from the two provinces triggered a civil war in
Georgia.

All of this has led to instability, making life difficult for the average citizen.

On the other hand, in the Central Asian Republics, the Hydrocarbons have benefited
economically. Also, foreign powers and oil companies are fighting for control of
Central Asia. Afghanistan, Pakistan, Russia, and China are nearby.

After the September 11 attacks, the US sought military bases in Central Asia and
paid all Central Asian governments to hire bases and allow planes to fly over their
territory during the Afghan and Iraq wars.

For Russia, these countries are part of its "Near Abroad" and should be influenced.

Because of the oil resources, China has begun to establish settlers and traders
along the borders.

Czechoslovakia peacefully split into two countries in Eastern Europe.

The Yugoslav republics saw the most bloodshed. After the breakup in 1991, Croatia,
Slovenia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina declared independence. Non-Serb Bosnians
were massacred due to ethnic Serb opposition.

Following the interethnic civil war, NATO bombed Yugoslavia.

India And The Post-Communist Regimes

All the post-communist countries have good relations with India. However, relations
between Russia and India remain the most positive. India's foreign policy is heavily
influenced by its relations with Russia.

Relations between India and Russia are rooted in mutual trust and shared interests,
and this is reflected in public perceptions.
In Russia and many former Soviet countries, Indian heroes like Raj Kapoor and
Amitabh Bachchan are well-known. Hindi film songs can be heard all over the region,
and India is well-remembered.

Russia and India are both proponents of a world order with multiple superpowers.

It means the coexistence of multiple powers in the international system, collective

security (in which an attack on any country is viewed as a threat to all countries and
necessitates collective response), increased regionalism, negotiation of international
conflicts resolutions, an independent foreign policy for all countries, and decision-
making through international organisations like the UN that should be strengthened,
democratised, and empowered.

As part of the 2001 Indo-Russian Strategic Agreement, India and Russia have
signed more than 80 bilateral agreements.

There are many areas where India's relationship with Russia will be beneficial to it in
the future, including Kashmir, energy supplies, the exchange of information on
international terrorism, and access to Central Asia. India is Russia's second-largest
arms market, so the two countries have a lot in common.

The majority of the military equipment used by the Indian armed forces comes from
Russia.

Due to India's dependence on Russian oil imports, Russia plays an important role in
the country's foreign policy. Also, despite a lot of sanctions on Russia amid the
Russian-Ukraine war, India continued to buy oil from Russian Markets.

Indian officials are working to increase the country's reliance on Russian,

Kazakhstani, and Turkmenistan-produced energy. Partnerships and investments in
oilfields are part of the cooperation with these countries.

For India's nuclear energy plans, Russia is critical, and it has aided India's space
industry by providing the cryogenic rocket when it was needed.

There have been numerous scientific projects in which Russia and India have
worked together successfully.
 Leaders Of The Soviet Union
Boris Yeltsin (1931-2007):
The first elected President of Russia (1991- 1999).
 Rose to power in the Communist Party and was made the Mayor of Moscow by
Gorbachev.
 He later joined the critics of Gorbachev and left the Communist Party, and also led
the protests against the Soviet regime in 1991.
 He also played a key role in dissolving the Soviet Union. Blamed for hardships
suffered by Russians in their transition from communism to capitalism.

Mikhail Gorbachev (Born 1931):

Last leader of the Soviet Union (1985-91)
 Introduced economic and political reform policies of perestroika (restructuring) and
glasnost(openness).
 He stopped the arms race with the US
 Ended the Cold War.
 Blamed for the disintegration of the Soviet Union.

Leonid Brezhnev (1906-82) :

Leader of the Soviet Union (1964- 82)
 He proposed the Asian Collective Security system.
 He was associated with the détente phase in relations with the US.
 Involved in suppressing a popular rebellion in Czechoslovakia and in invading
Afghanistan.

Nikita Khrushchev (1894-1971):

Leader of the Soviet Union (1953-64).
 He denounced Stalin’s leadership style and introduced some reforms in 1956.
 Also, suggested “peaceful coexistence” with the West.
 Involved in suppressing the popular rebellion in Hungary and in the Cuban missile
crisis.

Joseph Stalin (1879-1953):

Successor to Lenin and led the Soviet Union during its consolidation (1924-53).
 He began rapid industrialisation and forcible collectivisation of agriculture.
 Credited with the Soviet victory in the Second World War.
 He was held responsible for the Great Terror of the 1930s, authoritarian functioning
and elimination of rivals within the party.

Vladimir Lenin (1870-1924):

Founder of the Bolshevik Communist Party.
 Leader of the Russian Revolution of 1917 and the founder-head of the USSR during
the most difficult period following the revolution (1917-1924).
 He was an outstanding theoretician and practitioner of Marxism and a source of
inspiration for communists all over the world.

Sub-Topic: ‘Arab Spring’

The 21st century witnessed emergence of new developments for democracies and
democratization in West Asian countries, one such event is characterized as Arab
Spring that began in 2009. Located in Tunisia, the Arab Spring took its roots where
the struggle against corruption, unemployment and poverty was started by the public
which turned into a political movement because the people considered the existing
problems as outcome of autocratic dictatorship. The demand for democracy that
started in Tunisia spread throughout the Muslim-dominated Arab countries in West
Asia. Hosni Mubarak, who had been in power in Egypt since 1979, also collapsed as
a result of the massive democratic protests. In addition, the influence of Arab Spring
could also be seen in Yemen, Bahrain, Libya and Syria where similar protests by the
people led to democratic awakening throughout the region.
 Ch-2 Contemporary Centres of Powers

The Emergence of Different Political Structures

It became crystal clear that America's dominance over the world would be
threatened by the alternative centres of political and economic power that emerged
after the end of the world's bipolar structure in the early 1990s.

This led to the emergence of the European Union (EU) and the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in Europe and Asia, respectively.

European Union
Headquarters: Brussels, Belgium

What is the European Union?

The European Union is a political and economic union that comprises 27 member
states located primarily in Europe, which are subjected to the obligations and
privileges of the membership.

Every member state is part of the founding treaties of the union and is subjected to
binding laws within the common legislative and judicial institutions.

How did the Second World War Affect Europe?

Many Assumptions and structures on which the European states had based their
relations were shattered after the Second World War.
European Integration was aided by the Cold War. Also, the United States of America
helped Europe by providing financial aid to revive its economy under the 'Marshall
Plan'.

There were several key foundations on which the structure of the European Union
was laid: the creation of a single currency, common security and foreign policy and
cooperation on justice and home affairs.

The union evolved from an economic union to an increasingly political one and
started to act more like a nation-state, as of now, the union has its flag, Anthem,
founding date and a common currency.

The European Union has tried to expand its relations by allying with new members
from the erstwhile Soviet bloc, but that was very difficult as many countries were not
willing to give a part of their autonomy.

Recently, on June 23, 2022, Amid the Russia- Ukraine war, the European Council
granted Ukraine the status of a candidate for accession to the European Union as
Ukraine was seeking immediate accession of Ukraine to the European Union.

What was the Marshall Plan?

The Marshall Plan was proposed by a former US Secretary of State named George
Marshall in 1947. The plan was completely focused on providing economic help to all
the European countries by allocating $13 Billion in foreign aid. After the Second
World War, all the states were severely affected.

The plan played a crucial role in the development of all the European states, and all
of the countries that received aid were doing a lot better when the plan came to an
end in 1951.
More about the Marshall Plan
As a part of the Marshall Plan, a security framework was also established named
NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation).

The OEEC (Organisation for European Economic Cooperation) was founded in 1948
to help Western European countries receive aid.

In 1949, the Council of Europe was established, marking yet another step forward in
political cooperation. Following the fall of the Soviet Union in 1992, the European
Union was formed.

EU’s Economic Influence

In 2005, the EU had the largest economy in the world, with a GDP of more than $12
trillion, slightly more than the US, but the US overtook the EU in 2016. The Euro is
also seen as a major economic power and threat to the dominance of the US Dollar.

The European Union is in charge of a sizable portion of global trade. It has a three-
fold larger global trade share than the United States, allowing it to be more assertive
in trade disputes with both the United States and China.

It's also a key component of the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

EU’s Political Influence

The EU projects political and diplomatic power because two of its members, the
United Kingdom and France, have permanent seats on the United Nations Security
Council. Its members are also represented on the United Nations Security Council's
non-permanent council.

As a result, some US policies, such as the current US position on Iran's nuclear

programme, have been influenced by the EU.

In many cases of dialogue with China, it has used diplomacy, economic investments,
and negotiations rather than coercion and military force.

EU’s Military Influence

The EU's combined armed forces are the world's second-largest. After the United
States, it spends the second most on defence. Both the United Kingdom and France
have nuclear arsenals of around 550 nuclear warheads.

The European Union is the world's second-largest supplier of space and

communications technology.

The EU also faces internal divisions among its member states, as each has its own
foreign and defence policies.

What is Euro-Scepticism?
The term refers to a political situation involving the European Union and integration.
In some parts of Europe, there is 'Euro-scepticism' about the EU's integrationist
agenda. Denmark and Sweden opposed the Maastricht Treaty and the adoption of
the euro as the common European currency.

This is what limits the EU's ability to act in matters of foreign policy and defence.

Association Of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)

ESTD: 8 Aug, 1967
Headquarters: Jakarta, Indonesia

ASEAN is a regional intergovernmental organisation in Southeast Asia that promotes

intergovernmental cooperation and facilitates economic, political, security, military,
educational, and sociocultural integration among its members and other Asian
countries.

This region of Asia suffered the economic and political consequences of repeated
colonialism, both European and Japanese, before and during World War II.

What were the primary goals of ASEAN?

The Bandung Conference and the Non-Aligned Movement were ineffective in
establishing conventions for informal cooperation in Asia and the Third World. In
1967, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand signed the
Bangkok Declaration to become members of ASEAN.

ASEAN's primary goals were to accelerate economic growth and, as a result, "social
progress and cultural development."

A secondary goal was to promote regional peace and stability based on the rule of
law and the United Nations Charter's principles.
Later, Brunei Darussalam, Vietnam, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Myanmar
(Burma), and Cambodia joined ASEAN, bringing its total membership to ten.

ASEAN aspires to establish supranational structures and institutions. The ‘ASEAN

Way' is a form of informal, non-confrontational, and cooperative interaction that its
member states value.

ASEAN Way is the official Anthem of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

The respect for national sovereignty is critical to the functioning of ASEAN. It is also
one of the fastest-growing economies in the world.

What are the three pillars of ASEAN?

ASEAN Security Community
It was based on the conviction that outstanding territorial disputes should not
escalate into armed confrontation.

ASEAN had several agreements in place by which member states promised to

uphold peace, neutrality, cooperation, non-interference, and respect for national
differences and sovereign rights.

The ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) in 1994 is the organisation that carries out
coordination of security and foreign policy.

ASEAN Economic Community

ASEAN is primarily a commercial organisation with a much smaller economy than
the other economies, but it has a significant growth influence in the region and
beyond.

The ASEAN Economic Community's objectives are to establish a common market

and production base among ASEAN member states and to promote the region's
social and economic development.

Additionally, the Economic Community wishes to enhance the existing ASEAN

Dispute Settlement Mechanism for the resolution of economic disputes.

A Free Trade Area (FTA) was established for investment, labour, and services. The
US and China have already accelerated their efforts to negotiate free trade
agreements with ASEAN.

ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community

ASEAN is rapidly establishing itself as a major regional organisation.

In the international community, ASEAN's Vision 2020 has defined an outward-

looking role for the organisation.

What is the 2020 vision?

The ASEAN Vision 2020 was adopted by the member nations in 1997 in Kuala
Lumpur with the following important components:

All member governments vowed to make the region more peaceful and supported
conflict resolution through diplomacy. The ASEAN also served as a mediator in the
resolution of the Cambodian conflict.

As a further commitment to peace and stability, the organisation vowed to make the
South Asian region a nuclear-free zone.

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) aims to enhance economic

cooperation through a variety of development techniques and to emphasise
sustainable and equitable growth.

In addition, to achieve global competitiveness, multilateral trade agreements should

be utilised to expand commerce. Vision 2020 seeks to establish a successful, stable,
and competitive economic zone where commodities, services, and capital flow freely.

Vision 2020 also seeks to ensure that the people of South Asia have equal access to
opportunities for their growth, regardless of their gender, race, religion, language, or
cultural heritage. The principal objective of the ASEAN Vision 2020 is to promote
environmental stewardship among South Asian nations.

Consequently, Vision 2020 envisions an outward-looking ASEAN that plays a

significant role on the international stage.

The Rise Of Chinese Economy

China has one of the strongest economies in the world, as it has been the fastest-
growing economy since 1978. According to the projections and experts, it is said that
the Chinese economy will surpass and will be the world's largest economy by 2040.

China also possesses enormous regional power as a result of its economic

integration into East Asia.

History & Background

In 1949, after Mao Zedong's communist revolution in 1949, China chose to develop
its economy based on the Soviet Model and to cut ties with capitalism.

The idea was to create a state-owned heavy industry sector using agricultural
savings.

Later, due to a lack of foreign exchange, China chose to import domestic goods.
Also, it was able to use its resources to build a massive industrial economy.

China had better education and health care than most developing countries, and all
citizens had jobs and social security. The economy grew at a respectable pace, but
not fast enough. Also, the agricultural output was insufficient to generate an
industrial surplus.

Its industrial output was stagnant, and its per capita income was low.

Way Forward
The Chinese leadership ended China's political and economic isolation by
establishing diplomatic relations with the US in 1972. On the other hand, China
unusually established a market and exported capital and technology to boost
productivity.

The Chinese chose gradual economic opening over "shock therapy." After privatising
agriculture in 1982, the country went towards the industry in 1998. In this sense, it
established SEZs (Special Economic Zones) where foreign investors could set up
shop and were exempt from trade barriers.

The state played an important role in the development of a market economy.

New economic policies helped China's economy break out of stagnation.

Privatisation of agriculture increased agricultural output and rural income.

Rural personal savings increased the Chinese economy's growth rate, resulting in a
rapid increase in rural industry.

The creation of SEZs and new trade laws resulted in massive increases in
international trade. It surpassed the US as the most important FDI destination (FDI).

It has large foreign exchange reserves, allowing it to heavily invest abroad. Also,
China's WTO membership in 2001 marked a turning point in its globalisation.

How has this development affected China Internally?

The reforms have not benefited everyone in China. China's unemployment rate has
risen to nearly 100%. Female employment and working conditions are as bad as in
18th and 19th century Europe.

A rise in environmental degradation and corruption has accompanied a rise in

economic disparity between rural, urban, and inland provinces.

China is a regional and global economic power. China's economic integration and
interdependencies have given it considerable influence over its trading partners.

Economic concerns have tempered its outstanding issues with Japan, the US,
ASEAN, and Russia. After the 1997 financial crisis, China's contributions to the
ASEAN economies helped ease concerns about its rise.

Global player on behalf of developing economies, its more outward-looking

investment and aid policies in Latin America and Africa project it.

Sino-Indo Relations
India and China were great powers in Asia before the advent of Western imperialism.
China had considerable influence and control on the periphery of its borders based
on its unique tributary system.

Various kingdoms and empires in India also extended their influence beyond their
borders; this influence was political, economic and cultural.

There were some confrontations with each other regarding the foreign policy of both
nations to deal with each other.
After India regained its independence from Britain and China expelled the foreign
powers, there was hope that both would come together to shape the future of the
developing world and of Asia particularly.

Military/ Border Conflict

A border dispute between the two countries has led to armed conflict. In a joint
military exercise known as "Hand in hand," India and China train together.

Both countries were involved in the Sino-Indian border dispute that arose after China
occupied Tibet in 1950.

In 1962, China and India fought over Arunachal Pradesh and Aksai Chin's territorial
claims.

When India lost the war with China in 1962, it had long-term repercussions for India-
China relations. Until 1976, diplomatic ties between the two countries were at an all-
time low.

Cordial Aspects
When China's political leadership shifted in the 1970s, it became more pragmatic
and less political, which aided the country's relations with India.

A popular slogan was 'Hindi-Chini bhai bhai.' A series of talks to resolve the border
dispute began in 1981.

Indo-China relations have taken on a variety of economic and political dimensions

since the Cold War's end. Both countries see themselves as rising powers in global
politics, and they both want to play an important role in Asian politics and economics.

Rajiv Gandhi's visit to China in December 1988 signalled an improvement in India-

China relations. Since then, both governments have taken steps to contain the
conflict and maintain "peace and tranquillity" along the border.

They've also signed agreements on cultural exchanges, science and technology

collaboration, and the opening of four trade border posts. Bilateral trade between
India and China has increased.

India and China have agreed to work together in areas where they might otherwise
clash, such as bidding for energy deals outside of India.

India and China have adopted similar policies in international economic institutions
such as the World Trade Organisation.

The nuclear tests conducted by India in 1998, which were justified in part by a
perceived threat from China, did not prevent further interaction.

China's military ties with Bangladesh and Myanmar were viewed as hostile to Indian
interests in South Asia. Leaders and officials from India and China are visiting each
other more frequently, and both sides are getting to know each other better.
Increased transportation and communication links, as well as shared economic
interests and global concerns, should help to make the relationship more positive
and stable.

Sub-Topic: ‘BRICS’
It refers to Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa respectively. It was founded
in 2006 in Russia. It turned into BRICS after the inclusion of South Africa in its first
meeting in the year 2009. Objectives of BRICS- primarily to cooperate and distribute
mutual economic benefits among its members besides non-interference in the
internal policies of each nation and mutual equality. The 11th conference of the
BRICS concluded in Brazil in 2019, chaired by Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro.

Sub-Topic: ‘Russia’
Russia- the largest part of the former Soviet Union even before its disintegration.
After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Russia emerged as the strong successor of
the USSR [Union of Soviet Socialist Republics]. Its GDP is currently 11th in the
world. Russia has reserves of minerals, natural resources, and gases that make it a
powerful country in the world. In addition, Russia is a nuclear state with a huge stock
of sophisticated weapons. Russia is also a permanent member of the UN Security
Council (P-5).

Sub-Topic: ‘India’
In the 21st century, India is being seen as an important emerging global power. The
world is experiencing the power and rise of India in a multidimensional way. The
economic, cultural, and strategic position of the country, with a population of more
than 135 cr, is very strong. Economic perspective- targeting the goal of a $5 trillion
economy, a competitive huge market, and an ancient inclusive culture with 200
million people of Indian Diaspora spreading across the globe impart distinct meaning
and salience to India as a new Centre of power in the 21st century.

From a strategic perspective, the military of India is self-sufficient with indigenous

nuclear technology, making it another nuclear power. ‘Make in India’ scheme in
technology and science is another milestone of the Indian economy. All these
changes are making India an important Centre of power in the present world.

Sub-Topic: ‘Israel’
Israel has emerged as one of the most powerful nations in the 21st-century world in
terms of science and technology, defence, intelligence, and economy. Situated in the
middle of the burning politics of West Asian countries, Israel has reached to new
heights of global political standing under its indomitable defence prowess,
technological innovations, industrialisation and agricultural development. Sustaining
against adversity is the principle with which a small Jewish-Zionist nation, i.e., Israel,
is placed in contemporary global politics in general and the Arab-dominated West
Asian politics in particular.
Picture Based Questions
A1. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:

Question.
1. The given cartoon is related to which country?
2. Which two symbols in this cartoon helped in identifying the country?
3. What message does this cartoon convey to the world?
Answer:
1. This cartoon is related to China.
2. The Dragon and the Great Wall helped in identifying the country.
3. This cartoon conveys a message to the world that China is emerging as a great
economic power.

A2. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:

Question.
1. What does the cartoon represent?
2. Name the policy that is being represented in the cartoon.
3. What does the ‘Competition’ refer to in the cartoon?
4. “We’ll have to get used to it”. What does it denote?
Answer:
1. India’s policy towards ASEAN.
2. ‘Look East’ Policy since 1991 to interact with ASEAN, China, Japan and South
Korea.
3. Competition among various countries to develop potential relations with ASEAN.
4. It denotes India’s strategy towards using free trade areas with ASEAN.
 Ch-3 Contemporary South Asia

Introduction To South Asia

How is South Asia defined?
South Asia is defined as a subcontinent located in the southernmost part of Asia
comprising Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka.

What is the extent of South Asia?

The South Asian subcontinent is insulated by the Himalayas in the north and the vast
Indian Ocean, Arabian Sea, and Bay of Bengal in the south, west, and east,
respectively.

In the east and west, the region's boundaries are hazy. When discussing the region
as a whole, Afghanistan and Myanmar are frequently mentioned.

China is also an important player in the region, but it is considered a part of South
Asia.

Why is there linguistic, social and cultural distinctiveness in South

Asia?
This insulation provided by natural boundaries in the north, south, east and west
resulted in the subcontinent's linguistic, social, and cultural distinctiveness.

Diverse politics of South Asia

South Asia is diverse in every way while also forming a single geopolitical space.
There are several types of political systems in South Asian countries:
 Sri Lanka and India have successfully run democratic systems since their
independence from the British. But lately, the situation in Sri Lanka is not looking
promising as it sits on the cusp of bankruptcy due to corrupt regimes.

 However, despite numerous constraints, both India and Sri Lanka have maintained
their democracies.

Pakistan and Bangladesh have had civilian and military rulers, but Bangladesh has
remained a democracy since the Cold War's end.

 Pakistan, on the other hand, began with democratic governments led by Benazir
Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, which were overthrown by a military coup in 1999 and
have been ruled by a military regime and democratic government alternatively.

 Pakistan hasn't seen even a single democratic government complete its full term.

Nepal was a constitutional monarchy until 2006 when the king threatened to seize
executive power. A popular uprising that followed reduced the king's nominal position
and restored democracy.

Changes were similar in the region's smallest countries.

 Bhutan is a monarchy, but it is working to become a multiparty democracy.

 The Maldives was a sultanate until 1968 when it became a republic with a
presidential system of government.

Political Transformation In Maldives

In June 2005, the Maldives' parliament voted unanimously to establish a multi-party
system.

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) ruled the political scene for the initial years.

After the 2005 elections, some opposition parties were legalised, resulting in the
maturing of the Maldivian democracy.

Later, the Progressive Party of Maldives also seized power, but presently it is ruled
by the MDP.

The Military And Political Developments In Pakistan

Pakistan's politics has been full of volatility, with no prime minister ever completing a
full term. Pakistan has seen alternating transitions between being a democracy and
military rule.
 General Ayub Khan was quickly elected after taking over the country's administration
shortly after the country's constitution was drafted. His reign was marred by
widespread dissatisfaction.

A military takeover was then carried out, this time led by General Yahya Khan.

The Bangladesh crisis occurred during Yahya's military rule, and after a war with
India in 1971, East Pakistan seceded to form Bangladesh, an independent country.

Pakistan was ruled by an elected government led by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto from 1971 to
1977.

In 1977, General Zia-ul-Haq deposed Benazir Bhutto's government.

General Zia was confronted with a pro-democracy movement from 1982 onwards,
and an elected democratic government was re-established in 1988 under Benazir
Bhutto's leadership.

Pakistani politics was dominated by the rivalry between her party, the Pakistan
People's Party, and the Muslim League.

In 1999, General Pervez Musharraf intervened and deposed Prime Minister Nawaz
Sharif, ending the period of elective democracy for a while.

Lately, Pakistan's prime minister is Nawaz Sharif's brother, who replaced Imran
Khan after a no-confidence vote.

What were the factors that led to the failure of democracy in

Pakistan?
The social dominance of the military, clergy, and landowning aristocracy has resulted
in the overthrow of elected governments and the establishment of military
governments on numerous occasions.

As a result of the country's conflict with India, pro-military groups in Pakistan have
grown in strength.

These organisations have repeatedly stated that Pakistan's political parties and
democracy are flawed, that selfish parties and chaotic democracy endanger
Pakistan's security, and that the army's continued rule endangers the country's
security.

There is a strong pro-democracy sentiment in the country. Pakistan has a strong

human rights movement as well as a brave and relatively free press.

 The military's hold on power has been strengthened by a lack of genuine

international support for democratic rule in Pakistan.

 The United States and other Western countries have previously supported the
military's authoritarian rule for their reasons.
 Fearing that Pakistan's nuclear arsenal would fall into the hands of terrorist groups,
Pakistan's military regime has been viewed as the protector of Western interests in
West Asia and South Asia.

Democracy In Bangladesh
Political Developments
Bangladesh was a part of Pakistan from 1947 to 1971. It was made up of the
partitioned areas of Bengal and Assam in British India. The people of this area
despised the dominance of western Pakistan and the imposition of the Urdu
language.

In response to the unjust treatment of Bengali culture and language, protests

erupted. They also demanded equal representation and political power in
government. The popular uprising against West Pakistani dominance was led by
Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. He demanded that the eastern region be granted
independence.

In the 1970 elections, the Awami League, led by Sheikh Mujib, won every seat in
East Pakistan, securing a majority in the proposed constituent assembly for the
entire country.

Sheikh Mujib was arrested as a result of the West Pakistani leadership's refusal to
call the assembly. Under the military rule of General Yahya Khan, the Pakistani army
attempted to suppress the Bengali people's mass movement.

Thousands of people were killed, prompting a massive influx of people into India.

Both financially and militarily, the Indian government supported the people of East
Pakistan in their demand for independence.

Constitution Of Bangladesh
As a result, in December 1971, India and Pakistan fought a war that resulted in the
surrender of Pakistani forces in East Pakistan and the establishment of Bangladesh.
The constitution of Bangladesh expresses the country's belief in secularism,
democracy, and socialism.

In 1975, Sheikh Mujib changed the constitution to change the government from
parliamentary to presidential.

All parties except his own, the Awami League, were outlawed, resulting in conflict
and tensions. He was assassinated in August 1975.

In 1979, Zia ur Rahman, the new military ruler, formed his own Bangladesh National
Party and won elections. He was assassinated as well, prompting yet another
military takeover, this time led by Lt Gen H. M. Ershad.
Bangladeshis quickly rallied in support of the democratic demand, with students
leading the way. Ershad had no choice but to allow some political activity.

Ershad was later elected President for five years but resigned in 1990 due to
widespread public outrage.
Since 1991, Bangladesh has been governed by a representative democracy based
on multi-party elections.

Nepal: A Transition from Monarchy to Democracy

Nepal was a Hindu kingdom in the past, and in the modern era, it became a
constitutional monarchy.

Political parties and the general public in Nepal have long desired a more
transparent and responsive government. The king, however, maintained complete
control over the government and limited democracy with the help of the army.

Following a strong pro-democracy movement, the king accepted a demand for a new
democratic constitution in 1990.

Nepal's Maoists were successful in spreading their influence throughout the country
in the 1990s. They advocated armed rebellion against the monarchy and ruling elite,
which resulted in a bloodbath between Maoist guerrillas and the king's armed forces.

A triangular conflict erupted between monarchists, democrats, and Maoists.

The king disbanded parliament and dismissed the government, effectively bringing
Nepal's limited democracy to an end in 2002.

Seven Party Alliance

There were nationwide pro-democracy demonstrations in April 2002.

The struggling pro-democracy forces scored their first major victory when the king
was forced to restore the House of Representatives, which had been dissolved in
April 2002.

The largely nonviolent movement was led by the Seven Party Alliance (SPA),
Maoists, and social activists.

Nepal's democratic transition is currently incomplete; the country is in a unique

period as it prepares to form a constituent assembly to write the country's
constitution.

Some Nepalese still believe that a nominal monarchy is required to maintain Nepal's
historical ties.

The Maoists have agreed to suspend their armed struggle. They want the
constitution to include radical social and economic restructuring programmes.
This programme may not be acceptable to all SPA parties.

Ethnic Conflict And Democracy In Sri Lanka

Ethnic Conflict
Sri Lanka has been a democratic country since its independence in 1948. It was
confronted with a serious challenge, not from the military or the monarchy, but from
ethnic conflict, which led to a demand for secession from one of the regions.

In Sri Lanka (Ceylon), forces representing the interests of the majority Sinhala
community dominated politics.

They were hostile to the large number of Tamils who had immigrated to Sri Lanka
from India. Even after the country gained independence, people continued to
migrate.

Sinhala nationalists believed that because Sri Lanka belonged solely to the Sinhala
people, no "concessions" should be made to the Tamils.

Disregarding for Tamil concerns fuelled militant Tamil nationalism.

How India happens to be a key role player in the Sri Lankan war?
The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), a militant organisation, has been
fighting the Sri Lankan army in an armed conflict over the demand for 'Tamil Eelam,'
or a separate country for Sri Lanka's Tamils.
The LTTE has taken control of Sri Lanka's north-eastern region. People of Indian
origin are involved in the Sri Lankan problem, and the Tamils in India are putting
pressure on the Indian government to protect the Tamils' interests in Sri Lanka.

On several occasions, the Indian government has attempted to negotiate with the Sri
Lankan government over the Tamil issue. For the first time in 1987, the Indian
government became directly involved in the Sri Lankan Tamil issue.

India and Sri Lanka signed a peace agreement and dispatched troops to bring the
Sri Lankan government and the Tamils back together.

The Indian Army and the LTTE fought each other. The presence of Indian troops in
Sri Lanka was also unpopular with the local population. They interpreted this as India
interfering in Sri Lanka's internal affairs.

The Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) failed to complete its mission in Sri Lanka.

The Economy of Sri Lanka

Sri Lanka's civil war is still raging. International actors, particularly Scandinavian
countries like Norway and Iceland, have attempted to negotiate.

Sri Lanka has experienced significant economic growth and high levels of human
development despite the ongoing conflict.

After liberalising its economy, Sri Lanka was one of the first developing countries to
successfully control population growth. For many years, even during the civil war, it
had the highest per capita GDP (gross domestic product).

A free trade agreement was signed between India and Sri Lanka, which
strengthened bilateral ties. India's assistance in rebuilding Sri Lanka after the
tsunami has also brought the two countries closer together.
 India-Pakistan Conflicts
Following partition, the two countries became embroiled in a dispute over the fate of
Kashmir. The Pakistani government claimed to be the sole owner of Kashmir.

India and Pakistan fought two wars, in 1947-48 and 1965, but neither was successful
in resolving the conflict. During the 1947-48 war, the province was divided by the
Line of Control, resulting in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir and the Indian province of
Jammu and Kashmir.

In a decisive war, India defeated Pakistan, but the Kashmir issue remained
unresolved.

The conflict between India and Pakistan is also about strategic issues like control of
the Siachen glacier and the acquisition of weapons.

India detonated a nuclear device in Pokhran in 1998. Pakistan retaliated a few days
later by conducting nuclear tests in the Chagai Hills.

India and Pakistan appear to have established a military relationship that reduces
the likelihood of a full-fledged war.

The Indian government has accused Pakistan of employing a low-key violence

strategy by providing arms, training, money, and protection to Kashmiri militants for
them to carry out terrorist attacks against India.

According to the Indian government, Pakistan is also suspected of supplying arms

and ammunition to pro-Khalistani militants between 1985 and 1995.

Its spy agency, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), has been accused of involvement in
anti-India campaigns in India's northeast, which it is said to be running under the
radar through Bangladesh and Nepal.

For its part, Pakistan's government accuses India's government and security
agencies of fomenting unrest in the provinces of Sindh and Balochistan.

There were also squabbles over river water. Until 1960, both countries were locked
in a bitter dispute over the use of the rivers of the Indus basin.

The Indus Waters Treaty was signed by India and Pakistan in 1960, and it has stood
the test of time despite the two countries' involvement in various military conflicts.

The demarcation line in Sir Creek, Rann of Kutch, is a source of disagreement

between the two countries.

All of these issues are being discussed between India and Pakistan at the moment.
 India And Its Other Neighbours
India & Bangladesh
The Indian and Bangladeshi governments have disagreed on several issues,
including the allocation of Ganga and Brahmaputra river waters.

The Indian government has been irritated by Bangladesh's refusal to allow illegal
immigration into India, as well as its support for anti-Indian Islamic fundamentalist
groups.

Bangladesh's refusal to allow Indian troops to cross into north-eastern India via its
territory, as well as its refusal to export natural gas to India or allow Myanmar to do
so via its territory.

When it comes to sharing river waters, encouraging rebellion in the Chittagong Hill
Tracts, attempting to extract natural gas, and being unfair in trade, Bangladeshi
governments believe India acts as a regional bully.

The two countries have yet to resolve their border dispute. Both countries' economic
relations have significantly improved in the last ten years.

Bangladesh is a component of India's Look East policy, which seeks to connect the
country to Southeast Asia via Myanmar.

Regularly, the two countries have collaborated on disaster relief and environmental
issues.

India & Nepal

Nepal and India share a special bond. A bilateral treaty allows citizens of the two
countries to travel and work in the other without the need for visas or passports.

The governments of the two countries have had trade disputes in the past.

Given the rise of Naxalite groups across India, from Bihar in the north to Andhra
Pradesh in the south, Indian security agencies regard the Maoist movement in Nepal
as a growing security threat.

Nepal believes that India meddles in its internal affairs, has plans for its river waters
and hydropower, and prevents Nepal, a landlocked country, from gaining easier
access to the sea via Indian territory.

India and Nepal have relatively stable and peaceful relations. Despite their
differences, trade, scientific cooperation, shared natural resources, electricity
generation, and interconnected water management grids bind the two countries
together.

India & Bhutan

India has a special relationship with Bhutan, with which it has no major
disagreements.
The efforts of Bhutan's monarch to root out guerrillas and militants from north-
eastern India operating in his country have benefited India.

India, which is involved in large hydroelectric projects in Bhutan, is the Himalayan

kingdom's largest source of development aid.

India & Maldives

The Maldives and India maintain warm and cordial relations.

When Tamil mercenaries from Sri Lanka attacked the Maldives in November 1988,
the Indian air force and navy responded quickly to the Maldives' request for
assistance.

India has also contributed to the economic development, tourism, and fisheries of the
island.

Why did India have problems with its smaller neighbours?

In contrast, the Indian government frequently feels exploited by its neighbours. It is
concerned that political instability in these countries will allow outside powers to gain
influence in the region.

Smaller countries are concerned that India aspires to be a regional power.

Not all South Asian conflicts are between India and its neighbours. Nepal and
Bhutan, as well as Bangladesh and Myanmar, have previously disagreed over the
migration of ethnic Nepalese into Bhutan and Rohingyas into Myanmar.

There have been some disagreements between Bangladesh and Nepal regarding
the future of the Himalayan river waters.

The major conflicts and differences, however, are between India and the others,
which is due in part to the geography of the region, in which India is centrally located
and thus the only country that borders the others.

South Asian Association For Regional Cooperation

What Is SAARC?
The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) is a major regional
initiative launched by South Asian countries to advance cooperation through
multilateral means.

SAARC has had limited success as a result of persistent political differences.

What is the South Asian Free Trade Agreement?
SAARC members signed the South Asian Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA), which
promised the creation of a South Asian free trade zone. The agreement was signed
in 2004 and became effective on January 1, 2006.

SAFTA's his was to reduce trade tariffs by 20% by 2007. Some of our neighbours
were concerned that SAFTA would allow India to "invade" their markets and
influence their societies and politics through commercial ventures.

On the other hand, India believed SAFTA would provide real economic benefits to all
parties and that a region that trades more freely would be able to cooperate better on
political issues.

Even though India-Pakistan relations appear to be rife with endemic conflict and
violence, the two countries have agreed to implement confidence-building measures
to reduce the risk of war.

Social activists and prominent figures have worked together to foster friendship
between the peoples of both countries.

Leaders have met at summits to better understand each other and find solutions to
the two neighbours' major problems.

In the last five years, bus routes and trade between the two parts of Punjab have
grown significantly. Visas are now more easily obtained.

Although Sino-Indian relations have improved significantly in the last ten years,
China's strategic partnership with Pakistan remains a major source of friction.

The demands of development and globalisation have brought the two Asian
behemoths closer together, and their economic ties have grown rapidly since 1991.
After the Cold War, the United States' involvement in South Asia grew rapidly. Since
the end of the Cold War, the United States has maintained good relations with both
India and Pakistan, and it is increasingly acting as a moderator in India-Pakistan
relations.

Economic reforms and liberal economic policies in both countries have significantly
increased American participation in the region.

Picture Based Questions

A1. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:

Questions
1. What does the cartoon represent?
2. What does the equations speak about?
3. “I’m always good at calculations”. What does this represent?
Answer:
1. Dual role of Pakistan’s ruler Pervez
Musharraf as the president and as army General. ,
2. These equations speak about dominance of one person militarily more rather than
only president.
3. It shows the nation that Musharraf wants to command the country militarily and
administratively both to strengthen his power because president’s survival is not
easy without military support.
A2. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:

Questions
1. What does the cartoon represent?
2. Which animals do represent Sinhala and LTTE?
3. What does Sri Lankan leadership speak in the cartoon?
Answer:
1. Sri Lanka’s ethnic conflict between LTTE and Sinhala.
2. Sinhala by Lion, LTTE by Tiger.
3. Sri Lankan leadership is supposed to balance both Sinhala hardliners and Tamil
militants while negotiating peace.
 Ch-4 International Organisations
What is an International Organisation?
An 'International Organisation' is a legal entity established at the international level
by a treaty or other instrument. It has its own legal international identity.

Organisations with international recognition include the United Nations, NATO, and
the World Health Organisation.

What is the role of the International Organisation?

The international organisation aids in the setting of the international agenda, as well
as providing a forum for global political initiatives and acting as a catalyst in
international relations between member states.

The European Union, African Union, and NATO, for example, have member states
from all over the world. On the other hand, organisations such as the European
Union, African Union and NATO have geographic limitations.

The primary aim of International organisations is to facilitate cooperation and

coordination among member countries.

The United Nations is one of the most important intergovernmental organisations in

the world today. The organisations also comprise various bodies and regional
organisations, such as the UNECE (European Economic Council) and the UNECA
(United Nations Economic Commission for Africa) (Economic Council for Africa).

What led to the formation of such organisations for peace, stability

and cooperation in the international arena?
The First World War resulted in the formation of the 'League of Nations,' an
international organisation.

The United States played a major role in the formation of the league; Woodrow
Wilson, the US president, bought into the idea of the league's formation for the sake
of international peace and stability.

After the 'Treaty of Versailles,' the League of Nations was proposed in 1919 and
formally established in January 1920.

The outbreak of World War II, following the Nazi invasion of Poland, demonstrates
the 'League of Nations's' greatest failure.

The United Nations

It is an intergovernmental organisation responsible for maintaining international
peace and security.
The major aim of the organisation is to develop friendly relations among nations,
achieve international cooperation, and be a centre for harmonising the actions of the
member states.

It is one of the largest, most internationally represented and powerful organisations

in the world.

Why do we need organisations like the UN?

International organisations help in both war and peace situations. They also help
countries work together to improve everyone's living conditions.

An international organisation is not a super-state with authority over its members.

When states agree to create it, it takes shape. Some problems are so difficult to
solve that they can only be solved if everyone works together to solve them.

Some diseases, for example, can only be eradicated if every country in the world
collaborates to inoculate or vaccinate their citizens.

An international organisation can help with the collection of information and ideas for
collaboration.

It can provide mechanisms, rules, and bureaucracy to give members more

confidence that costs will be properly shared, benefits will be distributed fairly, and
once a member joins an agreement, it will follow its terms and conditions.

What led to the formation of the United Nations?

The United Nations was established as a successor to the League of Nations. It was
established in 1945, shortly after World War II ended. The United Nations charter
was signed by 51 countries.

The UN attempted to accomplish what the League of Nations had failed to do

 between the two world wars. The UN’s mission was to prevent international conflict
and promote interstate cooperation.

It was created in the hopes of preventing inter-state conflicts from escalating into war
and, if war did break out, limiting the scope of hostilities.

The United Nations was established to bring countries together to improve global
social and economic development prospects.

The United Nations had 192 member states by 2006. Almost every independent
state was represented, and in 2011, South Sudan joined the United Nations as the
193rd member state.

The Structure Of the United Nations

The United Nations has six main organs:

 General Assembly: It is the central deliberative body composed of representatives

of all member states. It is empowered to discuss and make recommendations on the
subjects within the scope of the charter itself.

 Security Council: It is the 15-member body with the primary responsibility of

maintaining peace and stability around the world. It comprises permanent and non-
permanent members.

 The Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC): It has the responsibility to look after
the economic and social matters. It comprises the 54 members elected by the
general assembly for an overlapping three-year term.

 Trusteeship council: It is composed of the five permanent members of the Security

Council to ensure equal division of administering and non-administering powers.

 The International Court of Justice: It is the principal judicial organ of the UN. It
consists of 15 judges elected to nine-year terms by the General Assembly and the
Security Council voting independently.

 The Secretariat: It is the administrative arm of the organisation. It is headed by a

Secretary-General appointed by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of
the Security Council for a five-year, renewable term.

The UN also consists of many different structures and agencies. Social and
economic issues are dealt with by many agencies, including :
 World Health Organisation (WHO)
 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
 United Nations Human Rights Commission (UNHRC)
 United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR)
 United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)
 United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO)
 League Of Nations
The League of Nations was the first worldwide intergovernmental organisation
whose principal mission was to maintain world peace. The organisation was officially
formalised on 10th January 1920.

It was founded following the Paris Peace Conference that ended the First World
War; in 1919, U.S. President Woodrow Wilson won the Nobel Peace Prize for his
role as the leading architect of the League.

Reform Of the UN After The Cold War

Reform and improvement are fundamentals for any organisation to serve the needs
of a changing environment.

The UN faced two basic kinds of reforms:

 Reform of the organisation’s structures and processes.
 A review of the issues that fall within the jurisdiction of the organisation.

The biggest discussion has been on the functioning of the Security Council. There
has been a demand for an increase in the UN Security Council’s permanent and
non-permanent membership so that the realities of contemporary world politics are
better reflected in the structure of the organisation.

There are proposals to increase membership from Asia, Africa and South America.
The US and other Western countries want improvements in the UN’s budgetary
procedures and its administration.

It was also stated by many leaders that the UN is a seventy-five-year-old body the
way it was organised and the way it functioned reflected the realities of world politics
after the Second World War, and these realities changed with a due course of time.

What were the changes the world faced after the Cold War?

The Soviet Union has collapsed.

 The US became the strongest power. The relationship between Russia, the
successor to the Soviet Union, and the US is much more cooperative.
 China was rapidly emerging as a great power, and India was also growing rapidly.
 The economies of Asia were growing at an unprecedented rate.
 Many new countries have joined the UN (as they became independent from the
Soviet Union or former communist states in Eastern Europe).
 A whole new set of challenges confronts the world (genocide, civil war, ethnic
conflict, terrorism, nuclear proliferation, climate change, environmental degradation,
epidemics).

What reforms are necessary to make the UN work better?

In 1992, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution. The resolution reflected
three main complaints:

 The Security Council no longer represents contemporary political realities.

 Its decisions reflect only Western values and interests and are dominated by a few
powers.
 It lacks equitable representation.

How should New Security Council members be chosen?

The following are just some of the criteria that have been proposed for new
permanent and non-permanent members of the Security Council.

It was suggested that a new member must be:

 A major economic power.
 A major military power
 A substantial contributor to the UN budget.
 A big nation in terms of its population.
 A nation that respects democracy and human rights.
 A country that would make the Council more representative of the world’s diversity in
terms of geography, economic systems, and culture.

Depending on their interests and aspirations, the governments of various states saw
advantages in some criteria and disadvantages in others. Countries could see that
the criteria were problematic, even if they had no desire to be members themselves.

There are five permanent members and ten non-permanent members on the
Security Council. The charter gave permanent members a special position in the
post-World War II world, allowing them to help bring stability to the world.

Permanency and veto power are the main benefits of the five permanent members.
Non-permanent members serve for a maximum of two years before being replaced
by newly elected members.
 After completing a two-year term, a country cannot be re-elected immediately. The
non-permanent members are chosen in such a way that they represent all of the
world's continents. They also don't have veto power.

What is the veto power?

The Security Council makes decisions through voting; Every member has one vote.

Permanent members can vote negatively, so even if all other permanent and non-
permanent members vote in favour of a decision, a single permanent member's
negative vote can put the decision on hold.

The veto is this negative vote. While there has been talk of abolishing or changing
the veto system, it is clear that the permanent members are unlikely to agree to such
a change.

Jurisdiction of the UN
The question of membership is a serious one. Also, there are more substantial
issues before the world. As the UN completed 60 years of its existence, the heads of
all the member-states met in September 2005 to celebrate the anniversary and
review the situation.

The leaders in this meeting decided that the following steps should be taken to make
the UN more relevant in the changing context.

 Creation of a Peace Building Commission.

 Acceptance of the responsibility of the international community in case of failures of
national governments to protect their citizens from atrocities.
 Establishment of a Human Rights Council (operational since 19 June 2006).
 Agreements to achieve the Millennium Development Goals.
 Condemnation of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations.
 Creation of a Democracy Fund
 An agreement to wind up the Trusteeship Council

India and the UN reforms

As far as India and the UN relations are concerned, India has backed UN reform for
many reasons. India wants a stronger and more vibrant UN amid this changing world
order.

India thinks the UN should do more to promote development and inter-state

cooperation. As a precondition for international peace and security, India believes
the UN should prioritise development.

India's main concern is the Security Council's composition, which has remained
largely unchanged while the UN General Assembly has grown significantly. India
also claims this has harmed the Security Council's representativeness.

India also states that a larger council with more representation will have more
international support.

In 1965, the UN Security Council grew from 11 to 15 members. However, the

number of permanent members remained constant. The size of the council has
remained constant since.

The developing countries now make up the majority of UN General Assembly

members. As a result, India believes it should be consulted on Security Council
decisions.

The support of the international community is required for the Security Council's
actions. Hence, India advocates the addition of more permanent and non-permanent
members. Also, India wants itself to be in the UNSC as a permanent member.

How is India the right fit for the UNSC permanent members’ Candidature?
 India is the world's second most populous country, with nearly a fifth of the world's
population.
 India is also the world's most populous democracy.
 India has taken part in nearly every UN initiative.
 It has a long and important history of UN peacekeeping.
 The country's economy's global rise is also notable. It has also made regular
financial contributions to the UN, never defaulting.

India recognises the symbolic value of permanent Security Council membership. It

denotes a country's rising global stature.

India wants to be a permanent member of the UN Security Council with veto power,
but some countries doubt it.

Ineffectiveness as a permanent member of the UN Security Council Many believe

India's problems with Pakistan. Others argue that by including India, other emerging
powers like Brazil, Germany, Japan, and possibly even South Africa will be forced to
accommodate.

Some argue that permanent membership should be expanded to include Africa and
South America, the only unrepresented continents. Given these reservations, India,
or anyone else, may struggle to gain permanent membership in the UN.

The UN in the Unipolar World

Some countries have expressed concern about the UN's reform and restructuring,
hoping that the changes will assist the UN in dealing with a unipolar world in which
the US is the most powerful country with no serious rivals.

As a result of the demise of the Soviet Union, the United States has become the
world's sole superpower. Its military and economic might enable it to ignore the
United Nations and other international organisations.

The United States wields considerable power within the United Nations. (In its
capacity as the world's largest donor to the United Nations.) The fact that the United
Nations is physically located on US soil gives Washington extra leverage.

The United States has a large number of nationals in the UN bureaucracy. The
United States can put a stop to any actions that irritate or harm its interests, as well
as the interests of its friends and allies.

The power and veto of the United States within the organisation ensure that
Washington has a significant say in the selection of the UN Secretary-General.

The US can and does use this power to "split" the world and lessen opposition to its
policies.

As a result, the UN offers little in the way of a counterbalance to the US.

The United Nations can and has served to bring the United States and the rest of the
world together to discuss various issues in a unipolar world dominated by the United
States.

Despite their frequent criticism of the United Nations, US leaders believe the
organisation serves a purpose by bringing together over 190 countries to deal with
conflict and social and economic development.

The United Nations provides a forum for changing American attitudes and policies.
While the rest of the world rarely stands united against Washington, and "balancing"
US power is nearly impossible, the UN does provide a forum for arguments against
specific US attitudes and policies, as well as compromises and concessions.

United Nations and the Ukraine War

 The recent Russia-Ukraine war has created an existential dilemma for the UN. It has
also been plagued by several recent crises, including the Taliban takeover of
Afghanistan and the Covid pandemic.

The UN's inability to in, firstly, prevent the war and secondly put an end to it speaks
largely of its inability to achieve peace and security, sustainable development,
human rights and humanitarian assistance.

The first military confrontation in Europe since World War II has created an
existential crisis for the UN as it failed to prevent the humanitarian and refugee crisis
faced by Ukraine, where over 10 million people have been displaced, and 5 million
have become refugees.

The leader of the UN himself, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, agrees in his

address on the organisation’s 75th anniversary in 2020 that the UN now lacks the
ambition, political will and unity of member states to overcome any humanitarian
crisis.

International Monetary Fund (IMF)

Headquarters: Washington, DC.

 The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is an international organisation that oversees

international financial institutions and regulations.

 The IMF has 184 member countries, but they do not have equal representation.

 The top ten countries received 55% of the votes.

 They are the members of the G-8 (the US, Japan, Germany, France, the UK, Italy,
Canada and Russia).

 The US alone has 17.4 per cent of voting rights.

The World bank

The World Bank was established shortly after World War II ended in 1945. Its
activities are focused primarily on developing countries. Human development
(education, health), agriculture and rural development (irrigation, rural services),
environmental protection (pollution reduction, establishing and enforcing
regulations), infrastructure (roads, urban regeneration, and electricity), and
governance are all areas in which it works (anti-corruption, development of legal
institutions).

 It makes loans and grants to member countries. As a result, it has a significant

impact on developing countries' economic policies.

 It is frequently chastised for dictating the economic agendas of poorer countries,

imposing stringent loan conditions, and imposing free-market reforms.
 World Trade Organisation
The World Trade Organisation (WTO) is an international organisation that
establishes global trade rules. This organisation was established in 1995 as the
successor to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which was
established following World War II. It consists of 150 people. Although all decisions
are made unanimously, major economic powers such as the United States, the
European Union, and Japan have been able to use the WTO to frame trade rules to
advance their interests. Developing countries frequently complain about opaque
procedures and are being bullied by major powers.

The International Atomic Energy Agency

In 1957, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was established. It was
established to carry out US President Dwight Eisenhower's "Atoms for Peace"
proposal. Its goal is to promote the peaceful use of nuclear energy while
discouraging its use for military purposes. IAEA teams inspect nuclear facilities
around the world regularly to ensure that civilian reactors are not being used for
military purposes.

Sub-Topic: ‘United Nations Educational, Scientific

and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)’
Established on 4 November 1946. With its headquarters in Paris, France, UNESCO
is a special body of the United Nations whose main objective is to promote
education, natural science, society and anthropology, culture and communication.
During the past several years, the special work done by UNESCO has been to
promote literacy, technical and educational training, independent media, etc., all
across its member nations.

Sub-Topic: ‘United Nations International Children's

Emergency Fund (UNICEF)’
Established in 1946 by the United Nations General Assembly as a body whose main
task was to collect emergency funds for children and to help in their development
work all across the world. Apart from this, UNICEF helps and encourages the works
that promote children's health and better life in all parts of the world. With its’
headquarter in New York, United States, UNICEF has been working successfully in
almost all 193 countries of the world.

Sub-Topic: ‘International Labor Organization (ILO)’

Founded in October 1919 with its headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland, is a body of
the United Nations that aims to promote efficient conditions of social justice and work
for workers through international labour standards at the global level. In addition,
there is an incentive for women and male workers to engage in productive work and
to create safety, parity and self-respectful conditions for them at the workplace.
Picture Based Questions
A1. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:

Questions
1. What does the cartoon represent?
2. Who is the person being commented in the cartoon?
3. What message does the cartoon convey?
Answer:
1. It represents role of the UN on attack on Lebanon by Israeli forces.
2. The UN Secretary General.
3. It conveys message on relevance of the UN as immediate follow-up was not there
by Israeli forces despite passing a resolution from the UN.

A2. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:

Questions
1. What does the cartoon represent?
2. What type of crisis does the cartoon show?
3. What message does the cartoon convey?
Answer:
1. A humanitarian crisis in Darfur, Sudan.
2. Starvation, genocide, horror etc.
3. ‘A Big Helping of Words’ only because during these crises, the international
organisations performed debates, speeches on these but no actual aid or support
was reached to peoples.
 Ch-5 Security in the Contemporary World

What is Security?
The term "security" refers to the absence of threats.

Human life and the life of a country are both fraught with dangers. Every time a
person leaves his or her home, their existence and way of life are threatened in
some way.

Things that threaten 'core values' should be considered in security discussions.

Security only refers to extremely dangerous threats that could jeopardise core values
to the point where they would be irreparably damaged if we did nothing to address
the situation.

There are two types of security conceptions: traditional and non-traditional.

Traditional Notions
What are the external threats?
Traditional security thinking holds that military threats pose the greatest threat to a
country. Any other country jeopardises the core values of sovereignty, independence
and territorial integrity by threatening military actions.

In a situation like war, not only soldiers are likely to be injured or killed. Ordinary men
and women are frequently made targets of war to sever their allegiance to the
conflict.

In such a situation, a government has the following options to choose from:

 surrender
 promise to increase war costs to deter the opposing side from attacking.
 To defend itself in the event of a war, denying the attacking country.

When faced with a conflict, governments may choose to surrender, but this is not
advertised as the country's policy.

As a result, security policy is divided into two parts: deterrence, which is concerned
with preventing war, and defence, which is concerned with limiting or terminating the
war.

The third component of traditional security policy is the balance of power.

As a result, governments are acutely aware of the power dynamic that exists
between their country and other nations. They work hard to maintain a favourable
power balance with other countries, particularly those nearby, with whom they
disagree or with whom they have previously clashed.

Alliance Building
Military power is an important part of maintaining a balance of power, but economic
and technological power are also important because they serve as the foundation for
military power.

Traditional security policy includes a fourth component: alliance building.

An alliance is a group of states that work together to deter or defend against military
attacks. Most alliances are formalised in written treaties and are based on a fairly
clear identification of who poses a threat.

Why are Alliances formed?

Alliances are formed by countries to increase their effective power in comparison to
another country or alliance.

Alliances are formed based on national interests, and these interests can shift over
time.

For example, in the 1980s, the United States supported Islamic militants in
Afghanistan against the Soviet Union but later attacked them after Al Qaeda—an
Islamic militant group led by Osama bin Laden—launched terrorist attacks against
America on September 11, 2001.

The majority of security threats come from outside a country's borders. This is
because the international system is a rather brutal arena with no central authority
capable of regulating behaviour.
Within a country, the threat of violence is regulated by an acknowledged central
authority — the government — but there is no acknowledged central authority that
stands above everyone else in global politics.

It's alluring to believe that the United Nations is or could be such a power.

The United Nations is a member-driven organisation, and its authority exists only to
the extent that its members allow it to exist and obey it. Each country is responsible
for its security in international politics.

Internal
Traditional security is also concerned with internal security.

It is not given as much weight because, following WWII, it appeared that the internal
security of the world's most powerful countries was more or less assured.

Following 1945, the United States and the Soviet Union appeared to be united and to
be on the verge of establishing peace within their respective borders.

The majority of European countries, particularly those in powerful Western Europe,

faced no serious threats from within-border groups or communities.

These countries focused their efforts primarily on threats that came from outside
their borders.

The Cold War was a period following WWII in which the Western alliance led by the
United States fought the Soviet-led Communist alliance.

Both alliances were wary of each other's military assaults.

Furthermore, some European powers were concerned about violence in their

colonies caused by colonised people seeking independence. (For example, in the
1950s, the French were in Vietnam, and the British were in Kenya in the 1950s and
early 1960s.)

When the colonies gained independence in the late 1940s, their security concerns
mirrored those of European powers.

Some newly independent countries, such as Europe's major powers, became

members of Cold War alliances. The Cold War between the two superpowers was
responsible for roughly one-third of all wars in the post-World War II period. The vast
majority of these conflicts occurred in the Third World.

The European colonial powers feared violence in the colonies, and some colonial
people feared that their former colonial rulers in Europe would attack them after
independence.

As a result, they needed to prepare to defend themselves in the event of imperial

war.
Security challenges confronting newly independent Asian and African countries
differed from those confronting Europe in two ways. First, the new countries had to
deal with the threat of war with their neighbours. They had to be worried about
internal military conflict as well.

These countries faced threats not only from the outside, primarily from their
neighbours, but also from within. Many newly independent countries began to fear
their neighbours more than the US, the Soviet Union, or former colonial powers.

They fought for control of borders and territories, as well as people and populations,
or all three at the same time.

Internally, the new states were worried about separatist movements attempting to
establish independent states. At times, external and internal threats merged.

External and internal wars posed a serious threat to the security of the new states.

Non-Traditional Notions
In addition to military threats, this concept encompasses a wide range of threats and
dangers affecting human existence.

Human security in a non-traditional sense, in which the emphasis shifts from the
state to the individual. It is security in a broad sense, including other forms of
insecurity such as hunger, poverty, civil war, and so on.

In the last century, their governments have killed more people than foreign armies.
According to all proponents, the primary goal of human security is to protect
individuals.
Supporters of the 'narrow' definition of human security focus on violent threats to
individuals, or, in the words of former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, "the
protection of communities and individuals from internal violence."

According to proponents of the "broad" concept of human security, hunger, disease,

and natural disasters kill far more people than war, genocide, and terrorism
combined.

According to human security policy, people should be protected from both these
threats and violence.

The human security agenda includes economic security and "threats to human
dignity."

To put it another way, the broadest formulation emphasises "freedom from want" and
"freedom from fear."

Global security emerged in the 1990s in response to global threats such as global
warming, international terrorism, and health epidemics such as AIDS, bird flu, and
COVID-19.

These problems cannot be solved by a single country. In some cases, a single

country may be forced to bear a disproportionate share of the burden of a global
problem, such as environmental degradation.

New Sources Of Threats

Human security and global security both have non-traditional perspectives that
emphasise the changing nature of security threats.

Terrorism
It refers to political violence that targets civilians on purpose and indiscriminately.
International terrorism involves citizens or territories from more than one country.

Terrorist organisations use force or the threat of force to alter a political context or
condition that they do not agree with.

Civilians are frequently targeted to terrorise the public and use public dissatisfaction
as a weapon against national governments or other opposing parties.

Terrorists have previously hijacked planes or planted bombs in trains, cafes,

markets, and other crowded places.

Even though terrorism is not new, other governments and the general public have
paid more attention to it since the terrorist attack on the World Trade Centre in New
York on September 11, 2001. Previously, the majority of terrorist attacks took place
in the Middle East, Europe, Latin America, and South Asia.
Human Rights
It is divided into three sections. Political rights include freedom of expression and
assembly.

There are two kinds of rights: economic and social rights.

Rights of colonised peoples, as well as ethnic and indigenous minorities. Events

such as Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, Rwanda's genocide, and Indonesian military
killings in East Timor have sparked debate over whether the UN should intervene to
stop human rights violations.

Some argue that the UN Charter authorises the use of force in the defence of human
rights. Others argue that the national interests of powerful states will determine
which cases of human rights violations the UN will investigate.

Poverty
It exacerbates insecurity. The global population will rise to 700-800 million in 25
years, then stabilise at 900-1000 million.

More than half of global population growth is now attributed to these countries.

Most developing countries' populations are expected to triple in the next 50 years,
while many wealthy countries' populations will shrink.

Wealthy states and social groups benefit from low population growth, while poor
states and social groups benefit from high income per capita.

A global divide between the Northern and Southern hemispheres exists.

For example, the majority of global armed conflicts now occur in Sub-Saharan Africa,
the world's poorest region. More people were killed in wars in this region in the early
twenty-first century than anywhere else.

Southern poverty has caused mass migration to the North in search of a better life,
especially economic opportunity.

Global political tensions have risen. International law distinguishes between migrants
(who leave voluntarily) and refugees (who are forcibly displaced) (those who flee
from war, natural disaster or political persecution).

In general, states must accept refugees but not migrants.

Internally displaced people are those who have fled their homes but remain within
national borders, as opposed to refugees.

Internally displaced Kashmiri Pandits fled the violence in the Kashmir Valley in the
early 1990s.
A 1990s study found that all but three of the 60 refugee flows coincided with an
internal armed conflict.

Migration, business, tourism, and military operations have accelerated the spread of
epidemics like HIV/AIDS, bird flu, and SARS.

The ability of one country to control disease spread affects infections in other
countries.

In 2003, an estimated four crore people had HIV AIDS, with two-thirds in Africa and
half in South Asia.

In the late 1990s, new HIV AIDS drugs dramatically reduced deaths in North
America and other industrialised nations.

Others, such as Ebola and hantaviruses, have emerged, while old diseases like
cholera, tuberculosis, and malaria have mutated into drug-resistant forms that are
difficult to treat.

Economic consequences of animal epidemics. During the late 1990s mad cow
disease outbreak, Britain lost billions of dollars, and bird flu shut down several Asian
poultry exports.

Epidemics like these show how states are becoming more interdependent,
diminishing the importance of borders and emphasising global cooperation.

Extending the definition of security does not include any disease or distress.

This will likely render the concept of security incoherent. Anything can cause a
security breach.

Even if the threat is unique, it must meet a minimum common criterion, such as
endangering the referent's (a state or group of people's) existence.

The Maldives may be threatened by global warming as rising sea levels submerge
large portions of the country, while HIV/AIDS threatens Southern African countries
as one in every six adults has the disease (one in three for Botswana, the worst
case).

In 1994, the Hutu tribe slaughtered nearly five lakh Tutsi in Rwanda. The same as
traditional security conceptions, non-traditional security conceptions are context-
dependent.

Cooperative Security
Rather than military confrontation, many of these non-traditional security threats
necessitate cooperation.

Military force may have a role to play in combating terrorism or enforcing human
rights (and even here, there are limits to what force can achieve), but it's hard to see
how it would help alleviate poverty, manage migration and refugee movements, or
control epidemics.

Using military force would almost always worsen the situation! It is far more effective
to develop strategies that involve international cooperation.

Bilateral (between any two countries), regional, continental, or global cooperation are
all possible. It all depends on the nature of the threat and the willingness and ability
of countries to respond.

Nongovernmental organisations (Amnesty International, the Red Cross, private

foundations and charities, churches and religious organisations, trade unions,
associations, social and development organisations, businesses and corporations,
and great personalities may all be involved in cooperative security (e.g. Mother
Teresa, Nelson Mandela).

Cooperative security may require the use of force as a last resort. The international
community may be forced to sanction the use of force against governments that
murder their citizens or ignore the plight of their citizens who are afflicted by poverty,
disease, and disaster.

Non-traditional security is far better when the international community is sanctioned

and uses force collectively rather than when a single country decides to use force
unilaterally.

How is India dealing with these security threats?

Traditional (military) and non-traditional threats to India's security have emerged from
both within and outside its borders. Its security strategy is made up of four main
components that have been used in various combinations over time.
India has been involved in conflicts with its neighbours in the past, including Pakistan
in 1947–48, 1965, 1971, and 1999, and China in 1962.

India's decision to conduct nuclear tests in 1998 was justified by the Indian
government as a means of ensuring national security because it is surrounded by
nuclear-armed countries in the South Asian region.

In 1974, India conducted its first nuclear test. To protect its security interests, it must
strengthen international norms and institutions.

Jawaharlal Nehru, India's first Prime Minister, supported Asian solidarity,

decolonisation, disarmament, and the United Nations as a forum for resolving
international conflicts.

India has also taken steps to establish a universal and non-discriminatory non-
proliferation regime in which all countries have the same rights and obligations when
it comes to WMD (nuclear, biological, chemical).

It argued for a more equitable New World Economic Order (NIEO). Most importantly,
it used non-alignment to help carve out a peace zone outside of the two
superpowers' bloc politics.

The 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which provides a roadmap for reducing greenhouse gas
emissions to combat global warming, has been signed and ratified by 160 countries.
In support of cooperative security initiatives, Indian troops have been deployed to UN
peacekeeping missions around the world.

Meeting internal security challenges: Several militant groups from Nagaland,

Mizoram, Punjab, and Kashmir, among others, have attempted to secede from India
on several occasions.

India has attempted to maintain national unity by adopting a democratic political

system that allows various communities and groups to freely express their
grievances and share political power.

Finally, India has attempted to develop its economy in such a way that the vast
majority of its citizens are lifted out of poverty and misery, and huge economic
inequalities are eliminated.

Democratic politics creates spaces for the voices of the poor and disadvantaged to
be heard.

The democratically elected governments are under pressure to combine economic

growth and human development.

What do you understand about the term “Kyoto Protocol”?

The Kyoto Protocol is an international treaty that extends the 1992 United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) by requiring state parties to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions based on the scientific consensus that (part one)
global warming is occurring, and that human-caused CO2 emissions are a significant
contributor.

The Kyoto Protocol was signed on December 11, 1997, in Kyoto, Japan. It became
effective on February 16, 2005.

There are currently 192 parties to the Protocol (Canada has withdrawn from the
Protocol as of December 2012).

Sub-Topic: ‘Terrorism’
Terrorism refers to the systematic use of brutal violence that creates an atmosphere
of fear in society. It is used for many purposes, very prominently the politico-religious
purposes.

There could be three broad meanings of terrorism:

 A systematic use of terror, often violent, especially as a means of coercion.

 Violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror); are perpetrated for a
religious, political or, ideological goal; and deliberately target or disregard the
safety of non-combatants (civilians).
 Acts of unlawful violence and war.

There is not a single nation in the world that does not suffer from terrorism. Although
some countries have tried to divide terrorism into good and bad terrorism, India has
always denied this distinction. India's current Prime Minister Narendra Modi has also
clarified that terrorism cannot be divided into good or bad; it is a global problem and
should be combated collectively.

Picture Based Questions

1. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:
Questions
1. What does the cartoon represent?
2. What does the pigeon and man with goods symbolise?
3. What message does the cartoon convey?
Answer:
1. The movement of Peace Keeping Force i.e. pigeon (White) a symbol of peace and
an army personnel is flying it.
2. Pigeon symbolises peace and a man with goods to maintain peace at a place
where threat has occurred.
3. Peace Keeping Forces are also supposed to bear arms to initiate peace.

2. Study the picture given below and answer the questions as that follow:

Questions
1. What does the cartoon represent?
2. Is it any different from our country?
3. What message does this cartoon convey?
Answer:
1. The US’s massive expenditure of defence and lack of money for peace related
issues.
2. Our country spends a lot on peaceful initiations first as well as make efforts to find
out a peaceful solution first.
3. This cartoon conveys message that the countries are ready to spend on military
rather than on peaceful initiation.
 Ch-6 Environment and Natural Resources

Environmental Concerns In Global Politics

What are the current environmental concerns?
Until recently, 'global politics' was only considered in a limited sense: wars and
treaties, the rise and fall of state authority, the connection between governments that
represent their countries in the international arena, and the role of intergovernmental
organisations.

We already broadened the definition of world politics to include topics such as

poverty and diseases.

That may not have been a tough step to take because we all believe governments
are in charge of these things.

In that sense, they are part of international politics.

How do you think these concerns fall within the scope of

contemporary world politics?

Cultivable land is scarcely expanding globally, while a significant amount of existing

agricultural land is losing fertility. Grasslands and fisheries have been overgrazed.
Water bodies have been drastically depleted and polluted, putting a serious
constraint on food production.

According to the United Nations Development Programme's 2006 Human

Development Report, 1.2 billion people in poor countries lack access to safe drinking
 water and 2.6 billion lack access to sanitation, resulting in the death of almost three
million children each year.

Natural forests — which help to stabilise the climate, regulate water supplies, and
house the majority of the world's species on land — are being degraded and people
displaced. The loss of biodiversity continues as a result of habitat destruction in
species-rich places.

Consistent declines in the overall amount of ozone in the Earth's stratosphere (often
referred to as the ozone hole) pose a serious threat to ecosystems and human
health.

Globally, coastal pollution is also increasing. While the open sea remains relatively
clean, coastal waterways are becoming progressively contaminated, primarily as a
result of land-based activities. If left unchecked, the intensive human settlement of
coastal zones worldwide will result in continued deterioration of the marine
environment's quality.

If various governments take action to halt the aforementioned environmental

damage, these issues will have political ramifications. The majority of them are so
complex that no single government can adequately solve them.

As a result, they must integrate themselves into 'global politics.' Environmental and
natural resource issues are, in a broader sense, political.

 Who is responsible for environmental degradation?

 Who bears the cost? And who is ultimately accountable for corrective action?
 Who gets to use how much of the Earth's natural resources?

All of these issues raise the question of who possesses the most power. As such,
they are profoundly political issues.

Although environmental issues have a long history, from the 1960s onward,
knowledge of the environmental repercussions of economic growth took on an
increasingly political dimension.

Earth Summit
In 1972, the Club of Rome, a global think tank, produced a book titled Limits to
Growth, which highlighted the probable depletion of Earth's resources in the face of a
fast-rising global population.

Worldwide organisations, such as the United Nations Environment Programme

(UNEP), began convening international conferences and sponsoring in-depth studies
to achieve a more coordinated and effective response to environmental concerns.

Since then, the environment has risen to prominence as a major issue in world
politics.
The growing importance of environmental issues in global politics was firmly
established at the United Nations Conference on the Environment and Development
in June 1992 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil,l which is also known as the Earth Summit.

The conference drew 170 states, thousands of non-governmental organisations, and

numerous international enterprises.

Five years earlier, the 1987 Brundtland Report, Our Common Future, warned that
old economic growth patterns were unsustainable in the long run, particularly in light
of the South's desires for additional industrial development.

At the Rio Summit, it was clear that the established and wealthy countries of the First
World, collectively referred to as the 'global North,' had a different environmental
agenda than the impoverished and developing countries of the Third World,
collectively referred to as the 'global South.'

Unlike the Northern states, which were concerned about ozone depletion and global
warming, the Southern states were concerned about the relationship between
economic development and environmental management.

The Rio Summit resulted in the adoption of treaties on climate change, biodiversity,
and forestry, as well as the recommendation of a list of development principles
dubbed 'Agenda 21'.

However, it left significant disagreements and challenges unaddressed. There was

agreement on the importance of balancing economic expansion with environmental
stewardship.

This method of growth is frequently referred to as sustainable development.'

However, the issue was how this was to be accomplished. Certain critics have
argued that Agenda 21 was skewed toward economic growth rather than ecological
preservation.

Protection of the Global Commons

What are 'Global Commons'?
The term 'commons' refers to community-owned resources rather than privately held
ones. Similarly, some parts of the world are not under the sovereign jurisdiction of
any single country and hence require international community control.

Humanitas res communis, or global commons, is the term used to describe these
areas. Examples include the Earth's atmosphere, Antarctica (see Box), the ocean
floor, and outer space.

It is difficult to work together on global commons challenges. The 1959 Antarctic

Treaty, the 1987 Montreal Protocol, and the 1991 Antarctic Environmental Protocol
are just a few of the ground-breaking agreements that have been drafted.
The challenge of obtaining consensus on shared environmental agendas based on
imprecise scientific facts and time frames is a key issue that underpins all ecological
issues.

In this way, the discovery of the Antarctic ozone hole in the mid-1980s revealed both
the benefits and risks of dealing with global environmental issues.

Similarly, the history of outer space as a global commons illustrates that disparities in
the management of these domains have a significant impact.

The primary focus here, as with the earth's atmosphere and ocean floor, is technical
advancement and industrial development. This is crucial since the benefits of
exploitative space operations for current and future generations are far from equal.

Responsibilities are shared but differentiated.

There is a difference in how countries in the north and south tackle environmental
issues.

The affluent countries of the North want to address the current situation of the
environment and want everyone to share equally in the responsibility for ecological
conservation.

The developing countries of the South feel that wealthier countries' industrial
progress is to blame for a major percentage of the world's environmental
degradation.

They must face a higher share of the burden of reversing the harm today if they have
contributed to greater degradation.

Furthermore, developing countries are becoming more industrialised and should not
be subjected to the same restrictions as developed countries.

As a result, in the creation, application, and interpretation of international

environmental law laws, the special needs of developing nations must be taken into
account.

The concept of shared but differentiated responsibilities was supported in the Rio
Declaration at the 1992 Earth Summit.

"States shall engage in the spirit of global partnership to conserve, protect, and
restore the Earth's ecosystem's health and integrity," according to the relevant
portion of the Rio Declaration.

In light of the many contributors to global environmental deterioration, states have

common but distinct responsibilities.
Given the stresses their societies exert on the global environment and the
technological and financial resources at their disposal, the industrialised countries
recognise their responsibility in the international pursuit of sustainable development."

Furthermore, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

(UNFCCC) of 1992 specifies that parties should act "on an equitable basis and by
their shared but distinct responsibilities and various capabilities" to maintain the
climate system.

Industrialised countries accounted for the lion's share of historical and current global
greenhouse gas emissions, according to the parties to the Convention.

Furthermore, it was acknowledged that emerging countries' per capita emissions

remain low. As a result, the Kyoto Protocol's stipulations were waived for China,
India, and other emerging countries.

What is the Kyoto Protocol?

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement that sets greenhouse gas emission
reduction targets for developed countries. Certain gases, such as carbon dioxide,
methane, and hydrofluorocarbons, are thought to be at least largely responsible for
global warming, a rise in global temperature that threatens life on Earth.

Based on the UNFCCC's principles, the protocol was adopted in 1997 in Kyoto,
Japan.

Common Property Resources

The common property of the group is represented by a common property. In terms of
the nature, levels of use, and upkeep of a given resource, the underlying norm is that
group members have both rights and obligations.

Many Indian village communities, for example, have defined their members' rights
and responsibilities over centuries of practice and mutual understanding.

Due to a combination of factors such as privatisation, agricultural intensification,

population growth, and ecosystem degradation, the common property has shrunk in
size, quality, and availability in many parts of the world.

A common property regime is an apt description of the institutional arrangement for

managing sacred groves on state-owned forest land.

Village communities along South India's forest belt have traditionally managed
sacred groves.

Kyoto Protocol and India

India signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocol in 1997 in August 2002. India, China,
and other developing countries were exempt from the Kyoto Protocol's requirements
because their contribution to greenhouse gas emissions during the industrialisation
period (which is thought to be the cause of today's global warming and climate
change) was minimal.

On the other hand, opponents of the Kyoto Protocol argue that India and China, as
well as other developing countries, will eventually become major contributors to
greenhouse gas emissions.
At the G-8 meeting in June 2005, India pointed out that developing countries' per
capita emission rates are a fraction of those in developed countries. India believes
that developed countries, which have accumulated emissions over a long period,
bear primary responsibility for reducing emissions based on the principle of shared
but differentiated responsibility.

India's international negotiating stance is heavily based on the UNFCCC's historical

responsibility principles.

This acknowledges that developed countries are responsible for the majority of
historical and current greenhouse gas emissions while also emphasising that "the
developing country parties' first and overriding priorities are economic and social
development."

As a result, India is wary of recent UNFCCC discussions about requiring rapidly

industrialising countries (like Brazil, China, and India) to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions.

This, India believes, goes against the UNFCCC's spirit.

It also doesn't seem fair to impose restrictions on India when its per capita carbon
emissions are expected to increase by less than half of the global average of 3.8
tonnes in 2030.

India's emissions are expected to rise from 0.9 tonnes per capita in 2000 to 1.6
tonnes per capita in 2030. The Indian government is already contributing to global
efforts through several programmes. Cleaner fuels are required for vehicles in India's
National Auto-fuel Policy, for example.

The Energy Conservation Act of 2001 outlines strategies for improving energy
efficiency.

For example, the Electricity Act of 2003 encourages the use of renewable energy. In
recent years, India has made significant efforts, such as importing natural gas and
encouraging the use of clean coal technologies.

The government plans to launch a National Mission on Biodiesel in 2011–2012,

which will entail the use of approximately 11 million hectares of land to produce
biodiesel. India also has one of the most extensive renewable energy programmes in
the world.

In 1997, India conducted a review of the implementation of the Rio Earth Summit
agreements. One of the key findings was that no significant progress had been made
in terms of transferring new and additional financial resources, as well as
environmentally sound technology, to developing countries on favourable terms.

For developing countries to meet their UNFCCC commitments, India believes that
developed countries must take immediate steps to provide financial resources and
clean technologies.
India also believes that SAARC countries should take a united stance on major
global environmental issues for the region's voice to be heard more clearly.

Environmental Movements: One or Many?

Governments have reacted to the threat of global environmental degradation until
now. However, rather than governments, some of the most significant responses to
this challenge have come from groups of environmentally conscious volunteers
working in different parts of the world.

Some work on a global scale, but the vast majority work on a local level.
Environmental movements are among the most active, diverse, and powerful social
movements in the world today.

Within social movements, new forms of political action emerge or are reinvented.
These movements generate new ideas and long-term perspectives on what we
should and shouldn't do in our individual and collective lives.

Here are a few examples of how today's environmental movements are

characterised by diversity. Forest movements in the southern hemisphere, such as
those in Mexico, Chile, Brazil, Malaysia, Indonesia, continental Africa, and India (to
name a few), are under severe stress.

Forest clearance in the Third World continues at an alarming rate despite three
decades of environmental activism. The destruction of the world's last great forests
has increased in the last decade.
The minerals industry is one of the most powerful forms of industry on the planet. A
large number of economies in the South are now reopening to MNCs as a result of
global economic liberalisation.

The mineral industry's extraction of earth, use of chemicals, pollution of waterways

and land, clearance of native vegetation, and displacement of communities, among
other factors, continue to be criticised and opposed around the world.

A vast network of groups and organisations in the Philippines, for example, waged a
campaign against the Western Mining Corporation (WMC), an Australian
multinational corporation.

Anti-nuclear sentiments and advocacy for Australian Indigenous peoples' basic rights
are driving much of the opposition to the company in Australia.

The anti-mega-dam movement is another group of people fighting mega-dams.

Every country where a mega-dam is being built is likely to face opposition from
environmental groups.

Anti-dam movements are increasingly being replaced by pro-river movements for

more sustainable and equitable management of river systems and valleys.

The first anti-dam movement in the North was the campaign to save the Franklin
River and its surrounding forests in Australia, which began in the early 1980s. This
was an anti-dam campaign as well as a campaign for wilderness and forests.

From Turkey to Thailand to South Africa and from Indonesia to China, mega-dam
construction is on the rise.

Some of the most powerful anti-dam and pro-river movements in the world have
originated in India.

The Narmada Bachao Andolan is one of the most well-known of these movements.
It's worth noting that in India's anti-dam and other environmental movements,
nonviolence is the most common theme.

Resource Geopolitics
In resource geopolitics, it's all about who gets what, when, where, and how.
Resources have been a significant means and motivation for European power
expansion on a global scale.

They have also been the focus of inter-state rivalry. Trade, war, and power have
dominated Western geopolitical thinking about resources, with an emphasis on
overseas resources and maritime navigation.

Naval timber supply became a top priority for major European powers in the 17th
century, as sea power itself was based on access to timber. The critical importance
of ensuring an uninterrupted supply of strategic resources, particularly oil, was well
established during both World Wars.

Throughout the Cold War, the industrialised countries of the North employed a
variety of strategies to ensure a constant flow of resources.

Military forces were stationed near extraction sites and along communication
corridors, strategic resources were accumulated, efforts were made to prop up
friendly governments in producing countries, and multinational corporations
benefited from favourable international agreements.

Western strategic thinking in the traditional sense was still preoccupied with access
to supplies, which the Soviet Union could threaten.

Western control of the Gulf of Mexico's oil and strategic minerals in Southern and
Central Africa were major concerns.

After the Cold War ended and the Soviet Union disintegrated, the security of supply
for a variety of minerals, particularly radioactive materials, remained a concern for
government and business decisions.

On the other hand, oil continues to be the most critical resource in global strategy.

For the majority of the twentieth century, oil was a readily available and
indispensable source of energy for the global economy.

Due to the immense wealth associated with oil, political conflicts over its control
abound, and the history of petroleum is also a history of war and struggle.

This is more evident in West and Central Asia than anywhere else on Earth. Around
30% of the world's oil production is produced in West Asia, specifically the Gulf
region.

It controls approximately 64% of known global reserves, making it the only region
capable of meeting any significant increase in oil demand. Saudi Arabia is the
world's largest producer, accounting for nearly a quarter of global reserves.

Iraq is second only to Saudi Arabia in terms of known reserves. Additionally,

because large swaths of Iraqi territory remain unexplored, actual reserves may be
much larger.

The United States, Europe, Japan, and, increasingly, India and China are located far
from the region's petroleum-consuming countries.

Water is another critical resource that is relevant to global politics. Regional

disparities and the increasing scarcity of fresh water in some parts of the world
indicate that disagreements over shared water resources could become a major
source of conflict in the twenty-first century.
The term "water wars" was coined by some world political commentators to describe
the possibility of violent conflict over this life-sustaining resource.

Countries that share a river can disagree on a variety of issues. A typical

disagreement is between a downstream (lower riparian) state and an upstream
(upper riparian) state over pollution, excessive irrigation, or the construction of dams
by the upstream state, which may reduce or degrade the quality of water available to
the downstream state.

States have used force to protect or seize freshwater resources. Two examples are
the 1950s and 1960s conflict between Israel, Syria, and Jordan over each side's
attempts to divert water from the Jordan and Yarmuk rivers, as well as more recent
threats between Turkey, Syria, and Iraq over the construction of dams on the
Euphrates River.

Numerous studies have discovered that countries that share rivers — and there are
a large number of them — engage in military conflicts with one another.

Indigenous Peoples and Their Rights

The issue of indigenous peoples combines environmental, resource, and political
concerns. Indigenous populations, according to the United Nations, are descendants
of peoples who lived in a country's current territory at the time when people of a
different culture or ethnic origin arrived from other parts of the world and overcame
them.

Indigenous peoples today follow their own social, economic, and cultural customs
and traditions more than the institutions of the country to which they have now
become a part.

What are the common interests of the world's estimated 30 million

indigenous peoples, including those in India?
There are 20 lakh indigenous people in the Philippines' Cordillera region, 10 lakh
Mapuche in Chile, six lakh tribal people in Bangladesh's Chittagong Hill Tracts, 35
lakh North Americans, 50,000 Kuna east of the Panama Canal, and ten lakh Small
Peoples in the Soviet North.

Indigenous people, like other social movements, talk about their struggles, agendas,
and rights.

Indigenous peoples should be admitted to the world community as equals, according

to indigenous voices in world politics. Indigenous peoples live in Central and South
America, Africa, India (where they are referred to as Tribals), and Southeast Asia.

Over thousands of years, the Polynesian, Melanesian, and Micronesian peoples

inhabited many of the present-day island states in the Oceania region (including
Australia and New Zealand).
They are pleading with governments to accept indigenous nations' continued
existence as enduring communities with distinct identities. Indigenous peoples all
over the world use the phrase "since time immemorial" to describe their continued
occupation of the lands from which they came.

Indigenous societies' worldviews on land and the variety of life systems supported by
it are strikingly similar, regardless of their geographical location. The most obvious
threat to indigenous people's survival is the loss of land, which also means the loss
of an economic resource base.

Is it possible to have political autonomy without being bound by the means of

physical survival?

The Scheduled Tribes, who make up nearly 8% of India's population, are commonly
referred to as "indigenous people."

Except for a few small groups of hunters and gatherers, the majority of India's
indigenous peoples rely on land cultivation for their survival.

They had free access to as much land as they could cultivate for centuries if not
millennia. Areas that had previously been inhabited by Scheduled Tribe communities
were only subjected to outside forces after the establishment of British colonial rule.

Despite having constitutional protection in political representation, they have not

reaped any of the benefits of the country's development.

They have paid a high price for development, as they are the single largest group of
people displaced by various development projects since independence.

For a long time, issues concerning indigenous peoples' rights have been ignored in
domestic and international politics. Growing international contacts among Indigenous
leaders from around the world in the 1970s sparked a sense of shared concern and
experiences.

In 1975, the World Council of Indigenous Peoples was established. The Council
went on to become the first of 11 indigenous NGOs to be granted UN consultative
status.

Picture Based Questions

1. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:
Questions
1. What does the picture represent?
2. Why do you think the fingers are designed like chimneys and the world
made into a lighter?
3. What message does this picture convey?
Answer.
1. It represents ‘Industrial Pollution’ commenting on ‘Global warming’.
2. Fingers denote pollution coming out of chimneys from industries and the lighter
represents burning and depleting of natural resources.
3. This picture draws the attention of the world towards industrial pollution, if it
continues on, flora and fauna will be depleted which will create an imbalance to
ecosystem.

2. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:

Questions
1. What does the cartoon represent?
2. Which countries are being shown here?
3. What message does this picture convey?
Answer.
1. The cartoon represents the methods adopted by industrialised countries to fulfil
their essentials from weaker sections.
2. The stronger country like the USA and the weaker nation like Iraq.
3. Resources are the real strength of a nation and neo-colonialism play politics to
obtain it.
 Ch-7 Globalisation

What is Globalisation?
Globalisation is the interaction and integration of people, businesses, and
governments all over the world.

It is a type of capitalist expansion in which local and national economies are

integrated into a global, unregulated market economy.

Advances in transportation and communication technology have aided globalisation.

International trade, ideas, and culture are all growing as a result of increased global
interactions.

Globalisation is primarily a business-to-business interaction and integration process

with social and cultural implications.

Globalisation's history is also littered with conflicts and diplomacy.

Globalisation does not have to be beneficial to people; it can have negative

consequences.
Flows are at the heart of globalisation as a concept.

Ideas moving from one part of the world to another could be one of these flows. The
capital was transferred between two or more locations.

Commodities are traded across borders, and people are migrating to different parts
of the world in search of better opportunities.

As a result of these continuous flows, the concept of "global interconnectedness" is

created and maintained.

What are the causes of globalisation?

In terms of these four flows, globalisation has occurred for much of human history.
Globalisation has a long history, and it's important to consider current flows in the
context of that history.

Technology remains a critical component of globalisation, which is not caused by a

single factor.

In more recent times, the invention of the telegraph, the telephone, and the
microchip has revolutionised communication between actors in different parts of the
world. The invention of printing paved the way for the rise of nationalism.

Technological advancements have made it possible for ideas, capital, commodities,

and people to move more easily from one part of the world to another.
The speed at which these flows occur may vary. For example, the movement of
capital and commodities will almost certainly be faster and wider than the movement
of people between countries.

Globalisation does not occur solely as a result of improved communications.

The bird flu or tsunami is not limited to a single country. It is unconcerned about
national boundaries. Similarly, when major economic events occur, their effects are
felt on a global scale outside of their immediate local, national, or regional
environment.

Political Consequences
How does globalisation affect traditional conceptions of state
sovereignty?
Globalisation reduces state capacity or the government's ability to carry out its
functions.

The old "welfare state" is giving way around the world to a more minimalist state that
performs core functions like maintaining law and order and ensuring the safety of its
citizens.

It abandons many of its previous welfare functions aimed at promoting economic and
social well-being. The market, rather than the welfare state, becomes the primary
determinant of economic and social priorities.

The entry and the increased role of multinational corporations around the world have
reduced the government’s ability to make independent decisions.
State capacity is not always reduced as a result of globalisation.

The state's primacy continues to be the unquestioned foundation of the political

community. The state continues to carry out its core functions (law and order,
national security) while consciously withdrawing from areas where it no longer
wishes to be involved. States will continue to play an important role.

Economic Consequences
The term "economic globalisation" immediately brings to mind the role of
international institutions such as the IMF and the World Trade Organisation in
determining global economic policies.

Other than these international institutions, many other actors are involved in
economic globalisation. Economic globalisation necessitates an examination of the
distribution of economic gains, i.e., who benefits the most from it and who suffers the
most losses.

Economic globalisation typically entails increased economic flows between countries

around the world.

Globalisation has resulted in increased commodity trade across the globe, as well as
a reduction in the restrictions imposed by different countries on allowing the import of
goods from other countries.

The restrictions on capital movement between countries have also been eased. It
means that investors in developed countries can put their money in countries other
than their own, such as developing countries, where they may earn a higher return.
Developed countries have carefully guarded their borders with visa policies to ensure
that foreign citizens cannot take their citizens' jobs.

Globalisation has resulted in a wide range of outcomes in various parts of the world.
Economic globalisation has sparked fierce disagreements around the world. Those
concerned about social justice are concerned about the extent to which economic
globalisation processes have resulted in state withdrawal.

It will most likely benefit a small portion of the population while impoverishing those
who rely on the government for jobs and welfare (education, health, sanitation, etc.).
To ensure institutional safeguards or to create "social safety nets" to mitigate the
negative effects of globalisation on the poor.

Many movements around the world believe that safety nets are inadequate or
ineffective. They have called for an end to forced economic globalisation, claiming
that its consequences would be disastrous for the poorer countries, particularly the
poor within these countries.

Some economists have referred to economic globalisation as the world's re-

colonisation. De-regulation, according to proponents of economic globalisation, leads
to greater economic growth and well-being for a larger portion of the population.

Greater international trade allows each economy to focus on what it does best. This
would be beneficial to the entire world.

More moderate proponents of globalisation argue that it poses a challenge that can
be addressed intelligently without blindly accepting it.

Globalisation has increased the momentum toward interdependence and integration

among governments, businesses, and ordinary people in different parts of the world,
which cannot be denied.

Cultural Consequences
Globalisation's consequences are not limited to the realms of politics and economics.

Globalisation has an impact on our daily lives, including what we eat, drink, wear,
and think. It shapes our perceptions of our preferences. Globalisation's cultural
impact has led to concerns that the process poses a threat to world cultures.

As a result of globalisation, a uniform culture, also known as cultural

homogenisation, emerges. The emergence of a global culture is not the same as the
rise of a uniform culture.

Some argue that the popularity of a burger or a pair of blue jeans is due to the
powerful influence of the American way of life.
As a result, the culture of the politically and economically dominant society imprints
itself on a weaker society, and the world begins to resemble the dominant power.

Those who make this argument frequently refer to the world's 'McDonaldisation,' with
cultures attempting to buy into the dominant American dream.

This is dangerous not only for poor countries but for humanity as a whole because it
causes the world's rich cultural heritage to dwindle.

Cultures do not exist in a vacuum. Every culture accepts outside influences on a

regular basis. External influences can be negative because they limit our options, but
they can also be positive because they broaden our options and modify our culture
without overpowering the traditional.

The burger isn't a replacement for a masala dosa and thus doesn't present a real
challenge. It's simply an addition to our menu options. Blue jeans, on the other hand,
can be worn with a khadi kurta made at home.

Although cultural homogenisation is a result of globalisation, the same process has

the exact opposite effect. As a result, each culture becomes more distinct and
distinct. Cultural heterogeneity is the term for this phenomenon.

India And Globalisation

During the colonial period, as a consequence of Britain’s imperial ambitions, India
became an exporter of primary goods and raw materials and a consumer of finished
goods.

After independence, India decided to make things on its own rather than relying on
others. Other people were also banned from exporting to the Indian trend.

This ‘protectionism’ generated its own problems. While some advances were made
in certain arenas, critical sectors such as health, housing and primary education did
not receive the attention they deserved.

India had a fairly sluggish rate of economic growth. In 1991, responding to a financial
crisis and the desire for higher rates of economic growth, India embarked on a
programme of economic reforms that have sought increasingly to de-regulate
various sectors, including trade and foreign investment.

Resistance To Globalisation
Globalisation is a divisive issue that has sparked widespread criticism all over the
world. Critics of globalisation make a variety of claims.

Those on the left argue that contemporary globalisation is a subset of global

capitalism that enriches the wealthy (while decreasing their number) while
impoverishing the poor.

The capacity of the state to protect the interests of its poor deteriorates as the state
weakens.

Critics of globalisation on the political right are concerned about the political,
economic, and cultural consequences.

In political terms, the deterioration of the state is cause for concern. In terms of
economics, they desire a return to self-sufficiency and protectionism, at least in
some areas.

They are concerned that traditional culture will be harmed, and that people will
abandon traditional values and ways of life.

It's worth noting that anti-globalization movements join global networks as well,
forming alliances with people in other countries who share their viewpoints. Many
anti-globalisation movements oppose a specific globalisation programme, which they
see as a form of imperialism, rather than the concept of globalisation itself.

A large number of people attended the World Trade Organisation (WTO) Ministerial
Meeting in 1999.
Picture Based Questions[5 Marks]
1.Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:

Questions
1. What does the cartoon comment?
2. What is referred under the title ‘Yesterday’?
3. What message does the title ‘Today’ convey?
Answer:
1. Cartoon comments on the changing scenario due to globalisation.
2. It refers to earlier conditions of developing countries who were starving due to less
growth in their economy.
3. Globalisation opened doors for new entrants from developing nations and resulted
into brain drain.
 POLITICS IN INDIA SINCE INDEPENDENCE
Ch-1 Challenges of Nation Building

Introduction
The first few years in the life of Independent India were full of Challenges. Some of
the most pressing ones concerned the national unity and territorial integrity of India.
The story of Independence India began with the following challenges that were
negotiated in the first decade after 1947.

 Freedom came with partition, which resulted in large-scale violence and

displacement & challenged the very idea of Secular India.

 The Integration Of Princely States into the Indian Union.

 To meet the aspirations of the people Internal Boundaries of the country needed to
be drawn afresh.

Challenges for the New Nation

India gained independence at 12 a.m. on August 14th and 15th, 1947. That evening,
India's first Prime Minister, Jawahar Lal Nehru, addressed a special session of the
Constituent Assembly. 'Tryst With Destiny,' a famous speech by J L Nehru, was the
moment the Indians had been looking forward to.

Our national movement was marked by a diversity of voices. Almost everyone

agreed on two goals:

 First, that our country would be run democratically after independence.

 Second, the government would run for the benefit of all people, especially the poor
and socially disadvantaged.

The time came to fulfil the promise of liberty after the country had gained
independence. Given India's difficult birth circumstances, it would be difficult. With
the partition of the country came liberation.

The year 1947 was by unprecedented levels of violence and trauma as a result of
displacement.

What were the challenges faced by independent India?

Three types of difficulties confronted independent India.

 The first challenge was to create a nation that was both united and accepting of the
diversity of our society. India was a diverse nation with a landmass the size of a
continent. Its people spoke a wide range of languages and practised a wide range of
cultures and religions.
 Second, Establishing democracy was a major challenge to overcome. The Indian
Constitution is something you already know how to do. The constitution guarantees
fundamental rights and extends the right to vote to all citizens. India created a
parliamentary-based representative democracy.

 These characteristics guarantee that political competition takes place in a democratic

environment. A democratic constitution is required, but it is not sufficient to establish
democracy.

The goal was to establish democratic practices that were following the Constitution.

 Third, the entire society, not just certain segments, needed to be developed and
well-off. The Constitution, once again, enshrined the principle of equality and
provided additional protection for socially disadvantaged groups, as well as religious
and cultural groups. The Directive Principles of State Policy, which were established
by the Constitution, set out the welfare goals that democratic politics must achieve.
At this point, the real challenge was to come up with effective policies for economic
development and poverty alleviation.

Rehabilitation And Displacement

The separate nation states of India & Pakistan were founded on August 14-15,1947.
The territory was divided into two broader category of people; Hindus and Muslims,
as per the two nation theory of Muslim League.

The All India Muslim League was formed in Dhaka on December 30,1906. The
league demanded a separate nation comprising of the Muslim majority regions. Their
demand and the two nation theory was rejected by the Congress.
 There were several instances that led to the creation of Pakistan, like the political
rivalry between the Congress and Muslim League.

The Process of Partition

It was mutually decided to divide the country into two different nations; India and
Pakistan. The Process of partition was painful and challenging altogether. It was
decided to adhere to the principle of religious majority.

 It meant that Pakistan's territory would consist of Muslim dominated areas. The
remaining was to be left with India.

 Although the concept appeared straightforward, it was fraught with complications.

There was no single belt of Muslim majority areas in British India. Two concentrated
areas existed, one in the west and one in the east.

 It was impossible to join these areas together. Pakistan was to be divided into two
parts: West Pakistan and East Pakistan, separated by a large swath of Indian
territory.

Second, not every region with a Muslim majority desired accession to Pakistan.
Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan, also known as 'Frontier Gandhi,' was the undisputed leader
of the North Western Frontier Province who was a staunch opponent of the two-
nation theory.

 Eventually, his voice was drowned out, and the NWFP was forced to merge with
Pakistan. (Now a part of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province)

A huge number of people remained in dilemma and didn't even know where they
belonged in the provinces of Punjab and Bengal which dominated both of these
communities; Hindus and Muslims. Eventually, it was decided to divide these two
provinces based on religious majority at the district or even lower levels. This
decision could not be made by the 14th or 15th of August at midnight.

As a result, a large number of people on Independence Day had no idea whether

they were in India or Pakistan.

During the partition process, these two provinces suffered the most severe trauma.
On both sides of the border minorities were a source of contention. Thousands of
Hindus and Sikhs were stranded in Pakistani areas, while an equal number of
Muslims were stranded in India's Punjab and Bengal provinces (and, to a lesser
extent, Delhi and its environs).

They were about to find out that they were unwanted foreigners in their own country,
where they had lived with their forefathers for centuries.

Minorities on both sides became easy targets as soon as it became clear that the
country would be partitioned. Nobody had anticipated the scope of the problem.
Nobody was sure how they were going to deal with it.
The public and political leaders initially hoped that the violence would be brief and
quickly brought under control. The violence, on the other hand, quickly became out
of hand. On both sides of the border, minorities were forced to flee their homes in a
matter of hours.

Consequences Of Partition
What were the consequences of partition?

One of the largest, most unexpected, and tragic population transfers in history
occurred in 1947. Both sides committed assassinations and atrocities. Members of
one community killed and maimed members of another in the name of religion.

'Communal zones' exist in cities such as Lahore, Amritsar, and Kolkata. Hindu and
Sikh-dominated areas avoided Muslim-dominated areas.

Those who were forced to flee their homes and cross borders have suffered
tremendously. Minorities fleeing both sides of the border frequently ended up in
refugee camps. In their own country, they frequently encountered uncooperative
local government and police.

They crossed the new border in a number of ways, the most common of which was
on foot. Frequently, they were attacked, killed, or raped. Thousands of women have
been kidnapped along the border.

Women were murdered by their own families for the sake of 'family honour,' and
many children were separated from their parents. Those who crossed the border
were rendered homeless and forced to live in refugee camps for years.
The ruthlessness of the killings, displacement, and violence has been depicted in
Indian and Pakistani literature and cinema.

They frequently used the survivor's term "a division of hearts" to describe Partition's
trauma. They frequently used the phrase "division of hearts," coined by survivors, to
describe the trauma.

Politically and administratively, as well as in terms of property, liability, and asset

division, the Partition divided the country. Personal property, such as tables and
chairs, was divided in addition to the police band's instruments. Employees of the
government and railways were also 'divided.'

It was a violent schism between communities that had previously coexisted

peacefully. Between 5,000 and 10,000 people were killed as a result of partition-
related violence. The Partition, however, caused more than just administrative and
financial problems. The two-nation theory was rejected by leaders of India's national
struggle.

Despite religious strife and mass Muslim migration to Pakistan, India's Muslim
population in 1951 was only 13%. The Muslim League was a driving force for a
Muslim state in colonial India, having been founded to protect Muslims' rights.

Hindus were similarly organised in order to make India a Hindu nation. On the other
hand, the majority of national movement leaders believed that India should treat all
religions equally and that no faith should be considered superior to another.

Everyone, regardless of religion, would be treated equally. Citizenship would not be

determined by religious convictions. As a result, they admired the concept of a
secular nation. This ideal was enshrined in the Indian Constitution.
 Integration Of Princely States
British India was divided into two divisions: the British Indian Provinces and the
Princely States.

British Indian Provinces were directly administered by the British government. On the
other hand, as long as they accepted British supremacy, the Princely States, a group
of large and small states ruled by princes, retained some control over their internal
affairs.

The supremacy or suzerainty of the British crown was referred to as paramountcy.

Princely states occupied one-third of the British Indian Empire's land area, and one
in every four Indians lived under the princely rule.

Problem
The British announced shortly before Independence that once their rule over India
ended, the British crown's supremacy over the Princely States would end as well.

All 565 of these states gained legal independence as a result of this. All of these
states were free to join either India or Pakistan, or to remain independent, according
to the British government.

This decision was made by the princely rulers of these states, not the people. This
was a major problem that jeopardised the existence of a united India. The problems
began almost immediately. To begin with, the ruler of Travancore declared the
state's independence.

The following day, the Nizam of Hyderabad made a similar announcement. The
Nawab of Bhopal, for example, was adamant about not participating in the
Constituent Assembly. Following Independence, India faced the very real possibility
of being further divided into a number of small countries due to the reaction of the
rulers of the Princely States.

In these countries, the prospects for democracy appeared to be similarly bleak.

Given that the goal of Indian independence was to promote unity, self-determination,
and democracy, this was an odd situation.

The Strategy of the Government

Sardar Patel
Sardar Patel played a critical role in the consolidation of princely states. He served
as India's deputy prime minister and home minister at the time.

He was instrumental in negotiating with the rulers of princely states firmly but
diplomatically and bringing the majority of them into the Indian Union. At this point, it
may appear straightforward. It was, however, a difficult task that required deft
persuasion. For example, in modern-day Orissa, there were 26 small states.
 The Saurashtra region of Gujarat was divided into 14 large states, 119 small states,
and a slew of other administrations.

These Three factors influenced the government's decision:

 To begin, the majority of princely states' populations expressed a strong desire to

join the Indian union.

 Second, the government demonstrated a willingness to be flexible in granting

autonomy to certain regions. The goal was to accommodate diversity and to be
adaptable to regional demands.

 Third, against the backdrop of Partition, which heightened the debate over territorial
demarcation, the integration and consolidation of the nation's territorial boundaries
had assumed paramount importance.

Prior to August 15, 1947, peaceful negotiations had united almost all of the states
whose territories bordered India's new borders.

The rulers of the majority of states signed an 'Instrument of Accession,' indicating

their state's agreement to join the Union of India. Joining was more difficult for the
princely states of Junagadh, Hyderabad, Kashmir, and Manipur than for the others.

Junagarh was resolved after a plebiscite confirmed the people's desire to join India.

Hyderabad
Hyderabad, the largest of the Princely States, was completely encircled by Indian
territory. Parts of the former Hyderabad state have been annexed by Maharashtra,
Karnataka, and Andhra Pradesh.

Nizam was the ruler's title, and he was one of the wealthiest men in the world.

The Nizam was to grant Hyderabad independence. He entered the so-called

Standstill Agreement with India in November 1947 for a year while negotiations with
the Indian government continued.

Meanwhile, a popular revolt against the Nizam's rule grew in strength in Hyderabad
State. Telangana's peasantry, in particular, suffered under Nizam's oppressive rule
and rose up against him.

Additionally, a sizable number of women who had endured the most heinous forms
of oppression joined the movement. Hyderabad was the epicentre of the movement.
The Congress of Hyderabad and the Communist Party of India were at the forefront
of the movement.

In retaliation, the Nizam dispatched the Razakars, a paramilitary force, to attack the
populace.

Atrocities committed by the Razakars and their communal nature knew no bounds.
They specifically murdered, maimed, raped, and pillaged non-Muslims. The central
government was forced to dispatch the army to deal with the situation. In September
1948, the Indian army arrived to seize control of the Nizam's forces. After a few days
of intermittent fighting, the Nizam surrendered.

Hyderabad became a part of India as a result.

Manipur
A few days before independence, the instrument of accession was signed between
Maharaja of Manipur Bodhachandra Singh and the Indian government, the Maharaja
of Manipur, pledging to maintain Manipur's internal autonomy. In June 1948, the
Maharaja held elections in Manipur in response to public pressure, establishing the
state as a constitutional monarchy.

Thus, Manipur became the first state in India to hold an election with a universal
adult franchise.

In Manipur's Legislative Assembly, there were bitter disagreements over the state's
merger with India. While the state legislature was in favour of the merger, other
political parties were opposed.

In September 1949, the Government of India succeeded in pressuring the Maharaja

into signing a Merger Agreement without consulting the popularly elected Legislative
Assembly of Manipur.

This sparked outrage and resentment throughout Manipur.

 State Reorganisation
The major task was to define the internal borders of the Indian states. There were no
administrative silos in this case. The boundaries had to be drawn in a way that
reflected the country's linguistic and cultural diversity without jeopardising the
country's unity.

State boundaries were drawn during colonial rule for administrative purposes or to
coincide with British-annexed or princely-ruled territories.

Our national movement had promised to use the linguistic principle as the basis for
state formation, rejecting these artificial divisions.

Following the Nagpur session of Congress in 1920, the principle was recognised as
the foundation for the reorganisation of the Indian National Congress party.
Language zones that did not follow British India's administrative divisions formed a
slew of Provincial Congress Committees.

Things changed after Independence and Partition. Our forefathers believed that
dividing states based on their languages would cause chaos and disintegration.

It was also thought that this would draw attention away from the country's other
social and economic problems. Deferring action was the central leadership's
decision.

The need for the postponement was also felt because the Princely States' fate
remained uncertain.

The populace and local leaders posed a challenge to national leadership. The
Telugu-speaking areas of the old Madras province, which included modern-day
Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala, and Karnataka, were the first to protest.

The Vishal Andhra Movement

The Vishalandhra movement demanded that the Telugu-speaking areas must be
separated from the Madras province in which they were included and formed into a
separate Andhra province.

The movement gained traction as a result of the central government's vacillation:

 Potti Sriramulu, a veteran Gandhian and Congress leader, began an indefinite fast,
which lasted 56 days and ended in his death. In Andhra Pradesh, this resulted in
widespread unrest and violent outbursts.

 A large number of people took to the streets to protest. Several people have been
injured or killed as a result of police shootings.

 The formation of a separate Andhra state was announced by the Prime Minister in
December 1952. (The first state established on the basis of linguistic principles)
The formation of Andhra Pradesh sparked a fight in other parts of the country for the
formation of linguistically distinct states. The Central Government was forced to
establish a States Reorganisation Commission in 1953 to study the issue of
redrawing state boundaries as a result of these conflicts.

In its report, the Commission stated that the state's boundaries should correspond to
the boundaries of various languages. In response to the report, the States
Reorganisation Act of 1956 was passed.

As a result, fourteen states and six union territories were established.

One of the main concerns in the early years was that demands for separate states
would endanger the country's unity. Language states were thought to encourage
separatism and exert pressure on the newly formed nation.

The leadership, however, ultimately chose linguistic states due to popular pressure.
The threat of division and separatism was hoped to be reduced by accepting all
regions' regional and linguistic claims.

Furthermore, meeting regional demands and establishing linguistic states were seen
as more democratic.

Sub-Topic: ‘Patel and National Integration’

The first deputy Prime Minister and Home Minister of India, Sardar Vallabhbhai
Patel, emerged as a major leader of the freedom movement after the Kheda
Satyagraha (1918) and the Bardoli Satyagraha (1928).

At the time of independence, the problem of integration of princely states was a big
challenge for the national unity and integrity of India. Under such difficult times,
Sardar Patel undertook the daunting tasks of uniting all 565 princely states of India.
Known as an ‘Iron Man’ of India, Patel's approach to the question of the merger of
princely states into independent India was very clear. He was not in favour of any
compromise with the territorial integrity of India. By his political experience,
diplomatic prowess and foresightedness, out of India's 565 princely states many had
already given their consent to merge with India even before achieving the
independence.

Sardar Patel faced key challenges of integration from three states, viz., Hyderabad,
Junagarh and Kashmir. It was under his leadership that Indian forces compelled
Hyderabad and Junagarh to merge with India. Keeping well- versed with Pakistan’s
intentions from Jinnah’s divisive ‘Two Nation Theory’, Sardar Patel's opinion on
Kashmir was different from other leaders. Like Hyderabad, he also wanted Kashmir’s
integration with India through military operations. But due to various reasons, Sardar
Patel could not succeed in integrating Kashmir fully with India. However, Patel will
always remain as an astounding leader who combined in himself the features of a
true ‘Nationalist’, ‘Catalyst’ and ‘Realist’ – popularly characterised as NCR in Indian
political history.
Picture/Map Based Questions [5 Marks]
A1. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:

Questions
1. What does this picture represent?
2. Mention some consequences of partition.
3. Which year is being denoted in the picture?
Answer:
1. This picture represents the painful scene of partition of country when people were
supposed to leave their homes.
2. (i) Communal Riots (ii) Social Sufferings
(iii) Administrative Concerns and Financial Strains.
3. The year of 1947, most abrupt, unplanned year in the history.

2. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:

Questions
1. Identify the person in the centre of the cartoon and mention the challenge
surrounding him.
2. What does the picture actually refer?
3. How did India avoid all these conflicts?
Answer:
1. The person is the first Prime Minister of India Pt. Jawahar Lai Nehru, who faced
the first and foremost challenge of integration of princely states and formation of
linguistic states.
2. The picture refers the problem of reorganisation of states on linguistic basis with
the fear of disintegration in the country.
3. India identified and respected regional demands of the people and enhanced
democracy by providing some autonomy to the states also.

B. On a political outline map of India locate and label the following and
symbolise them as indicated:

Questions
1. Name and mark the original state from . which the following states were
carved out.
(a) Gujarat (b) Meghalaya (c) Haryana (d) Chhattisgarh
2. Name and mark the countries reorganised on religious grounds.
3. Demarcated boundaries of these countries by geographical zones.
Answer:
1. (a) Gujarat (from Bombay)
(b) Meghalaya (from Assam)
(c) Haryana (from Punjab)
(d) Chhattisgarh (from Madhya Pradesh)
2. (a) India (b) Pakistan
3. (a) Pakistan (b) Bangladesh
 Ch-2 Era of One Party Dominance

Challenges In Building Democracy

What were the Challenges in Building Democracy?
Independent India was born in very unfavourable circumstances. The Political
leaders and constitution-makers of India decided to establish a democratic nation.

Many leaders in other nations decided not to pursue the democratic path as it was
thought that it would introduce internal differences. ‘Making National Unity’ as their
priority, non-democratic regimes took control with a promise of restoring Democracy
which was close to impossible.

India’s Constitution was adopted on 26 November 1949 and signed on 24 January

1950 and it came into effect on 26 January 1950. As of then, India was being
governed by an interim government.

Election Commission of India

The Election Commission of India was set up in January 1950 with its first chief
election commissioner Sukumar Sen. The ECI was responsible for drawing of
boundaries of the electoral constituencies and the preparation of the electoral rolls.
In the first draft of the rolls, the ECI identified one of the major issues that the names
of the women were not properly recorded. They were simply listed with the reference
of their male-dominant member.

The Election Commission refused to accept these entries and ordered a revision if
possible and deletion if necessary.

The process of conducting the election on this huge scale was happening for the first
time. There were 17 crore eligible voters who had to elect about 3200 MLAs. It was
not just the size of the country that made the electorate unusual.

The Election had to be postponed twice and finally held from October 1951 to
February 1952. But this election is referred to as the 1952 Elections.

It took Six Months for the Campaigning, polling and counting to be completed.
Elections were Competitive, on average there were more than four candidates for
each seat.

The level of participation was encouraging more than half the eligible voters turned
out to vote on the day of elections.

India’s general election of 1952 became a landmark in the history of democracy all
over the world. It was no longer possible to argue that democratic elections could not
be held in conditions of poverty or lack of education.

It proved that democracy could be practised anywhere in the world.

Why did the Congress Dominate the First Three General Elections?
The Congress party won the Elections as it was popularly known and it had inherited
the legacy of the national movement.

It was the only party then to have an organisation spread all over the country.
Jawaharlal Nehru led the party’s campaign throughout the country.

The victory of the Congress did surprise many. The party won 364 of the 489 seats
in the first Lok Sabha and finished way ahead of any other challenger.

The Communist Party of India that came next in terms of seats won only 16 seats.
Congress also scored a big victory in the state elections which were held with the
Lok Sabha elections.

It won a majority of seats in all the states except Travancore-Cochin (part of today’s
Kerala), Madras and Orissa. But even in these states, Congress formed the
government. So the party ruled all over the country at the national and the state
level.

Jawaharlal Nehru became the Prime Minister after the first general election.

What made Congress lead the Second and Third General Elections?
In the second and the third general elections, held in 1957 and 1962 respectively,
the Congress maintained the same position in the Lok Sabha by winning three-fourth
of the seats.

None of the opposition parties could win even one-tenth of the number of seats won
by Congress.

In the state assembly elections, Congress did not get a majority in a few cases. The
most significant of these cases was in Kerala in 1957 when a coalition led by the CPI
formed the government.

The Congress won three out of every four seats but it did not get even half of the
votes. In 1952, for example, Congress obtained 45 per cent of the total votes. But it
managed to win 74 per cent of the seats.

The Socialist Party, the second-largest party in terms of votes, secured more than 10
percent of the votes all over the country. But it could not even win three per cent of
the seats.

In this system of election, that has been adopted in our country, the party that gets
more votes than others tends to get much more than its proportional share. That is
exactly what worked in favour of Congress.

If the votes of all the non-Congress candidates were added it was more than the
votes of the Congress. The non-Congress votes were divided between different rival
parties and candidates. So the Congress was still way ahead of the opposition and
managed to win.

Nature of Congress
India was not the only country to experience party Dominance but the difference is in
India democracy was not compromised.

In countries like China, Cuba and Syria the constitution permits only a single party to
rule the country. Some others like Myanmar, Belarus, Egypt, and Eritrea etc. are
effectively one-party states due to legal and military measures.

Many parties contested elections in conditions of free and fair elections and yet
Congress managed to win election after election. This was similar to the dominance
the African National Congress has enjoyed in South Africa after the end of apartheid.

The roots of this extraordinary success of the Congress party go back to the legacy
of the freedom struggle.

Congress was seen as the inheritor of the national movement as many leaders who
were at the forefront of that struggle were now contesting elections as Congress
candidates.
The Congress was already a very well-organised party and by the time the other
parties could even think of a strategy, the Congress had already started its
campaign.

The Congress had the ‘first off the blocks’ advantage. By the time of Independence
the party had not only spread across the length and breadth of the country as we
had seen in the maps but also had an organisational network down to the local level.

All these factors contributed to the dominance of the Congress party.

Congress as Social and Ideological Coalition

Congress as a Social Coalition
Congress in 1885 evolved from a pressure group for the newly educated,
professional and commercial classes to a mass movement in the twentieth century.

The Congress began as a party dominated by the English-speaking, upper caste,

upper-middle-class and urban elite. But with every civil disobedience movement it
launched, its social base widened.

The diverse groups, with different interests, came together.

Peasants and industrialists, urban dwellers and villagers, workers and owners,
middle, lower and upper classes and castes, all found space in the Congress.

The leadership expanded beyond the elite class and professionals to the agriculture-
based leaders.

The Congress transformed into a rainbow-like social coalition broadly representing

India’s diversity in terms of classes and castes, religions and languages and various
interests.

Many of these groups merged their identity within the Congress. Very often they did
not and continued to exist within the Congress as groups and individuals holding
different beliefs.

Congress as an Ideological Coalition

Congress as a Single party accommodated different Ideologies. It accommodated
the revolutionary and pacifist, conservative and radical, extremist and moderate and
the right, left and all shades of the centre.

The Congress was a ‘platform’ for numerous groups, interests and even political
parties to take part in the national movement.

In pre-independence days, many organisations and parties with their own

constitution and organisational structure were allowed to exist within the Congress.
 Some of these, like the Congress Socialist Party, later separated from the Congress
and became opposition parties.

Tolerance and Management of Factions

This coalition-like character of the Congress gave it an unusual strength.

 Firstly, a coalition accommodates all those who join it. Therefore, it has to avoid any
extreme position and strike a balance on almost all issues. Compromise and
inclusiveness are the hallmarks of a coalition. This strategy put the opposition in
difficulty. Anything that the opposition wanted to say, would also find a place in the
programme and ideology of the Congress.

 Secondly, in a party that has the nature of a coalition, there is a greater tolerance of
internal differences and the ambitions of various groups and leaders are
accommodated.

 Even if a group was not happy with the position of the party or with its share of
power, it would remain inside the party and fight the other groups rather than leaving
the party and becoming an ‘opposition’.

These groups inside the party are called factions. Instead of being a weakness,
internal factionalism became the strength of Congress. These factions were based
on ideologies but mostly they were personal rivalries.

There was room within the party for various factions to fight with each other, it meant
that leaders representing different interests and ideologies remained within the
Congress rather than go out and form a new party.

The factions took different ideological positions, making Congress appear as a grand
centrist party. The other parties primarily attempted to influence these factions,
thereby indirectly influencing policy and decision-making from the “margins”. They
were far removed from the actual exercise of authority.

They were not alternatives to the ruling party; instead, they constantly pressurised
and criticised, censured and influenced Congress.

The political competition took place within the Congress. The system of factions
functioned as a balancing mechanism within the ruling party. In the first decade of
electoral competition, Congress acted both as the ruling party as well as the
opposition.

This period of Indian politics has been described as the ‘Congress system’.

The Emergence of Opposition Parties

India had a larger number of diverse and vibrant opposition parties than many other
multi-party democracies. Some of these had come into being even before the first
general election of 1952. These parties played an important part in the politics of the
country.

The roots of almost all the non-Congress parties of today can be traced to one or the
other of the opposition parties of the 1950s.

These parties offered a sustained and often principled criticism of the policies and
practices of the Congress party which kept the ruling party under check.

The interim government that ruled the country just after Independence and the first
general election included opposition leaders like Dr Ambedkar and Shyama Prasad
Mukherjee in the cabinet.

Jawaharlal Nehru was very fond of the Socialist Party and invited socialist leaders
like Jayaprakash Narayan to join his government.

The ability of the Congress to accommodate all interests and all aspirants for political
power steadily declined, and other political parties started gaining greater
significance.

The Congress dominance constitutes only one phase in the politics of the country.

Socialist Party
The party was under the leadership of Acharya Narendra Dev. The origins of the
Socialist Party can be traced back to the mass movement stage of the Indian
National Congress in the pre-independence era.
The Congress Socialist Party (CSP) was formed within the Congress in 1934 by a
group of young leaders who wanted a more radical and egalitarian Congress.

In 1948, the amendment of Congress’s constitution prevented its members from

having a dual party membership, which caused the formation of the Socialist Party.

The Party’s performance was not very impressive and caused much disappointment.
Socialists believed in the ideology of democratic socialism which distinguished them
both from the Congress as well as from the Communists.

They criticised the Congress for favouring capitalists and landlords and for ignoring
the workers and the peasants. The socialists faced a dilemma when in 1955 the
Congress declared its goal to be the socialist pattern of society.

It became difficult for the socialists to present themselves as an effective alternative

to the Congress.

Many leaders like Ram Manohar Lohia and Ashok Mehta increased their distance
from and criticism of the Congress party. The Socialist Party went through many
splits and reunions leading to the formation of many socialist parties.

These included the Kisan Mazdoor Praja Party, the Praja Socialist Party and the
Samyukta Socialist Party.

The leadership of the party includes Jayaprakash Narayan, Achyut Patwardhan,

Asoka Mehta, Acharya Narendra Dev, Ram Manohar Lohia and S.M. Joshi.

Parties like the Samajwadi Party, the Rashtriya Janata Dal, Janata Dal (United) and
the Janata Dal (Secular) originated from the Socialist Party.
 The Communist Party of India
The CPI was an inspiration from the ‘Bolshevik Revolution’ in Russia and advocated
socialism as the solution to the problems of the country.

The Indian National Congress and the Communists worked within the same circle for
the nation in 1935, later the communists parted their way out by supporting the
British in the war against Nazi Germany in 1941.

The CPI had well-oiled party machinery and a dedicated cadre at the time of
Independence; also Independence raised different voices in the party.

The party thought that the transfer of power in 1947 was not true independence and
encouraged violent uprisings in Telangana. The Communists failed to generate
popular support for their position and were crushed by the armed forces.

In 1951 the Communist Party changed their path of violent revolution and decided to
participate in the approaching general elections.

The CPI emerged as the largest opposition party by acquiring 16 seats in the first
general election. It remained dominant enough in the states like Andhra Pradesh,
West Bengal, Bihar and Kerala.

Leaders of the party were A. K. Gopalan, S.A. Dange, E.M.S. Namboodiripad, P.C.
Joshi, Ajay Ghosh and P. Sundarayya.

A major split in the party occurred during 1964 following the ideological rift between
the Soviet Union and China. The pro-Soviet faction remained as the CPI, while the
opponents formed the CPI(M)

Bharatiya Jana Sangh

The Bharatiya Jana Sangh was formed in 1951 with Shyama Prasad Mukherjee as
its founder-President. The lineage of the party can be traced back to the Rashtriya
Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and the Hindu Mahasabha before Independence.

The Jana Sangh pursued a different ideology and programmes, ‘one country, one
culture and one nation’ was its idea and believed that the country could become
modern, progressive and strong based on Indian culture and traditions.

The party called for a reunion of India and Pakistan in Akhand Bharat.

The party played an impressive role in the fight for making ‘HINDI’ an official
language and was also opposed to the granting of concessions to religious
minorities. The Jana Sangh advocated India for to be a nuclear state after China
carried out its atomic tests in 1964.
It remained on the margins of electoral politics and was able to secure only 3 Lok
Sabha seats in 1952 elections and 4 seats in the 1957 general elections to Lok
Sabha.

Its support came mainly from the urban areas in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Delhi
and Uttar Pradesh.

The party’s leaders included Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, Deen Dayal Upadhyaya
and Balraj Madhok.

The Bharatiya Janata Party traces its roots to the Bharatiya Jana Sangh.
Picture/Map Based Questions [5 Marks]
A. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:

Questions
1. What does the cartoon represent?
2. What does the term ‘Tug of war’ refer to?
3. Who has been shown on the branches of tree?
Answer:
1. Cartoon represents dominance of Congress which is being tug by opposition
parties to throw Congress out of power.
2. ‘Tug of war’ refer to pulling out the Congress by criticism and mentioning its
weaknesses in an honest and justified manner.
3. Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru along with his colleagues in the cabinet.

B1. In the outline political map of India given below, five States have been
marked as A, B, C, D and E. With the help of the information given below,
identify them and write their correct names in your answer book along with the
serial number of the information used and the related alphabet in the map.

Questions
(i) The State to which C. Rajagopalachari, the first Indian Governor-General of
India, belonged.
(ii) The State where the first non-Congress Government was formed by E.M.S.
Namboodiripad.
(iii) The State to which Rafi Ahmed Kidwai, the Union Minister for Food and
Agriculture (1952-54) belonged.
(iv) The State which faced the most acute food crisis in 1965-1967.
(v) The State which led the country to White Revolution through Dairy
Cooperative Movement.
Answer:

S. No. Alphabet concerned Name of the state

(i) D Tamil Nadu
(ii) C Kerala
(iii) B Uttar Pradesh
(iv) A Bihar
(v) C Gujarat

2. On a political outline map of India locate and label the following and
symbolise them as indicated:
Questions
1. Two states where Congress was not in power at some point during 1952-67.
2. Two states where the Congress remained in power through this period.
Answer:
1. (i) Jammu & Kashmir (ii) Kerala
2. (i) Uttar Pradesh (ii) Maharashtra
 Ch-3 Politics of Planned Development

Introduction
As the global steel demand increased, the state of Orissa was seen as an important
investment destination due to the country’s largest reserves of untapped iron ore. A
'Memorandum of Understanding (MoU)’ was also signed between the Orissa
government and both international and domestic steel makers.

The major aim of the MoU was to bring in necessary capital investment and provide
a lot of employment opportunities.

The iron ore resources lie in some of the most underdeveloped and predominantly
tribal districts of the state. Hence, the major fear that the tribal population and
environmentalists had was that the setting up of industries would get them displaced
from their livelihood and the mining and the industry would cause major harm to the
environment.

On the other hand, the central government felt that if the industry was not allowed, it
would set up a bad impression and discourage investments in the country.

Political Contestation
On a political note and in a democracy, such major decisions should be taken or at
least approved by the people themselves. It is important to see all the aspects of the
affecting nature of the decision. Thus, the final decision must be political.

There was a series of major decisions that took place just after the Indian
independence. All of the decisions were bound together by a shared vision or model
of economic development. The majority was in favour of India's development in both
economic and social sense.

It was also agreed that this matter cannot be left to businessmen, industrialists and
farmers. Hence, the government played a key role in ensuring growth and justice.
There were several disagreements as well.

Critics also questioned the centralised institution model of the country. Every step
that the government took has several issues and political consequences.

Ideas of Development
What were the Ideas of the development?
‘Development’ has different meanings for different sections of the people.

The development would mean different things for example, to an industrialist who is
planning to set up a steel plant, to an urban consumer of steel and to the Adivasi
who lives in that region.

Any discussion on development is bound to generate contradictions, conflicts and

debates. The very first decade after independence witnessed a lot of debates around
this question of development. In general, being developed was all about being like
'West'.

Modernisation
It was believed that to be modernised, every country would go through the process
of modernisation as in the West, which involved the breakdown of traditional social
structures and the rise of capitalism and liberalism.

Modernisation was also associated with the ideas of growth, material progress and
scientific rationality. Also, this kind of idea of development allowed everyone to talk
about different countries as developed, developing or underdeveloped.

The models of modern development that India had at the time of Independence were
the ‘Liberal-Capitalist model’ and ‘Socialist model’ as in Europe, the US and the
USSR respectively.

Hence, a broad consensus was developed during the national development. The
Soviet model impressed many of the Indian leaders, not just the Communist Party of
India, but also those of the Socialist Party and leaders like Nehru within the
Congress.

The American-style capitalist development had very few supporters.

Economic Development
The nationalist leaders were clear that the economic concerns of the government of
free India would have to be different from the narrowly defined commercial functions
of the colonial government.

The task of poverty alleviation and social and economic redistribution was seen
primarily as the responsibility of the government.

Industrialisation seemed to be the preferred path for some, but for others, the priority
was agricultural development and alleviation of rural poverty.

Planning
The planning of the development models is a crucial task that should be done
concerning all sections of the society and country and taking into consideration all
the strata of the economic sphere.

The need for the government to design or plan the development occurred. The idea
of planning as a process of rebuilding the economy earned a good deal of public
support in the 1940s and 1950s all over the world.

The experience of the Great Depression in Europe, the inter-war reconstruction of

Japan and Germany, and most of all the spectacular economic growth against heavy
odds in the Soviet Union in the 1930s and 1940s contributed to this consensus.

The Planning Commission

The Planning Commission was established on 15 March 1950 to plan the
development modules. The commission played a major role in formulating the five-
year plans.

As per the formulating principles, the Prime Minister heads the responsibility of the
chairperson of the planning commission. Also, Jawaharlal Nehru became the first-
ever chairperson of the planning commission.

Over time, the commission became the most influential and central machinery for
deciding what path and strategy India would adopt for its development.

What was the Bombay Plan?

The Planning Commission was not a sudden or overnight invention. It is commonly
assumed that private investors, such as industrialists and big business
entrepreneurs, are averse to ideas of planning: they seek an open economy without
any state control in the flow of capital.

In 1944, a section of the big industrialists got together to draft a joint proposal for
setting up a planned economy in the country which eventually became known as the
Bombay Plan.

The Bombay Plan wanted the state to take major initiatives in industrial and other
economic investments.

What were the early initiatives of the Planning Commission?

As in the USSR, the Planning Commission of India opted for Five Year Plans
(FYPs). The whole idea was very simple: the government of India was supposed to
prepare a plan for all its income and expenditure for the next five years.

Then the budget of the central and all the State governments was divided into two
parts according to the plan; ‘the non-plan’ budget that is spent on routine items every
year and ‘the plan’ budget that is spent on a five-year basis as per the priorities fixed
by the plan.

A five-year plan has the advantage of permitting the government to focus on the
larger picture and make a long-term intervention in the economy.

The Plan Holiday

The draft of the First Five-Year Plan and then the actual Plan Document, released in
December 1951, generated a lot of excitement in the Country. People from all walks
of life academics, journalists, government and private sector employees,
industrialists, farmers, politicians, etc.- discussed and debated the document
extensively.

The excitement with planning reached its peak with the launching of the Second Five
Year Plan in 1956 and continued somewhat till the Third Five Year Plan in 1961.

The Fourth Plan was due to start in 1966, but due to the miserable failure of the 'third
five-year plan' the Indian government was forced to declare a 'Plan Holiday'. Three
different yearly plans were made during this period.

Though many criticisms emerged both about the process and the priorities of these
plans, the foundation of India’s economic development was firmly in place by then.
 The First Five-Year Plan
The First-Five Year Plan (1951-1956) sought to get the country’s economy out of the
cycle of poverty. The plan was drafted by a young economist, K.N Raj, who majorly
argued that India should 'hasten slowly' and for the development in the initial
decades as the faster growth might endanger democracy.

The government identified the major problem in the agricultural sector of the country,
which needs urgent attention. As a part of the plan, huge allocations were made for
large-scale projects like the Bhakra-Nangal Dam.

Key Characteristics of the Plan

Land reforms were identified as the key to the country's development. The plan
identified the pattern of land distribution in the country as the principal obstacle in the
way of agricultural growth.

One of the basic aims of the planners was to raise the level of national income,
which could be possible only if the people saved more money than they spent.

The planners sought to push savings up which was difficult as the total capital stock
in the country was rather low compared to the total number of employable people.
The people’s savings did rise in the first phase of the planned process until the end
of the Third Five Year Plan.

The rise was not as spectacular as was expected at the beginning of the First Plan.
Later, from the early 1960s till the early 1970s, the proportion of savings in the
country dropped consistently.
 The Second Five-Year Plan
The Second FYP stressed heavy industries. It was drafted by a team of economists
and planners under the leadership of P. C. Mahalanobis.

The aim of the ‘Second FYP’ was to bring about quick structural transformation by
making changes simultaneously in all possible directions. The Congress party
declared its goal of a ‘Socialist pattern of society’ at the ‘Avadi Session’ near Madras
City. This was reflected in the Second Plan.

The government imposed substantial tariffs on imports to protect domestic

industries. Such a protected environment helped both public and private sector
industries to grow.

As savings and investment were growing in this period, a bulk of these industries like
electricity, railways, steel, machinery and communication could be developed in the
public sector.

Such a push for industrialisation marked a turning point in India’s development.

Sub-Topic: ‘NITI Aayog’

After independence, a Planning Commission based on a socialist model was formed
for the planned development of India. But in the era of globalization, especially in the
21st century, it was becoming ineffective and irrelevant, particularly in terms of
coping with the pressing challenges of development. Hence, during his
Independence Day speech on 15 August 2014, Prime Minister Narendra Modi talked
about the abolition of the Planning Commission. NITI Aayog was constituted in place
of the Planning Commission on 1 January 2015 to provide the necessary and
technical advice to the Union Government regarding policymaking at the Central and
State levels.

The Prime Minister of India is the ex-officio Chairman of NITI Aayog and he appoints
the Vice Chairperson of NITI Aayog. The first Vice Chairperson of NITI Aayog was
Arvind Panagariya. Shri Suman Bery is the current Vice Chairperson of NITI Aayog.

To harmonize the interests of national security and economic policy and to prepare
strategic and long-term framework of policy and program, NITI Aayog acts as a think
tank of the Union Government. By adopting a ‘Bottom-Up Approach’, the NITI Aayog
acts in the spirit of cooperative federalism as it ensures equal participation of all
states in the country.

Sub-Topic: National Development Council (NDC)

The National Development Council (NDC) or Rashtriya Vikas Parishad is the apex
body for decision creating and deliberations on development matters in India,
presided over by the Prime Minister. It was set up on 6 August 1952 under the
chairmanship of India’s first Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru to strengthen
and mobilize the effort and resources of the nation in support of the Five Year Plans
made by Planning Commission. The Council comprises the Prime Minister, the
Union Cabinet Ministers and Chief Ministers of all States or their substitutes,
representatives of the Union Territories and the members of the NITI Aayog
(erstwhile Planning Commission).

Objectives of the Council:

 To secure cooperation of the states in the execution of the plan
 To strengthen and mobilize the effort and resources of the nation in support of
the Plan
 To promote common economic policies in all vital spheres and
 To ensure the balanced and rapid development of all parts of the country.

Functions of the Council:

 To prescribe guidelines for the formulation of the National Plan, including the
assessment of resources for the Plan;
 To consider the National Plan as formulated by the NITI Aayog.
 To assess the resources required for implementing the Plan and to suggest
measures for augmenting them.
 To consider important questions of social and economic policy affecting
national development; and
 To review the working of the Plan from time to time and to recommend such
measures as are necessary for achieving the aims and targets set out in the
National Plan.
 To recommend measures for the achievement of the aims and targets set out
in the national Plan.

Picture Based Questions

A1. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:
Questions
1. What message does the cartoon convey?
2. Name the person who is making efforts to balance both the sectors.
3. How was both these sectors balanced?
Answer:
1. Cartoon is trying to make balance between the private and public sector to
maintain the growth of an economy adopted by India.
2. Pt. Jawahar Lai Nehru, the then Prime Minister of India.
3. Pt. Nehru made a balance between both the sectors by adopting the model of
mixed economy to co-exist the private and public sector.

2. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:

Questions
1. About which state the clipping is talking about?
2. What is food-crisis?
3. What were the main reasons for food- crisis?
4. Is India now sufficient in food production?
Answer:
1. Bihar
2. Food crisis is unavailability of sufficient food or food shortage.
3. (i) High prices of food items.
(ii) Zoning policy of government.
4. Yes, due to Green Revolution foodgrain production has been increased upto
maximum extent.

B. On a political outline map of India locate and label the following and
symbolise them as indicated:

Questions
1. The state prone to food crisis during independence days! (Bihar)
2. The state adopted decentralisation. (Kerala)
3. The state where people protested against POSCO plants. (Orissa)
4. The state where White Revolution took place. (Gujarat)
 Ch-4 India’s External Relations

International Context
India was born and grew up in a very challenging global environment, many
countries came into the world picture as a result of the end of colonialism. Most of
these new countries were attempting to reconcile the twin challenges of welfare and
democracy.

After gaining independence, the foreign policy of free India also reflected these
concerns. On the other hand, India was also dealing with some internal issues and
the issue of poverty alleviation.

India's Entry into International Affairs

As a nation born amid a world war, India decided to conduct its foreign relations to
respect other nations' sovereignty and maintain peace. This goal was widely echoed
by the State Policy Directive Principles.

There were many nations with a lack of resources to effectively represent their
interests in international forums. As a result, they set lower goals. Many nations
valued peace and progress in their immediate environment.

There was one key factor that a nation's reliance on more powerful states for
economic and security aspects also affects its foreign policy. Many post-war
developing countries chose to support the foreign policy preferences of the powerful
countries that aided or financed them.

This resulted in the split of the world into two camps. The US and its allies influenced
one, while the Soviet Union influenced the other.

The end of the Cold War changed everything in international relations. At the time of
India's independence, the Cold War was just beginning, and the world was divided
into two camps.

Policy Of Non- Alignment

The Indian national movement was a part of the global anti-colonialist movement
which also influenced many Asian and African liberation movements. Many
nationalist leaders were impressed by India's approach and wanted to align
themselves with their common struggle against colonialism and imperialism.

Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose also established the Indian National Army (INA) with
a clear manifestation of India's links with overseas Indians during the freedom
struggle.

Both internal and external factors influence a country's foreign policy. As a result,
India's foreign policy was influenced by the noble ideals that motivated the country's
independence struggle.
India's independence coincided with the outbreak of the Cold War. This period was
marked by global political, economic, and military confrontation between two
superpower blocs, the United States and the Soviet Union.

During this time, the United Nations was established, nuclear weapons were
developed, China became communist, and decolonization began.

As a result, India's leaders had to strike a balance between national interests and
global realities.

What role did Nehru play in India's foreign policy?

Jawaharlal Nehru, India's first Prime Minister, was instrumental in establishing the
national agenda. As Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, he had a significant impact
on the formulation and implementation of India's foreign policy from 1946 to 1964.

Nehru's foreign policy had three major goals: to preserve hard-earned sovereignty,
protect territorial integrity, and promote rapid economic development.

Nehru hoped to achieve these goals through a non-alignment strategy. There were
many people and groups in the country who supported the idea of joining the power
led by the United States, which claimed to be pro-democracy.

Leaders like Dr Ambedkar were among those who thought along these lines. Some
anti-communist political parties also wanted India to pursue a pro-US foreign policy.
Parties like the Bharatiya Janata Dal later known as Swatantra Party were among
them.
Why did India maintain a safe buffer between the two camps?
By advocating non-alignment, lowering Cold War tensions, and contributing human
resources to UN peacekeeping missions, the foreign policy of independent India
vigorously pursued the dream of a peaceful world.

During the Cold War, India was not a member of either camp. India wished to avoid
military alliances that pitted the United States and the Soviet Union against one
another. Also, the military alliance’s NATO and the Warsaw Pact led by the United
States and the Soviet Union came into the picture.

India stuck to the policy of Non- Alignment which was an ideal foreign policy
approach. NAM also proved to be a difficult balancing act which was not always
perfect.

When Britain launched an attack on Egypt over the Suez Canal in 1956, India was
among the first to condemn the neocolonial invasion. However, the following year,
when the Soviet Union invaded Hungary, India did not join the international
condemnation.

Despite this, India has generally taken an independent stance on a variety of

international issues and has received aid and assistance from members of both
blocs.

While India was attempting to persuade other developing countries to follow suit,
Pakistan joined military alliances led by the United States.

The US was dissatisfied with India's independent initiatives and non-alignment

policy.

As a result, tensions between India and the US were high during the 1950s. The US
also despised India's increasing ties with the Soviet Union. This policy emphasised
import substitution.

Because of the emphasis on developing a resource base, export-oriented growth

has been limited. This development strategy hampered India's economic interaction
with the rest of the world.

The Afro- Asian Unity

Nehru, on the other hand, saw India playing a significant role in world affairs,
particularly in Asia, due to its size, location, and power potential.

This period was marked by the establishment of contacts between India and other
newly independent states in Asia and Africa. Nehru was a staunch supporter of
Asian unification throughout the 1940s and 1950s.

Under his leadership, India convened the Asian Relations Conference in March
1947, five months before gaining independence.

India made serious efforts to achieve Indonesia's independence from the Dutch
colonial regime as soon as possible by convening an international conference in
1949 to support Indonesia's freedom struggle.

India was a staunch supporter of decolonization and a vocal opponent of racism,

especially apartheid in South Africa.

The Bandung Conference, held in the Indonesian city of Bandung in 1955, was the
pinnacle of India's engagement with newly independent Asian and African nations.

The Bandung Conference resulted in the formation of the NAM. The NAM held its
first summit in Belgrade in September 1961.

Nehru co-founded the National Action Movement (NAM).

India's Relation With China

In contrast to its relationship with Pakistan, independent India initiated a positive
relationship with China.

Following the Chinese revolution in 1949, India was one of the first countries to
recognise the communist government. Nehru was deeply concerned with the
emergence of this neighbour from the shadow of Western dominance, and he
backed the new government in international fora.

Several of his colleagues, including Vallabhbhai Patel, expressed concern about

possible Chinese aggression in the future. Nehru, on the other hand, believed that a
Chinese attack on India was "extremely improbable." For a long period, paramilitary
forces patrolled the Chinese border, rather than the army.

On April 29, 1954, Prime Ministers Nehru of India and Zhou Enlai of China jointly
proclaimed Panchsheel, the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence. This was a
step toward the two countries developing a stronger relationship.

When Indian and Chinese leaders visited each other's countries, they were greeted
by large and friendly crowds.

The Chinese Invasion (1962)

The India China relationship was strained by two developments. In 1950, China
annexed Tibet, removing a historical buffer between the two countries.

Initially, the Indian government made no public opposition to this. However, as more
information about the suppression of Tibetan culture became available, the Indian
government became uneasy.

In 1959, the Dalai Lama, Tibet's spiritual leader, sought and was granted political
asylum in India. China alleged that India's government permitted anti-China activities
to be carried out from within the country.

A few months ago, India and China were embroiled in a boundary dispute. India
maintained that the boundary was settled during colonial times, but China
maintained that any colonial decision was irrelevant.

The primary point of contention was the western and eastern termini of the lengthy
border.

China claimed two areas within Indian territory: the Aksai-chin area in Jammu and
Kashmir's Ladakh region and a large portion of Arunachal Pradesh in what was then
known as NEFA (North Eastern Frontier Agency).

The Chinese occupied the Aksai-chin area between 1957 and 1959 and constructed
a strategic road there.

Despite extensive correspondence and discussion between top leaders, these

disagreements remained unresolved. Numerous minor border skirmishes occurred
between the armies of the two countries.

Amid The Cuban Missile Crisis

In October 1962, while the world was focused on the Sino-US crisis, China invaded
both disputed regions quickly and massively.

Chinese forces captured several strategic areas in Arunachal Pradesh during the
initial assault.

Then came the second wave of attacks. While Indian forces held off Chinese
advances in Ladakh, the Chinese advanced into the Assam plains from the east.

Finally, before the invasion, China declared a unilateral ceasefire and repositioned
its troops.
The China war tarnished India's image both at home and abroad. India needed the
US and UK military help to survive the crisis.

Throughout the conflict, the USSR remained neutral. It instilled both national
humiliation and patriotism.

Several high-ranking army officers have resigned or retired. V. Krishna Menon, then-
defence Minister and close Nehru associate, was forced out.

Nehru's reputation suffered due to his ignorance of China's intentions and lack of
military readiness.

A motion of no confidence in his government was debated in the Lok Sabha. The
Congress then lost several crucial Lok Sabha by-elections.

The country's political climate was changing.

The Sino-Indian conflict influenced the opposition. This, coupled with the growing rift
between China and the USSR, shattered the Indian Communist Party (CPI).

In the CPI, they worked to improve ties with Congress. The opposing faction wanted
closer ties with China and opposed the Congress.

Leaders of the latter faction formed the Communist Party of India (Marxist) after the
party split in 1964. (CPI-M). After the war with China, several CPI (M) leaders were
arrested on pro-China charges.

The war with China made India's leaders aware of the tense situation in the
Northeast. This isolated and underdeveloped region threatened India's national
integration and political unity.

Soon after the war with China, it was reorganised. Manipur and Tripura gained
statehood and the right to elect their legislatures despite being Union Territories.

Wars And Peace With Pakistan

Pakistan's conflict with India began shortly after partition over the Kashmir dispute.
In 1947, a proxy war between Indian and Pakistani armies erupted in Kashmir. This,
however, did not develop into a full-fledged war.

Following that, the matter was referred to the United Nations. Pakistan quickly
established itself as a pivotal factor in India's relations with the US and, later, with
China.

The Kashmir conflict did not prevent India and Pakistan's governments from
cooperating. Both governments worked cooperatively to reunite women abducted
during Partition with their families.

The World Bank mediated a long-standing dispute over river water distribution.
In 1960, Nehru and General Ayub Khan signed the India-Pakistan Treaty on the
Indus Waters.

Regardless of the ups and downs in Indo-Pak relations, this treaty served its purpose
admirably.

In 1965, the two countries fought a more serious war. As you will see in the following
chapter, by that time, Lal Bahadur Shastri had assumed the position of Prime
Minister.

In April 1965, Pakistan launched armed attacks in Gujarat's Rann of Kutch region. In
August and September, a larger offensive was launched in Jammu and Kashmir.

Pakistan's rulers hoped to garner support from the indigenous populace, but this did
not occur.

Shastri directed Indian troops to launch a counter-offensive along the Punjab border
to relieve pressure on the Kashmir front.

After a bloody battle, the Indian army was able to get close to Lahore. The
intervention of the United Nations brought an end to hostilities.

Later that year, in January 1966, Indian Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri and
Pakistani General Ayub Khan signed the Tashkent Agreement, which the Soviet
Union mediated.

While India was capable of inflicting significant military losses on Pakistan, the 1965
war aggravated India's already precarious economic situation.

Bangladesh War, 1971

In 1970, Pakistan experienced its worst internal crisis. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto's party won
West Pakistan's first general election, while Sheikh Mujib-ur Rahman's Awami
League won East Pakistan.

The Bengali population of East Pakistan voted in protest of years of being treated as
second-class citizens by West Pakistan's rulers.

Pakistan's rulers were adamant in their refusal to accept the democratic result.
Additionally, they were hostile to the Awami League's demand for federation.

Rather than that, the Pakistani army captured Sheikh Mujib in early 1971 and
terrorised the people of East Pakistan.

As a result, a struggle against Pakistan to liberate 'Bangladesh' began.

In 1971, approximately 80 lakh refugees fled East Pakistan for India's neighbouring
areas. India provided moral and material support to Bangladesh's struggle for
independence.
Pakistan accused India of orchestrating the destabilisation of the country. Pakistan
received support from both the US and China.

The rapprochement between the United States and China, which began in the late
1960s, resulted in a realignment of forces in Asia. In July 1971, Henry Kissinger, a
close adviser to US President Richard Nixon, travelled secretly to China via
Pakistan.

In response to the US-Pakistan-China axis, India and the Soviet Union signed a 20-
year Treaty of Peace and Friendship in August 1971.

This treaty assured India of the Soviet Union's assistance in the event of an attack.

India and Pakistan fought a full-scale war in December 1971, following months of
diplomatic tensions and military build-up.

Pakistani planes bombed Punjab and Rajasthan while the Indian army advanced into
Jammu and Kashmir. India responded with an air force, navy, and army attack on
both the Western and Eastern fronts.

Indian forces advanced rapidly in East Pakistan, aided and abetted by the populace.
Within ten days, the Indian army encircled Dhaka on three sides, compelling
Pakistan's approximately 90,000-strong army to surrender. Following Bangladesh's
independence, India unilaterally declared a ceasefire.

Indira Gandhi and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto signed the Shimla Agreement later that year, on
3 July 1972, formally ending the war.

National jubilation followed the war's decisive victory. This was viewed by the
overwhelming majority of Indians as a source of national pride and a demonstration
of India's growing military prowess.

Indira Gandhi was the Prime Minister of India at the time. She had already been
elected to the Lok Sabha in 1971.

Her popularity skyrocketed following the war's conclusion in 1971.

Following the war, the majority of states held assembly elections, with the Congress
party capturing large majorities in a number of them.

India had begun planning for development despite its resource scarcity.

Conflicts with neighbours put the five-year plans in jeopardy.

In 1962, when India was compelled to embark on a military modernisation drive,

scarce resources were diverted to the defence sector.

The Department of Defence Production and the Department of Defence Supplies

were established in November 1962 and November 1965, respectively.
The Third Plan (1961–66) and three Annual Plans were affected, with the Fourth
Plan beginning only in 1969. In the aftermath of the wars, India's defence spending
increased dramatically.

The Nuclear Policy of India

What was the nuclear policy of India?
Another significant event during this time was India's first nuclear explosion in May
1974, also known as Operation ‘Smiling Buddha’. For the rapid development of
modern India, Nehru had always placed his faith in science and technology.

The nuclear programme, which began in the late 1940s under the direction of Homi
J. Bhabha, was an important part of his industrialisation plans.

India desired to produce nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Nehru was an
outspoken opponent of nuclear weapons. As a result, he pleaded with the
superpowers for total nuclear disarmament.

The nuclear arsenal, on the other hand, continued to grow. When Communist China
conducted nuclear tests in October 1964, the five nuclear weapon powers – the
United States, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, France, and China (Taiwan
then represented China) – attempted to impose the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
(NPT) of 1968 on the rest of the world.

The NPT has always been viewed as discriminatory by India, which has refused to
sign it. India's first nuclear test was dubbed a "peaceful explosion" at the time.
India claimed that it was committed to using nuclear energy only for peaceful
purposes.

Domestic politics were tumultuous during the nuclear test period.

Due to the massive increase in oil prices by Arab nations following the Arab-Israel
War of 1973, the entire world was affected by the Oil Shock.

It wreaked havoc on India's economy, resulting in high inflation. As you will see in the
following paragraphs, there were numerous agitations in the country at the time,
including a nationwide railway strike.

Although there are minor differences among political parties on how to conduct
external relations, Indian politics is characterised by broad agreement among the
parties on national integration, international boundary protection, and national
interest issues.

As a result, we find that foreign policy played only a minor role in party politics during
the decade of 1962-1972, when India faced three wars, or even later when different
parties came to power from time to time.

Sub-Topic: ‘India-Israel Relation’

Nearly 45 years after independence, due to various reasons, India's foreign policy
with Israel remained largely unexplored, notwithstanding the two nations gaining
independence from British colonial rule in 1947 and 1948, respectively.
Though historical and cultural ties between India and Israel have gone back from
times immemorial, diplomatic relations formally developed between the two after the
opening of the Israeli embassy in India in 1992.

Relations between the two democratic nations further intensified with the visits of the
Two Heads of Government in 2017 and 2018. The two nations have started
cooperation in various fields like cultural exchange, security and defence,
counterterrorism, space research, water and energy and agricultural development.

Sub-Topic: ‘India’s Nuclear Program’ (Updates)

India's nuclear policy has always been peace-oriented, whose clear impression is
reflected in the policy of No First Use. However, given contemporary regional
security challenges, the present government has made it clear that the policy of no
first use can be reviewed and changed in consonance with India's regional and
national security. In addition, India is committed to ensuring its membership in the
Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) and opposing partisan and unjust nuclear treaties
like CTBT and NPT.

Picture/Map Based Questions [5 Marks]

A. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:

Question.
1. What message does this cartoon convey?
2. Which year is being shown here?
Answer:
1. This cartoon conveys message on Indo-China tensions to be resolved.
2. 1962, Chinese invasion.
Ch-5 Challenges to and Restoration of the Congress
System

Political Succession After Nehru

What was the Challenge to Political Succession after Nehru?
After the demise of our Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru in May 1964, the whole
nation was stuck with the question of who would succeed after Nehru and whether
India’s democratic experiment would survive or not.

It was feared that India would not be able to manage democratic succession. The
1960s was labelled as a dangerous decade as the nation was dealing with
unresolved problems like poverty, inequality, communal and regional division, etc.,
which may lead to the failure of democracy.

From Nehru to Shastri

Lal Bahadur Shastri became the next Prime Minister (1964-66) of the nation after K.
Kamraj, the president of INC, Consulted all the members of the party and voted in
favour.

Shastri had been a minister in Nehru’s cabinet and was also the Non-controversial
leader among all from Uttar Pradesh. Earlier, he had resigned from the position of
Railway Minister, accepting moral responsibility for a major railway accident.

The nation faced two major Challenges during Shastri’s tenure. While India was still
recovering from the economic implications of the war with China, failed monsoons,
drought, and a serious food crisis presented a grave challenge.

The second Challenge was that the country also fought a war with Pakistan in 1965.
Shastri’s famous slogan, ‘Jai Jawan Jai Kisan’, symbolised the country’s resolve to
face both these challenges.

Shastri’s Prime Ministership came to an abrupt end on 10 January 1966, when he

suddenly expired in Tashkent (Uzbekistan), then in the USSR.

Lal Bahadur Shastri and Pakistan’s president, Muhammad Ayub Khan, both were
there to sign an agreement to end the war. (Tashkent agreement).

From Shastri to Indra Gandhi

Indra Gandhi took charge after the death of Lal Bahadur Shastri.

This time, there was an intense competition between Morarji Desai and Indira
Gandhi.
Morarji Desai had earlier served as Chief Minister of Bombay state (today’s
Maharashtra and Gujarat) and also as a Minister at the centre.

Indira Gandhi, the daughter of Jawaharlal Nehru, had been Congress President in
the past and had also been Union Minister for Information in the Shastri cabinet.
Indira Gandhi defeated Morarji Desai by securing the support of more than two-thirds
of the party’s MPs. The senior leaders supported Indra Gandhi in the belief that she
would be dependent on them because of administrative and political inexperience.

Within a year of becoming Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi had to lead the party in a
Lok Sabha election around this time, the economic situation in the country had
further deteriorated and piled her problems up.

Fourth General Elections

What changes occurred in the Fourth General Elections, 1967?
The country witnessed major changes in the years leading up to the fourth general
election. Two Prime Ministers had died in quick succession, and the new Prime
Minister, who was being seen as a political novice, had been in office for less than a
year.

The nation faced a grave economic crisis from the successive failure of monsoons,
drought, the decline in agricultural production, the devaluation of currency, etc.

One of the first decisions of the Indira Gandhi government was to devalue the Indian
rupee under what was seen to be pressure from the US.

The economic situation triggered an off-price rise. People started protesting against
the increase in prices of essential commodities, food scarcity, growing
unemployment and the overall economic condition in the country.

‘Bandhs’ and ‘Hartals’ were called frequently across the country, which was
considered a law and order problem despite people's expression regarding their
problems.
The communist and socialist parties launched struggles for greater equality. This
period also witnessed some of the worst Hindu-Muslim riots since Independence.

What was Non-Congress?

The opposition parties were at the forefront of organising public protests and creating
unrest.
Parties opposed to the Congress realised that the division of their votes kept the
Congress in power.

Thus, parties that were entirely different in their programmes and ideologies grew
together to form anti-Congress fronts.

They felt that the inexperience of Indira Gandhi and the internal factionalism within
the Congress provided them with an opportunity to topple the Congress.

This strategy, the name ‘non-Congressism’, was given by socialist leader Ram
Manohar Lohia.

Congress rule was undemocratic and opposed to the interests of ordinary poor
people; therefore, the coming together of the non-Congress parties was necessary
for reclaiming democracy for the people. ~Ram Manohar Lohia

The Electoral Verdict

This context of heightened popular discontent and the polarisation of political forces
caused the Elections to be held in February 1967.
Congress was facing the electorate for the first time without Nehru. The Election
results were described as a ‘Political Earthquake’.

The Congress did manage to get a majority in the Lok Sabha, but with its lowest tally
of seats and share of votes since 1952. Half the ministers in Indira Gandhi’s cabinet
were defeated.

The senior political leader Kamaraj in Tamil Nadu, S.K. Patil in Maharashtra, Atulya
Ghosh in West Bengal and K. B. Sahay in Bihar lost their constituencies. Congress
lost the majority in as many as seven states. In two other States, defections
prevented it from forming a government.

These nine states where Congress lost power were spread across the country.

In Madras State (now called Tamil Nadu), a regional party called Dravida Munnetra
Kazhagam (DMK)- came to power by securing a clear majority.

The DMK won power after having led a massive anti-Hindi agitation by students
against the centre on the issue of the imposition of Hindi as the official language. It
was the first time a non-congress party gained a majority in its region.

Coalition governments formed consisting of different non-Congress parties in the

other eight states.

Coalitions
No single party had got the majority; various non-Congress parties came together to
form joint legislative parties (called Samyukta Vidhayak Dal in Hindi) that supported
non-Congress governments.

That is why these governments came to be described as SVD governments in many

cases, the coalition partners were ideologically incongruent.

For instance, the SVD government in Bihar included the two socialist parties, SSP &
PSP, along with the CPI on the left and Jana Sangh on the right.

In Punjab, it was called the ‘Popular United Front’ and comprised the two rival Akali
parties at that time- the Sant group and the master group- with both the communist
parties- the CPI and The CPI(M),

The SSP, The Republican Party and the Bharatiya Jana Sangh.

What does the term ‘DEFECTION’ stand for?

When an elected representative leaves the party on whose symbol he/she was
elected and joins another party, it is known as defection.

Defection played an important role in the politics after 1967 in making and unmaking
of the governments.
After the 1967 general election, the breakaway Congress legislators played an
important role in installing non-Congress governments in three States - Haryana,
Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh.

The constant realignments and shifting political loyalties in this period gave rise to
the expression ‘Aya Ram, Gaya Ram’.

What made the Congress split?

The Congress retained power at the Centre after the 1967 elections but with a
reduced majority and lost power in many States.

The results proved that Congress could be defeated in the elections. But there was
no substitute as yet.

Most non-Congress coalition governments in the States did not survive for long.
They lost the majority, and either new combinations were formed or the President’s
rule had to be imposed.

Indira vs. the ‘Syndicate’

The real challenge to Indira Gandhi came not from the opposition but from within her
party. She had to deal with the ‘syndicate’, a group of powerful and influential leaders
from within the Congress.

The Syndicate played a role in the installation of Indira Gandhi as the Prime Minister
by ensuring her election as the leader of the parliamentary party. These leaders
expected Indira Gandhi to follow their advice.

Indira Gandhi attempted to assert her position within the government and the party.
She chose her trusted group of advisers from outside the party.

Syndicates were side-lined slowly and carefully by Indra.

Indira Gandhi thus faced two challenges as she needed to build her independence
from the Syndicate. She also needed to work towards regaining the ground that the
Congress had lost in the 1967 elections.

A very bold strategy was adopted by Indra, she converted a simple power struggle
into an ideological struggle. Launched a series of initiatives to give the government
policy a Left orientation.

She got the Congress Working Committee to adopt a Ten-Point Programme in May
1967. This programme included social control of banks, nationalisation of General
Insurance, the ceiling on urban property and income, public distribution of food
grains, land reforms and provision of house sites to the rural poor.
The ‘syndicate’ leaders formally approved this Left-wing programme; they had
serious reservations about the same.

Politics of Presidential Election, 1969

The factional rivalry between the Syndicate and Indira Gandhi came into the open in
1969. The post of President of India fell vacant due to the death of earlier President
Zakir Hussain’.

N. Sanjeeva Reddy, the speaker of Lok Sabha, was nominated by the syndicate as
the official Congress candidate. He was the long-time opponent of Indra.

Indira Gandhi retaliated by encouraging the then Vice-President, V.V. Giri, to file his
nomination as an independent candidate.

She also announced several big and popular policy measures like the nationalisation
of fourteen leading private banks and the abolition of the ‘privy purse’ or the special
privileges given to former princes.

Morarji Desai was the Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister.

The then Congress President S. Nijalingappa issued a ‘whip’ asking all the Congress
MPs and MLAs to vote in favour of Sanjeeva Reddy, the official candidate of the
party.

Supporters of Indira Gandhi requisitioned a special meeting of the AICC (that is why
this faction came to be known as ‘requisitionists’), but this was refused. After silently
supporting V.V. Giri, the Prime Minister openly called for a ‘conscience vote’ which
meant that the MPs and MLAs from Congress should be free to vote the way they
want.

The election ultimately resulted in the victory of V.V. Giri, the independent candidate,
and the defeat of Sanjeeva Reddy, the official Congress candidate.

The defeat of the official Congress candidate formalised the split in the party.

The Congress President expelled the Prime Minister from the party; she claimed that
her group was the real Congress.

By November 1969, the Congress group led by the ‘syndicate’ came to be referred to
as the Congress (Organisation) and the group led by Indira Gandhi came to be
called the Congress (Requisitionists).

These two parties were also described as Old Congress and New Congress. Indira
Gandhi projected the split as an ideological divide between socialists and
conservatives, between the pro-poor and the pro-rich.

What was a Privy Purse? What was the reason for its abolishment?
This integration of Princely states was preceded by an assurance that after the
dissolution of princely rule, the then rulers’ families would be allowed to retain certain
private property and given a grant in heredity or government allowance, measured
based on the extent, revenue and potential of the merging state.
This grant was called the Privy Purse.

At the time of accession, there was little criticism of these privileges since integration
and consolidation were the primary aim.

Hereditary privileges were not consonant with the principles of equality and social
and economic justice laid down in the Constitution of India.

Indira Gandhi supported the demand that the government should abolish privy
purses. Morarji Desai, however, called the move morally wrong and amounted to a
‘breach of faith with the princes’.

The government tried to bring a Constitutional amendment in 1970, but it was not
passed in Rajya Sabha. An ordinance was also issued, which was struck down by
the Supreme Court.

Indira Gandhi made this into a major election issue in 1971 and got a lot of public
support. This resulted in a massive victory in the 1971 election; the Constitution was
amended to remove legal obstacles for the abolition of the ‘privy purse’.

The 1971 Election and Restoration of Congress

Indira Gandhi’s government was reduced to a minority due to the split in Congress.
She continued in office with the issue-based support of a few other parties, including
the Communist Party of India and the DMK.

During this period, the government made conscious attempts to project its socialist
credentials.

In the thin phase, Indira Gandhi vigorously campaigned to implement the existing
land reform laws and undertook further land ceiling legislation.

To end her dependence on other political parties, strengthen her party’s position in
the Parliament, and seek a popular mandate for her programmes, Indira Gandhi’s
government recommended the dissolution of the Lok Sabha in December 1970.

The fifth General Election to Lok Sabha was held in February 1971.

The Contest in the Electoral Politics

The electoral contest appeared to be loaded against Congress(R).

After all, the new Congress was just one faction of an already weak party. Everyone
believed that the real organisational strength of the Congress party was under the
command of Congress (O).

All the major non-communist, non-Congress opposition parties formed an electoral

alliance known as the Grand Alliance.

The SSP, PSP, Bharatiya Jana Sangh, Swatantra Party and the Bharatiya Kranti Dal
came together under this umbrella.
The ruling party had an alliance with the CPI.

The new Congress had something that its big opponents lacked; it had an issue, an
agenda and a positive slogan. The Grand Alliance did not have a coherent political
programme.

Indira Gandhi said that the opposition alliance had only one common programme:
Indira Hatao.
‘Garibi Hatao’ was the slogan given by Indra Gandhi.

The main focus was on the public sector, the imposition of a ceiling on rural
landholdings and urban property, the removal of disparities in income and
opportunity, and the abolition of princely privileges.

Indira Gandhi tried to generate a support base among the disadvantaged, especially
among the landless labourers, Dalits and Adivasis, minorities, women and the
unemployed youth through Garibi Hatao.

What were The Outcomes?

The Congress(R)-CPI alliance won more seats and votes than the Congress had
ever won in the first four general elections.

The combine won 375 seats in Lok Sabha and secured 48.4 per cent votes.
Indira Gandhi’s Congress(R) won 352 seats with about 44 per cent of the popular
votes on its own.

The Congress party led by Indira Gandhi established its claim to being the ‘real’
Congress and restored to it the dominant position in Indian politics.

The Grand Alliance of the opposition proved a grand failure. Their combined tally of
seats was less than 40.

After the 1971 Lok Sabha elections, a major political and military crisis broke out in
East Pakistan.

Indra became popular through these events, even the opposition leaders admired
her statesmanship. Her party swept through all the State Assembly elections held in
1972.

She was seen not only as the protector of the poor and the underprivileged but also
as a strong nationalist leader.

The dominance of the Congress was restored with two successive election victories,
one at the centre and the other at the State level.

Congress was now in power in almost all the States. It was also popular across
different social sections.

Was Congress Restored?

Indra re-invented the party in many ways. The party occupied a similar position in
terms of its popularity as in the past. But it was a different kind of party.

It relied entirely on the popularity of the supreme leader and also had a somewhat
weak organisational structure.

This Congress party now did not have many factions. Thus, it could not
accommodate all kinds of opinions and interests. It depended more on some social
groups: the poor, the women, Dalits, Adivasis and the minorities during elections.

This was a new Congress that had emerged.

Thus, Indira Gandhi restored the Congress system by changing the nature of the
Congress system itself.

Despite being more popular, the new Congress did not have the kind of capacity to
absorb all the tensions and conflicts that the Congress system was known for.

While the Congress consolidated its position and Indira Gandhi assumed a position
of unprecedented political authority, the spaces for the democratic expression of
people’s aspirations shrank.

The popular unrest and mobilisation around issues of development and economic
deprivation continued to grow.

Our Leaders
Lal Bahadur Shastri (1904-1966):
Prime Minister of India; participated in the freedom movement since 1930.
 Minister in the UP cabinet.
 General Secretary of Congress.
 Minister in Union Cabinet from 1951 to 1956, when he resigned, taking responsibility
for the railway accident, and later from 1957 to 1964
 Coined the famous slogan ‘Jai Jawan-Jai Kisan’.

Indira Gandhi (1917-1984):

Prime Minister of India from 1966 to 1977 and 1980 to 1984;

 Daughter of Jawaharlal Nehru.

 She participated in the freedom struggle as a young Congress worker.
 Congress President in 1958.
 Minister in Shastri’s cabinet from 1964-66.
 Led the Congress party to victory in the 1967, 1971 and 1980 general elections.
 Credited with the slogan ‘garibi hatao, victory in the 1971 war and for policy
initiatives like the abolition of Privy Purse, nationalisation of banks, the nuclear test
and environmental protection.
 Assassinated on 31 October 1984.

C. Natarajan Annadurai (1909-1969):

Chief Minister of Madras (Tamil Nadu) from 1967.

 A journalist, popular writer and orator.

 Initially associated with the Justice Party in Madras province.
 Later joined Dravida Kazhagam (1934).
 Formed DMK as a political party in 1949.
 A proponent of Dravid culture, he was opposed to the imposition of Hindi and led the
anti-Hindi agitations.
 Supporter of greater autonomy to States.

Ram Manohar Lohia (1910-1967):

Socialist leader and thinker.

 Freedom fighter and among the founders of the Congress Socialist Party.
 After the split in the parent party, the leader of the Socialist Party and later the
Samyukta Socialist Party.
 Member, Lok Sabha, 1963- 67; founder editor of Mankind and Jan, known for
original contribution to a non-European socialist theory; as a political leader, best
known for sharp attacks on Nehru, the strategy of non-Congress, advocacy of
reservation for backward castes and opposition to English.

K. Kamraj (1903-1975):
Freedom fighter and Congress President.

 Chief Minister of Madras (Tamil Nadu).

 Have suffered educational deprivation and made efforts to spread education in
Madras province.
 Introduced a mid-day meal scheme for school children.
 In 1963, he proposed that all senior Congressmen should resign from office to make
way for younger party workers—this proposal is famous as the ‘Kamraj plan.’

S. Nijalingappa (1902-2000):
 Senior Congress leader.
 Member of Constituent Assembly.
 Member of Lok Sabha.
 Chief Minister of the then Mysore (Karnataka) State,
 Regarded as the maker of modern Karnataka.
 President of Congress from 1968-71.

Karpoori Thakur (1924-1988):

Chief Minister of Bihar between December 1970 and June 1971 and again between
June 1977 and April 1979.

 Freedom Fighter and socialist leader.

 Active in labour and peasant movements.
 A staunch follower of Lohia.
 Participated in the movement led by JP.
 He is known for his decision to introduce reservations for the backward classes in
Bihar during his second Chief Ministership.
 A strong opponent of the use of the English Language.

V.V. Giri (1894-1980):

President of India from 1969 to 1974

 Congress worker and labour leader from Andhra Pradesh.

 Indian High Commissioner to Ceylon (Sri Lanka).
 Labour Minister in the Union cabinet; Governor of U.P., Kerala, Mysore (Karnataka).
 Vice-President (1967-1969) and acting President after the death of President Zakir
Hussain; resigned and contested the presidential election as an independent
candidate; received support from Indira Gandhi for his election as President.

Picture Based Questions

1. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:

Questions
1. What is meant by ‘Keep Right, No Left Turn”?
2. In the picture what does the following stand for:
(а) LD (b) BKS
(c) SSP (d) BKD
3. What is a hung assembly?
Answer:
1. United Front Party was formed on the basis of non-Communist ideology and
supposed to follow the ‘rightist’ only.
2. (a) Lok Dal
(b) Bihar Kranti Sabha
(c) Samyukt Socialist Party (d) Bharatiya Kranti Dal
3. It is dominated by coalition government where no single party gets majority and
this is very uncertain also.

2. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:

Questions
1. Which year is being referred by cartoon?
2. Who is being commented by the phrase ‘Aya Ram Gaya Ram’?
Answer:
1. 1967
2. Haryana’s MLA ‘Gaya LaP who changed the party thrice in a fortnight from
Congress to United Front, back to Congress and then within nine hours to United
Front again.

3. Study the picture given below and answer the questions

Questions
1. What does the cartoon represent?
2. Identify the lady in the cartoon and give reason for her pleasure.
3. Identify the person wearing garland in winning position. (V.V. Giri.)
4. Who is lying on the ground? (N. Sanjeeva Reddy.)
Answer:
1. Presidential elections of 1969.
2. Indira Gandhi on winning of her candidate V.V. Giri in presidential elections.
 Ch-6 The Crisis of Democratic Order

Conflict Among The Two Pillars

Indira Gandhi had risen to prominence as a leader. This was also a period of intense
party struggle, with growing tensions between the executive and judiciary.

Numerous government measures were judged to be constitutional violations by the

Supreme Court. The Congress party argued that the Court's position was contrary to
democratic and legislative supremacy norms and was obstructing the
implementation of pro-poor welfare programmes.

The opposing parties perceived a transformation of government authority into

personal authority.

The Congress's split has exacerbated the schism between Indira Gandhi and her
opponents.

How was the Indian economy impacted?

Congress campaigned on the slogan Garibi Hatao in the 1971 elections, but the
country's social and economic conditions did not improve significantly during the
1971-72 Bangladesh Crisis. Following this, a war with Pakistan erupted.

The United States withdrew its aid to India following the war.

Oil prices have also climbed on the worldwide market. This resulted in an overall
increase in commodity prices, which jumped by 23% in 1973 and 30% in 1974.

There was a lack of industrial expansion and a high unemployment rate, particularly
in rural areas. To save money, the government froze the pay of its employees, which
increased employee unhappiness.

In 1972, a monsoon failure resulted in a precipitous decrease in agricultural

productivity. Unrest among students and a surge in the activities of Marxist parties
that rejected parliamentary politics gained traction.

These groups have turned to weaponry and insurgency tactics in order to destabilise
the capitalist order and established political system. The Marxist-Leninist (now
Maoist) groups are referred to as the Naxalites.

They were especially powerful in West Bengal, where the state government took
severe attempts to crush them.
 Gujarat and Bihar Uprisings
Students' protests in Gujarat and Bihar had a profound effect on state and national
politics.

In January 1974, students in Gujarat began a protest against rising food grain,
cooking oil, and other necessary commodities prices, as well as against high-level
corruption.

The students' protest was backed by major opposition groups and became
widespread, resulting in the state being imposed with President's control.

The opposition has demanded new elections.

Morarji Desai, a major leader of the Congress (O), Indira Gandhi's primary
challenger, said that he would go on an indefinite fast if the State did not hold fresh
elections.

Assembly elections were held in Gujarat in June 1975 under significant pressure
from students and opposition political parties. This election resulted in the defeat of
Congress.

In March 1974, Bihar witnessed a similar student rebellion against rising prices, food
scarcity, unemployment, and corruption.

JP Narayan In Bihar
They invited Jayaprakash Narayan (JP), a former active politician who had taken up
social work, to lead the student movement. He agreed on the condition that the
movement would be nonviolent and would not be confined to Bihar.
 Thus, the students' movement acquired a political dimension and garnered
widespread support. Individuals from many areas of life have now joined the cause.

Jayaprakash Narayan demanded the resignation of Bihar's Congress administration

and called for a complete revolution in the social, economic, and political realms.

Bandhs, gheraos, and strikes were held in protest of the Bihar government's refusal
to resign.

The movement gained traction and began to exert influence on national politics.
Railway employees called for a statewide strike, which threatened to paralyse the
country.

In 1975, JP led a march of the people to Parliament. He was now backed by non-
Congress parties such as the Bharatiya Jana Sangh, the Congress (O), the
Bharatiya Lok Dal, and the Socialist Party.

Numerous criticisms were levelled at his beliefs and the politics of mass agitation
that he employed.

Conflicts with Judiciary

Following were the issues that emerged:
 Can parliament abridge Fundamental Rights?
 Can the Parliament curtail the right to property by making an amendment?

The Constitution was changed to allow the Parliament to abridge Fundamental

Rights in order to give effect to Directive Principles.
All of these provisions were overturned by the Supreme Court. This resulted in a
crisis in the relationship between the administration and the court.

(The renowned Kesavananda Bharati case culminated this dilemma.) In this case,
the Court ruled that there are some fundamental characteristics of the Constitution
that Parliament cannot change.)

The friction between the judiciary and the executive was exacerbated by two recent
events.

A vacancy for the post of Chief Justice of India developed almost immediately after
the Supreme Court's judgement in the Kesavananda Bharati case.

It had been customary to appoint the Supreme Court's senior-most judge as Chief
Justice. In 1973, however, A. N. Ray was appointed over the other senior justices.

Because all three judges who were succeeded had ruled against the government's
position, this nomination proved politically contentious.

Political ideology and constitutional interpretations were becoming increasingly

entangled.

The High Court judgement declaring Indira Gandhi's election illegitimate was, of
course, the climax of the struggle.

Declaration of Emergency
Indira Gandhi's election to the Lok Sabha was declared unlawful by Justice
Jagmohan Lal Sinha of the Allahabad High Court on June 12, 1975.

This decision was made in response to an election petition submitted by Raj Narain,
a socialist politician who ran against her in 1971.

He contested Indira Gandhi's election, alleging that she had exploited government
employees in her electoral campaign.

Because of the High Court's decision, she was no longer a member of Parliament
and so could not continue as Prime Minister until she was re-elected as an MP within
six months.

The Supreme Court granted her a temporary reprieve from the high court's
judgement until the outcome of her appeal, but she could still serve as an MP but not
participate in Lok Sabha proceedings.

Response to a Crisis
The stage had been prepared for a major political showdown. The opposition parties,
led by Jayaprakash Narayan, demanded Indira Gandhi's resignation and staged a
major protest.

JP called for a statewide Satyagraha in support of her resignation, asking the army,
police, and government personnel not to follow "illegal and immoral commands."

The government responded by declaring a state of emergency.

The administration declared a threat of domestic unrest on June 25, 1975, and
invoked Article 352 of the Constitution as a result.

The government could declare a state of emergency under this article if there was an
external threat or a threat of domestic unrest.

When a state of emergency is declared, the federal division of powers is effectively

suspended, and all authorities are centralised in the hands of the federal
government.

During an emergency, the government also has the authority to curtail or restrict all
or some of the Fundamental Rights.

On the night of June 25, 1975, the Prime Minister suggested that President
Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed declare a state of emergency.

After the proclamation was published, the electricity to all of the major newspaper
offices was turned off after midnight.

A considerable number of opposition party leaders and workers were detained.

After all of this, the Cabinet was notified about it at a special meeting held at 6 a.m.
on June 26.

What were the ramifications of declaring a state of emergency?

Strikes were banned, many opposition leaders were imprisoned, and the political
environment became quite calm.

The government imposed a moratorium on press freedom, and newspapers were

required to obtain prior approval for any item they wanted to publish. It's known as
press censorship.

The government outlawed the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and Jamaat-e-
Islami. Protests, strikes, and other forms of public agitation were also prohibited.

Citizens' Fundamental Rights, including the right to petition the Court for the
restoration of their Fundamental Rights, were suspended.

Preventive detention was often used by the authorities. (People are arrested and
detained not because they have committed an offence, but because they are
suspected of doing so.)
Many cases were brought by and on behalf of arrested individuals in the High Courts
and Supreme Court, but the government contended that it was not even necessary
to tell the arrested individuals of the reasons and grounds for their arrest.

Even after the declaration of emergency, several High Courts issued rulings.

In April 1976, the Supreme Court's constitution bench overruled the High Courts and
approved the government's plea. It meant that the government may take away a
citizen's right to life and liberty during an emergency.

This decision effectively shut down the judiciary for citizens and is widely recognised
as one of the Supreme Court's most contentious decisions. Many political activists
who were not jailed after the initial wave went "underground" and organised anti-
government protests.

The Indian Express and the Statesman, for example, opposed censorship by
creating blank areas when news items were banned. Rather than comply with
censorship, some journals elected to close their doors.

For writing against the Emergency, many journalists were arrested. To get over
censorship, many underground newsletters and leaflets were issued.

In protest of the suspension of democracy, Kannada writer Shivarama Karanth, who

was granted the Padma Bhushan, and Hindi writer Fanishwarnath Renu, who was
awarded the Padma Shri, returned their honours.

Many fresh amendments to the Constitution were also enacted by Parliament. An

modification was adopted in the aftermath of the Allahabad High Court's judgement
in the Indira Gandhi case, saying that elections for Prime Minister, President, and
Vice-President could not be challenged in court.

During the Emergency, the 42nd Amendment was also passed. (Constitution in
miniature)

One of the many changes brought about by this amendment was the extension of
the country's legislatures from five to six years.

This alteration was intended to be permanent, not only for the Emergency time.

Elections can be postponed for a year during an emergency.

Elections have to be held only in 1978, not 1976, after 1971.

What were the main points of contention in the emergency situation?

One of the most contentious periods in Indian politics is the state of emergency.

There are varying perspectives on the necessity of declaring an emergency; another

argument is that the administration effectively halted democratic functioning by
exercising powers granted by the Constitution.
The Shah Commission's investigations following the Emergency revealed that there
were numerous "excesses" committed during the Emergency.

What do you think about the "Was Emergency Necessary" comment?

Although the Constitution only stated "internal disturbances" as a justification for
declaring an emergency, an Emergency was never declared on this basis prior to
1975.

As riots erupted in several sections of the country. This was insufficient justification
for establishing a state of emergency.

In a democracy, the administration claimed, the ruling party must be permitted to

govern according to its policies.

Extra-parliamentary politics targeting the government, according to Indira Gandhi

supporters, is not allowed in a democracy. This causes unrest and diverts the
administration's attention away from its primary responsibility of assuring
development.

Subversive forces were aiming to impede the government's progressive programmes

and remove Indira Gandhi from office by extra-constitutional measures, she claimed
in a letter to the Shah Commission.

The CPI, which continued to support the Congress throughout the Emergency,
claimed that there was an international plot against India's unity and that some limits
on agitation were necessary in such circumstances.

The CPI believed that the agitations led by JP were primarily driven by middle-class
people who were opposed to the Congress party's extreme views, but after the
Emergency, the CPI realised that their assessment was incorrect.

On the other hand, critics of the Emergency noted that Indian politics had a long
history of public conflicts dating back to the independence movement.

JP and many other opposition leaders believed that in a democracy, citizens had the
right to criticise the government in public.

The agitations in Bihar and Gujarat were mainly calm and nonviolent. Those arrested
were never charged with any anti-national action. The majority of the inmates had no
charges filed against them.

The Home Ministry, which is in charge of monitoring the country's internal situation,
likewise expressed no worry.

There was no need to suspend democratic functioning or impose extreme measures

such as the Emergency because the administration had sufficient authorities to
address the issues. The threat was directed against the ruling party and the Prime
Minister herself, rather than the country's unity and integrity.
Critics claim that Indira Gandhi took use of a constitutional provision intended to
save the country in order to preserve her personal authority.

What took place during the Emergency?

Several inquiries were posed to the government about the government's emergency
provisions being abused.

The administration stated that the Emergency will be used to restore peace and
order, restore efficiency, and, most importantly, implement pro-poor social
programmes.

Indira Gandhi's government established a twenty-point programme and stated its

commitment to putting it into action.

Land reforms, land redistribution, agricultural pay reviews, worker engagement in

management, and the abolition of bonded labour were all part of the agenda.

During the first months of the emergency, the urban middle class was ecstatic that
the agitations had ended and that government officials had been disciplined.

Critics of the Emergency say that most of the government's promises were unfulfilled
and that they were only a ruse to divert attention away from the excesses.

Shah Commission
According to the Shah Commission, almost one lakh eleven thousand persons were
detained under preventative detention regulations. The use of preventive detention
has also been called into question.
Press restrictions were imposed, sometimes without sufficient legal repercussions.

According to the Shah Commission report, the General Manager of the Delhi Power
Supply Corporation received verbal orders from the office of the Lt. Governor of
Delhi on June 26, 1975, to turn off the electricity to all newspaper presses at 2 a.m.

After the censorship system was set up, electricity was restored two to three days
later.

At the time, Sanjay Gandhi, the Prime Minister's younger son, held no formal role.
Despite this, he was able to seize control of the government.

As a result of his role in the demolitions and forced sterilisation in Delhi, he became
a hot topic.

These examples demonstrate what happens when the democratic process is

disrupted.

The Emergency's Lessons

The Emergency exposed both the flaws and the strengths of India's democracy at
the same time.

As a result, one of the lessons of the Emergency is that eliminating democracy in

India is incredibly tough.

Second, it revealed significant ambiguities in the Constitution's Emergency Provision,

which have subsequently been resolved. Now, an "internal" emergency can only be
declared on the basis of "armed rebellion," and the Council of Ministers must provide
the President with written advice on whether or not to declare an emergency.

Third, the Emergency increased public awareness of the importance of civil

freedoms. Following the Emergency, the courts, too, have taken an active role in
preserving citizens' civil liberties.

The police and the government were in charge of putting the Emergency Rule into
effect. These institutions would be unable to function on their own.

They were turned into political tools of the ruling party, and the administration and
police became sensitive to political demands, according to the Shah Commission
Report.

After the Emergency, the problem did not go away.

How did the Political Dimensions Change after the

Emergency?
The most valuable and lasting lesson of the Emergency was learnt as soon as the
Emergency was over and the Lok Sabha elections were announced.

The 1977 elections turned into a referendum on the experience of the Emergency, at
least in north India where the impact of the Emergency was felt most strongly.

The opposition fought the election on the slogan of ‘save democracy’.

The people’s verdict was decisively against the Emergency.

The lesson was clear and has been reiterated in many state levels elections
thereafter governments that are perceived to be anti-democratic are severely
punished by the voters. The experience of 1975 -77 ended up strengthening the
foundations of democracy in India.

Lok Sabha Elections, 1977

After eighteen months of Emergency, the government decided to hold elections. All
the leaders and activists were released from jails.

Opposition was left with very little time, but political developments took place very
rapidly. The major opposition parties formed a new party, known as the Janata Party.

The new party accepted the leadership of Jayaprakash Narayan. Some leaders of
the Congress who were opposed to the Emergency also joined this new party.

Some other Congress leaders also came out and formed a separate party under the
leadership of Jagjivan Ram. This party was named Congress for Democracy, later
merged with the Janata Party.

The Janata Party made this election into a referendum on the Emergency. Its
campaign was focused on the non-democratic character of the rule and on the
various excesses that took place during this period.

The formation of the Janata Party also ensured that non-Congress votes would not
be divided. It was evident that the going was tough for the Congress.

The final results took everyone by surprise for the first time since Independence, the
Congress party was defeated in the Lok Sabha elections.

The Congress lost in every constituency in Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Delhi, Haryana and
Punjab and could win only one seat each in Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh.

Indira Gandhi was defeated by Rae Bareli, as was her son Sanjay Gandhi from
Amethi. But Congress did not lose elections all over the country.

It retained many seats in Maharashtra, Gujarat and Orissa and virtually swept
through the southern States.
The forced relocation and displacements, the forced sterilisations, were mostly
concentrated in the northern States.

The middle castes from north India were beginning to move away from the Congress
and the Janata party became a platform for many of these sections to come
together.

The elections of 1977 were not merely about the Emergency.

Janata Party Government

The government of the Janata Party, which came to power after the 1977 elections.
Following the election, three candidates vied for the position of Prime Minister:
Morarji Desai, who had been Indira Gandhi's rival since 1966-67; Charan Singh,
leader of the Bharatiya Lok Dal and a farmer's leader from Uttar Pradesh; and
Jagjivan Ram, who had vast experience as a senior minister in Congress
governments.

Morarji Desai eventually became Prime Minister, but the power battle inside the party
did not end there.

The resistance to the Emergency may only be able to hold the Janata Party together
for a short time. The Janata Party government was unable to implement policies that
differed significantly from those adopted by Congress.

In less than 18 months, the Janata Party divided, and Morarji Desai's government
lost its majority. On the guarantee of the Congress party's backing, a new
government led by Charan Singh was created.

However, the Congress party later withdrew its support, allowing the Charan Singh
government to stay in office for only around four months.

In January 1980, new Lok Sabha elections were held, in which the Janata Party was
soundly defeated, particularly in north India, where it had swept the polls in 1977.

Indira Gandhi's Congress party came close to repeating its historic triumph.

The experience of 1977-79 provided another lesson in democratic politics: voters

punish governments that are perceived to be unstable and quarrelsome.
Was it, however, simply a case of Indira Gandhi's return?
Between 1977 and 1980, the political landscape had shifted considerably. The
Congress party had begun to lose its image as an umbrella organisation that brought
together leaders and workers from many ideologies and opinions.

The Congress party has now identified itself with a certain ideology, claiming to be
the sole socialist and pro-poor political party in the country.

The Congress's political success in the early 1970s was dependent on gaining voters
based on deep social and ideological distinctions, as well as the appeal of one
leader, Indira Gandhi.

With the change in the nature of the Congress party, other opposition parties began
to rely more and more on 'non-Congressism,' as it is known in Indian politics.

They also recognised the need of avoiding a split of non-Congress votes during the
election. This factor played a significant effect in the 1977 elections. The outcome of
the 1977 elections was influenced by a change among North India's backward
castes.

In 1977, various states had Assembly elections after the Lok Sabha elections.

The leaders of the backward castes played a crucial role in the election of non-
Congress governments in the northern states.

The subject of reservations for 'other backward classes' became highly contentious
in Bihar, prompting the Janata Party administration at the centre to form the Mandal
Commission.

The post-Emergency elections kicked began the process of changing the party
structure.
Because it arose from a constitutional fight between the jurisdiction of Parliament
and the courts, the Emergency and the period surrounding it might be defined as a
moment of a constitutional crisis.

It was also a time of political upheaval. Despite having an absolute majority, the
ruling party's leadership opted to put the democratic process on hold.

The authors of India's Constitution assumed that all political parties would follow the
democratic norms in general.

When the government uses extraordinary powers in an emergency, it does so within

the bounds of the rule of law.

This expectation resulted in the government being given broad and unrestricted
powers in times of emergency, which were exploited during the emergency.

This was a more serious political crisis than the constitutional crisis.

Another important question that arose at this time was the function and scope of
large protests in a parliamentary democracy.

Tensions exist between democracy based on institutions and democracy based on

spontaneous popular participation. This can be ascribed to the party system's
incapacity to accommodate people's ambitions.

Sub-Topic: Jaya Prakash Narayan

Jaya Prakash Narayan is known for three key contributions: The fight against
Corruption, the Principle of Communitarian Socialism and the Championing of ‘Total
Revolution’.

Jaya Prakash Narayan was the first leader in post-independence India who
undertook a tirade against corruption through the participation of youth, particularly in
Gujarat and Bihar. He is the office of Lokpal against corruption. His principle of
Communitarian Socialism views India as a society of communities encompassing
three key layers, viz., community, region and rashtra – all combining as an example
of a true federation.

Based on the above principles, Jaya Prakash Narayan advocated the transformation
of the individual, society and state through his call for ‘Total Revolution’. His call for
total revolution sought to encompass moral, cultural, economic, political, educational
and ecological transformations. His political transformation included the right to
recall, the importance of village/ mohalla amenities in democratic politics, and his call
for Upper Ke Log to join the political struggle for clean politics in the country.
The essence of transformation, according to Jaya Prakash Narayan, revolves around
‘Man’ who could be the real catalyst of change in India.
 Sub-Topic: ‘Ram Manohar Lohia and Socialism’
Ram Manohar Lohia has been one of the main proponents of socialism in India. He
championed the idea of ‘Democratic Socialism’ while associating his socialism with
democracy. Lohia considered both capitalism and communism equally irrelevant to
Indian society. His principle of Democratic Socialism has two objectives - the
economic objective of food and housing. And the non-economic objective in the form
of democracy and freedom.

Lohia advocated Chouburja Rajneeti, in which he opines four pillars of politics as

well as socialism: Centre, Region, District and Village – all are linked with each
other. Considering affirmative action, Lohia argued that the policy of affirmative
action should not only be for the downtrodden but also women and non-religious
minorities.

Based on the premise of Democratic Socialism and Chouburja Rajneeti, Lohia

supported a ‘Party of Socialism’ as an attempt to merge all political parties. The
Party of Socialism, according to Lohia, should have three symbols, viz., Spade
[prepared to make efforts], Vote [power of voting], and Prison [Willingness to make
sacrifices].

Sub-Topic: ‘Deendayal Upadhyaya and Integral

Humanism’
Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya was a philosopher, sociologist, economist and
politician. The philosophy he presented is called 'Integral Humanism', which was
intended to present an 'indigenous socio-economic model' in which human beings
remain at the centre of development. Integral Humanism aims to ensure a dignified
life for every human being while balancing the needs of the individual and society. It
supports sustainable consumption of natural resources so that those resources can
be replenished. Integral Humanism enhances not only political but also economic
and social democracy and freedom. As it seeks to promote diversity, it is best suited
for a country as diverse as India.

The philosophy of Integral Humanism is based on the following three

principles:

 Primacy of whole, not part

 Supremacy of Dharma
 Autonomy of Society

Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya opposed both Western 'capitalist individualism' and

'Marxist socialism'. According to Deendayal Upadhyaya, capitalist and socialist
ideologies only consider the needs of the human body and mind, so they are based
on materialistic purposes, whereas spiritual development is equally considered
important for the complete development of human beings, which is missing in both
capitalism and socialism. Basing his philosophy on the internal conscience, the pure
human soul to be called Chhitti, Deendayal Upadhyaya envisaged a classless,
casteless and conflict-free social system.

DeenDayal Upadhyaya advocated the Indianization of Democracy, particularly with a

focus on Economic Democracy. For him, decentralisation & Swadeshi are the
foundation of Economic Democracy. His philosophy broadly revolved around the
principle of Arthayaam, which states that both the absence and prominence of artha
lead to the destruction and denigration of Dharma, which is so central to Integral
Humanism.

Sub-Topic: ‘Democratic Upsurges’

Increasing participation of the people in the democratic politics of the country is
broadly characterised as a democratic upsurge. Based on this principle, social
scientists have characterised three democratic upsurges in the post-independence
history of India.

The ‘First Democratic Upsurge’ could be attributed from the 1950s to 1970s, which
was based on the participation of Indian adult voters in democratic politics both at
the Centre and in states. Falsifying the Western myth that the success of democracy
requires modernisation, urbanisation, education and access to media, the successful
holding of elections to both Lok Sabha and legislative assemblies all across states
on the principle of parliamentary democracy was the testimony of India’s first
democratic upsurge.

During the 1980s, the increasing political participation of the lower classes of the
society, such as SCs, STs and OBCs, has been interpreted as a ‘Second
Democratic Upsurge’. This participation has made Indian politics more
accommodative and accessible for these classes. Although this upsurge has not
made any major change in the standard of living of these classes, especially Dalits,
the participation of these classes in the organisational and political platforms allowed
them to strengthen their self-respect and ensure empowerment in the democratic
politics of the country.

The era of Liberalization, Privatization and Globalization from the early 1990s is
attributed to the emergence of a competitive market society encompassing all
important sectors of the economy, society and polity, thus paving the way for the
‘Third Democratic Upsurge’. The Third Democratic Upsurge represents a competitive
electoral market that is based not on the principle of survival of the fittest but rather
on the survival of the ablest. It underlines three shifts in India’s electoral market: from
State to Market, from Government to Governance, and from State as Controller to
State as Facilitator. Moreover, the Third Democratic Upsurge seeks to promote the
participation of the youth, who constitute a significant chunk of Indian society and
have emerged as the real game changers given their increasing electoral preference
for both development and governance in India’s contemporary democratic politics.
Picture/Map Based Questions [5 Marks]
1. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:

Questions
1. What was the slogan of Janata Party to campaign in elections?
2. Identify the person who is sitting on ground holding the slogan.
3. Against which practices Jayaprakash Narayana agitated?
Answer:
1. Save Democracy.
2. Jayaprakash Narayan.
3. Corruption, lawlessness, violence, and most important against imposition of
emergency.

2. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:
Question.
1. When did cartoon appear in the newspaper and why?
2. Identify the person behind Indira Gandhi.
3. Identify what does the ‘Political Crisis’ stand for. Explain.
Answer:
1. This cartoon appeared few days before the declaration of emergency to capture
the sense of impending political crisis.
2. The then Congress president D.K. Barooah.
3. Political crisis in 1977 made the party system in India look like a two party system
i.e. Congress and non¬Congress to end one party dominance and emergence of
non-Congress party Janata Party as an umbrella for others.

3. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:

Questions
1. What situation does the picture refer to?
2. Which Commission is represented into the cartoon?
3. Mention some points of this Commission’s report.
Answer:
1. Appearance of Indira Gandhi before Commission but refused to answer any
question.
2. Shah Commission’s report about emergency.
3. (i) There were many excesses committed
during emergency.
(ii) Several restrictions were put on the press sometimes without legal sanction.
(iii) Many people were arrested under preventive detention law.
(iv) Even general manager of Delhi Power Supply Corporation received verbal orders
from the officers of Lt. Governor of Delhi to cut electricity to all newspaper presses at
2 a.m. on 26 June 1975.
 Ch-7 Regional Aspirations

Nation Building
Building a nation is not something that can be achieved once and for all. Every time,
new hurdles arose, as well as some old issues that had never been resolved. People
from many regions began to express their desire for autonomy as the democratic
experiment progressed.

People in several parts of the country, particularly in Assam, Punjab, Mizoram, and
the developments in Jammu and Kashmir, engaged in long conflicts and often
aggressive and armed statements.

What were the characteristics of the movements?

The emergence of regional autonomy aspirations began in the 1980s.

People's armed assertions, government repression, and the collapse of democratic

and electoral systems were all part of these movements. The majority of these
conflicts were protracted and ended in negotiated settlements or agreements with
the central authority.

The agreements were made through a conversion process aimed at resolving

controversial topics within the framework of the constitution. The road to the
agreement was always raucous and often violent.

What was unique about the Indian approach?

Indian nationalism attempted to strike a balance between unity and variety.

The Indian approach was quite different from that of many European countries,
where the cultural variety was seen as a threat to the country's survival. The
democratic approach accepts regional political expressions and does not regard
them as anti-national.

Democratic politics allows parties and groups to speak to people about their regional
identity, aspirations, and concerns.

It also means that regional issues and challenges will be given the attention and
consideration they deserve during the policy-making process.

Political confrontations over problems of regional power, rights, and independent

existence are prevalent among governments that desire to recognise diversity.

Tension Points
India has encountered numerous problems since independence, including partition,
displacement, absorption of princely states, state reorganisation, and so on.
After independence, the question of Jammu and Kashmir arose.

It was not only a struggle between India and Pakistan but also a question of the
people of Kashmir's democratic ambitions.

Nagaland and Mizoram, both in the North East, have seen strong movements for
independence from India.

Some Dravid groups in the south also sought their homeland. Following these
events, a mass movement for the construction of linguistic states erupted in many
regions of the world.

The states of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Gujarat were among
those affected by the riots. There were protests in the south, particularly in Tamil
Nadu, opposing declaring Hindi the country's official language.

In the North, there were strong pro-Hindi demonstrations demanding that Hindi be
made the official language soon.

During the 1950s, people who spoke Punjabi began to demand a separate state for
themselves. In 1966, the states of Punjab and Haryana were formed as a result of
this agreement.

It was decided to form the states of Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, and Uttaranchal (now
Uttarakhand).

The country's internal boundaries were redrawn. The problem in other areas, such
as Kashmir and Nagaland, was so complicated that it could not be solved during the
first phase of nation-building.
 Jammu & Kashmir
The 'Kashmir issue' has long been regarded as a key point of contention between
India and Pakistan.

Jammu, Kashmir, and Ladakh are the three social and political regions that make up
J&K. The people of Kashmir are predominantly Muslim and speak Kashmiri, with a
small Hindu minority speaking Kashmiri.

Jammu is home to Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs, who speak a variety of languages.

Ladakh is a mountainous region with a small population that is evenly split between
Buddhists and Muslims. The issue of Kashmiriyat, or Kashmiri identity, and the
people of J&K's desire for political autonomy.

The Sources of the Issue

Before 1947, Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) was a princely state. Hari Singh, the
territory's Hindu monarch, opposed a union with India and attempted to negotiate an
autonomous status for his state with both India and Pakistan.

Because there was a Muslim majority in Kashmir, Pakistanis believed it belonged to

them. However, this is not how the masses perceive it. They identified as Kashmiris.

The National Conference's Sheikh Abdullah led a movement within the state to
depose the Maharaja, but he was opposed to joining Pakistan.

The National Conference was a non-denominational organisation with a long history

of working with Congress.

Pakistan launched tribal infiltrators from their side to conquer Kashmir in October
1947, forcing the Maharaja to seek Indian military assistance.

India provided military assistance after the Maharaja signed an 'Instrument of

Accession' with the Indian government.

It was also agreed that after the situation had stabilised, the people of J&K's opinions
on their future would be ascertained.

In March 1948, Sheikh Abdullah became the Prime Minister of the State of J&K (the
head of the state's administration at the time was known as the Prime Minister).

India pledged to preserve Jammu & Kashmir's autonomy.

What is the Instrument of Accession?

The Instrument of Accession was a legal instrument formed by the Government of
India Act 1935 and used in 1947 to allow each of the princely states under British
supremacy to join one of the new dominions of India or Pakistan founded by the
Partition of British India.
 Internal and External Conflicts
Pakistan has always contended that the Kashmir valley should be a part of the
country.

In 1947, Pakistan funded a tribal invasion of the state, as a result of which one
portion of the state, known as ‘Azad Kashmir,' came under the Pakistani
administration.

Article 370 of our Constitution grants Kashmir unique status. In comparison to other
Indian states, Jammu and Kashmir have more autonomy under Article 370.

The state had a constitution of its own. The State was exempt from all provisions of
the Indian Constitution. Only if the State agrees do laws passed by Parliament apply
to J&K.

People outside of J&K argue that the special status provided by Article 370 does not
allow full integration of the state with India and that J&K should be treated like any
other Indian state.

Another group, primarily Kashmiris, believes that the autonomy granted by Article
370 is insufficient.

A section of Kashmiris has voiced its dissatisfaction.

First, the promise that accession would be referred to the people of the state
afterwards was not kept, leading to calls for a "plebiscite." In actuality, the special
federal status promised by Article 370 has been eroded. In the state of Jammu and
Kashmir, democracy has not been institutionalised in the same way.
What changed in terms of political dimensions after
1948?
Sheikh Abdullah was the driving force behind massive land reforms and other
programmes. His stand on Kashmir's status was causing a growing schism between
him and the national government.

In 1953, he was fired and imprisoned for several years. The leadership that
succeeded him did not have as much public support and was only able to administer
the state with the help of the federal government.

Several elections have been tainted by severe charges of fraud and rigging. During
the majority of the period from 1953 to 4, the Congress party had a significant effect
on state politics. For a time, the National Conference (minus Sheikh Abdullah)
remained in power with Congress' active support, but it eventually united with
Congress.

Sheikh Abdullah and the Indian government attempted to strike a deal on multiple
occasions. Sheikh Abdullah became the Chief Minister of the State after Indira
Gandhi arranged with him in 1974.

He resurrected the National Conference, which won a majority in the 1977 assembly
elections.

After his father died in 1982, Farooq Abdullah, Sheikh Abdullah's son, assumed
command.

The Governor quickly removed him, and a breakaway section of the National
Conference rose to power. The trust that Kashmiris had earned in democratic
processes following the agreement was shattered.

In 1986, the National Conference agreed to form an electoral alliance with Congress,
the federal government's main party.

After the Insurgency

Farooq Abdullah was re-elected as Minister after the National Conference-Congress
alliance won the assembly elections in 1987.

The results did not represent a popular opinion, and the entire election process is
thought to have been rigged. This resulted in a political crisis in Kashmir, which
worsened as the conflict grew.

In 1989, the state was engulfed by a militant movement dedicated to the creation of
a distinct Kashmiri country.
Pakistan provided moral, material, and military support to the militants.

For numerous years, the state was under President's rule and effectively under the
control of the military forces.

A Call for Regional Self-Government

In 1996, the National Conference, led by Farooq Abdullah, came to power in Jammu
and Kashmir with a proposal for regional autonomy for the state.

In 2002, the election in J&K was fairly fair. The National Conference lost its majority
and was replaced by a coalition government led by the People's Democratic Party
(PDP) and Congress.

"Separatist politics arose in Kashmir in various forms," says the author.

One group of separatists wants Kashmir to be its own country.

Others Kashmir to become part of Pakistan. Another strand wants the people of the
state to have more autonomy inside the Indian Union.

The concept of autonomy appeals to the people of Jammu and Ladakh in a unique
way. They frequently complain about being ignored and being behind the times. As a
result, there is just as much demand for intra-state autonomy as there is for state
autonomy.

The public's initial support for militancy has given way to a desire for peace. The
Centre has begun talks with several separatist parties. Instead of demanding an
independent country, most separatists in talks are attempting to renegotiate the
state's relationship with India.

Jammu and Kashmir is a living example of a diverse society and political system.

Despite these differences and divergences, the State's multifarious and secular
culture has generally stayed intact.

Punjab
The decade of 1980the s also witnessed major developments in the State of Punjab.
The social composition of the State changed first with Partition and later on after the
carving out of Haryana and Himachal Pradesh. The rest of the country was
reorganised on linguistic lines in the 1950s,

Punjab had to wait till 1966 for the creation of a Punjabi-speaking state.

The Akali Dal, which was formed in 1920 as the political wing of the Sikhs, had led
the movement for the formation of a ‘Punjabi Suba’.
 The Sikhs were now a majority in Punjab.

Political Context
The Akalis came to power in 1967 and then in 1977. On both occasions, it was a
coalition government.

The Akalis discovered that despite the redrawing of the boundaries, their political
position remained precarious.

 Firstly, their government was dismissed by the Centre mid-way through its term.
 Secondly, they did not enjoy strong support among the Hindus.
 Thirdly, the Sikh community, like all other religious communities, was internally
differentiated on caste and class lines.

The Congress got more support among the Dalits, whether Hindu or Sikh, than the
Akalis.

It was in this context that, during the 1970s, a section of Akalis began to demand
political autonomy for the region. This was reflected in a resolution passed at their
conference at Anandpur Sahib in 1973.

The Anandpur Sahib Resolution asserted regional autonomy and wanted to redefine
the centre-state relationship in the country.

The resolution also spoke of the aspirations of the Sikh qaum and declared its goal
as attaining the bolbala (dominance or hegemony) of the Sikhs.

The Resolution was a plea for strengthening federalism, but it could also be
interpreted as a plea for a separate Sikh nation. The Resolution had a limited appeal
among the Sikh masses.

After the Akali government had been dismissed in 1980, the Akali Dal launched a
movement on the question of the distribution of water between Punjab and its
neighbouring States. A section of the religious leaders raised the question of
autonomous Sikh identity.

The more extreme elements started advocating secession from India and the
creation of ‘Khalistan’.

Cycle of violence
The leadership of the movement passed from the moderate Akalis to the extremist
elements and took the form of armed insurgency.

Militants made their headquarters inside the Sikh holy shrine, the Golden Temple in
Amritsar, and turned it into an armed fortress.

The Government of India carried out ‘Operation Blue Star’ in June 1984. The
Government could successfully flush out the militants, but it also damaged the
historic temple and deeply hurt the sentiments of the Sikhs.
A large proportion of Sikhs in India and abroad saw the military operation as an
attack on their faith, and this gave further impetus to militant and extremist groups. A
still more tragic turn of events complicated the Punjab problem further.

The Assassination Of Indira Gandhi

Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated on 31 October 1984 outside her
residence by her bodyguards.

The entire country was shocked by this development, in Delhi and many parts of
northern India, violence broke out against the Sikh community.

The violence against the Sikhs continued for almost a week. More than two thousand
Sikhs were killed in the national capital, the area worst affected by this violence.
Hundreds of Sikhs were killed in other parts of the country, like Kanpur, Bokaro and
Chas.

Many Sikh families lost their male members and thus suffered great emotional and
heavy financial loss.

Twenty years later, speaking in the Parliament in 2005, Prime Minister Manmohan
Singh expressed regret over these killings and apologised to the nation for the anti-
Sikh violence.

The Longowal Accord

In 1984, the new Prime Minister, Rajiv Gandhi, initiated a dialogue with moderate
Akali leaders.

In July 1985, he reached an agreement with Harchand Singh Longowal, then the
President of the Akali Dal.

This agreement, known as the Rajiv Gandhi - Longowal Accord or the Punjab
Accord, was a step towards bringing normalcy to Punjab.

It was agreed that Chandigarh would be transferred to Punjab, a separate

commission would be appointed to resolve the border dispute between Punjab and
Haryana, and a tribunal would be set up to decide the sharing of Ravi-Beas river
water among Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan.

The agreement also provided for compensation to and better treatment of those
affected by the militancy in Punjab and the withdrawal of the application of the
Armed Forces Special Powers Act in Punjab.

Militancy and counter-insurgency violence led to excesses by the police and

violations of human rights.

The central government had to impose the President’s rule in the State, and the
normal electoral and political process was suspended.

It was not easy to restore the political process in an atmosphere of suspicion and
violence. When elections were held in Punjab in 1992, only 24 per cent of the
electors turned out to vote.

Militancy was eventually eradicated by the security forces. But the losses incurred by
the people of Punjab, Sikhs and Hindus alike were enormous.

Peace returned to Punjab by the middle of the 1990s.

The alliance of Akali Dal (Badal) and the BJP scored a major victory in 1997, in the
first normal elections in the State in the post-militancy era.

The State is once again preoccupied with questions of economic development and
social change. Though religious identities continue to be important for the people,
politics has gradually moved back along secular lines.

The North-East
The region is also known as the seven sisters, as it comprises the seven states of
India. Hence, the region is connected to the rest of the country by a 22-kilometre
corridor. Aside from that, the region borders China, Myanmar, and Bangladesh and
thus acts as India's gateway to Southeast Asia.

Since 1947, the region has changed dramatically. Tripura, Manipur, and Meghalaya's
Khasi Hills were once princely states that united with India following independence.

The entire North-East area has experienced significant political reorganisation.

Nagaland became a distinct state in 1960, Meghalaya, Manipur, and Tripura in 1972,
and Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram in 1986.
The North-East became a landlocked region after India's partition in 1947, which
harmed its economy.

Its politics remained impenetrable as well. At the same time, due to influxes of
migrants from neighbouring states and nations, most states in this region
experienced significant demographic shifts.

The region's isolation, complex socioeconomic nature, and backwardness in

comparison to other areas of the country have all resulted in a complex set of
demands from several North-East states.

The broad international border and poor connection between the Northeast and the
rest of India exacerbated the sensitive nature of politics in the region.

The politics of the North-East is dominated by three issues: aspirations for

autonomy, secessionist movements, and antagonism to "outsiders."

In the 1970s, major initiatives on the first issue paved the way for huge changes on
the second and third issues in the 1980s.

What were the Autonomy demands of the North-Eastern states?

Except for Manipur and Tripura, the entire region was part of Assam at the time of
independence. When non-Assamese people thought that the Assam government
was forcing them to speak Assamese, they demanded political autonomy.

Throughout the state, there were dissent and protest riots. The leaders of Assam's
major indigenous clans aspired to secede.

They established the Eastern India Tribal Union, which was eventually renamed the
All Party Hill Leaders Conference in 1960.

They urged that Assam be divided into tribal states. Finally, Assam was divided into
numerous states rather than a single tribal state.

Tripura and Manipur were also elevated to the status of states. By 1972, the
reorganisation of the North-East had been completed.

Communities such as the Bodos, Karbis, and Dimasas in Assam desired their states.
They fought for this demand through public opinion mobilisation, popular movement,
and insurgency.

More than one community claimed the same territory. It was no longer possible to
create smaller and smaller states.

As a result, additional aspects of our federal structure were employed to meet their
desires for autonomy while remaining in Assam.

District Councils have provided autonomy to the Karbis and Dimasas, while the
Bodos have lately been awarded Autonomous Council.
Secessionists Movements
Autonomy demands were easier to respond to because they included utilising
various parts of the Constitution to accommodate diversity.

It was far more difficult when some factions wanted a separate country consistently
rather than out of a fit of rage.

For a long period, the country's leadership had to deal with this issue in at least two
North-East states.

The Mizo Hills have constituted an autonomous region within Assam after
independence. Some Mizos claimed they were never a part of British India and,
hence, did not qualify for membership in the Indian Union.

After the Assam government failed to appropriately respond to the great famine in
the Mizo Hills in 1959, the independence movement garnered public support.

The Mizo National Front

The Mizo National Front (MNF), founded by Laldenga, was formed in response to
the Mizos' outrage.

The MNF began an armed war for independence in 1966.

It marked the beginning of a two-decade conflict between Mizo militants and the
Indian army.

The MNF waged a guerilla struggle, received government support, and found refuge
in what was then East Pakistan.

The Indian security forces responded with a slew of coercive measures, most of
which were directed at the general public. Even the Air Force was used at one time.

People become more enraged and alienated as a result of these measures.

Everyone was a loser at the end of two decades of conflict.

This is where the political leadership's maturity on both sides made a difference.

Laldenga returned to India from exile in Pakistan and began talks with the Indian
government.

Rajiv Gandhi led these talks to a successful finish. Rajiv Gandhi and Laldenga
signed a cease-fire agreement in 1986.

Mizoram was awarded full statehood with unique powers, and the MNF promised to
stop fighting for independence.

Laldenga was appointed Chief Minister.

This agreement marked a watershed moment in Mizoram's history. It is one of the

most tranquil areas in the region, and it has made significant progress in literacy and
development.

Nagaland's tale is similar to Mizoram's, only it began far earlier and has yet to reach
a happy conclusion.

Angami Zapu Phizo, a branch of the Nagas who declared independence from India
in 1951, was their leader.

Many proposals of a negotiated settlement were turned down by Phizo.

The Naga National Council began an armed battle for Naga independence. A
segment of the Nagas struck an agreement with the Indian government after a
period of violent insurgency, but this was not acceptable to other rebels.

Nagaland's problem has yet to be fully resolved.

Movement Against Outsiders

As a result of the large-scale migration to the northeast, a particular challenge
occurred. These latecomers, whether from India or elsewhere, are viewed as
potential competitors for jobs and political influence, as well as encroachers on
scarce resources such as land.

This issue has taken on a political and occasionally violent tone in several North-
Eastern states. The Assam Movement, which ran from 1979 to 1985, is the best
example.
The Assamese suspected the presence of a sizable number of unauthorised
Bangladeshi Muslim settlers.

They believed that without identifying and deporting these foreign nationals, the
indigenous Assamese would be reduced to a minority.

Despite its natural resources, such as oil, tea, and coal, Assam suffers from
widespread poverty and unemployment.

These were believed to be being drained out of the state with little benefit to the
populace. The All Assam Students' Union (AASU), a non-partisan students'
organisation, spearheaded an anti-foreigner movement in 1979.

The movement also targeted illegal immigrants, Bengali and other foreigners’
dominance, and erroneous votes.

The movement campaigned for the deportation of all foreigners who entered the
nation after 1951. The campaign employed several innovative strategies to mobilise
Assamese from all walks of life, collecting support from across the state.

Additionally, other tragic and violent incidents resulted in the destruction of property
and the loss of human life. Additionally, the movement aimed to disrupt train traffic
and oil supply from Assam to Bihar refineries.

Negotiations between the Rajiv Gandhi administration and the AASU's leaders
culminated in 1985 with the signing of an accord.

The Accord of 1958

Under this agreement, foreigners who relocated to Assam during and after the
Bangladesh conflict, as well as afterwards, were to be recognised and deported.
Following the movement's victory, the Asom Gana Sangram Parishad and the AASU
amalgamated to become the Asom Gana Parishad, a regional political organisation
(AGP).

It was elected in 1985 on a platform of resolving the foreign national issue and
establishing a "Golden Assam."

While the Assam Accord established peace and altered the face of Assam politics, it
did not tackle the issue of immigration.

Outsiders continue to be a contentious issue in Assam politics, as it is in many other

parts of the North-East.

This is an especially acute situation in Tripura, where indigenous people have been
reduced to a minority in their territory.

In Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh, the indigenous population's hostility toward

Chakma refugees is founded on the same feeling.

What are the lessons to be learned from these examples?

 The first and most fundamental lesson is that regional interests are critical in
democratic politics. The manifestation of regional challenges is neither exceptional
nor unusual.

Even smaller countries, such as the United Kingdom, have regional ambitions.
Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland are no exception. Both Spain's Basques and
Sri Lanka's Tamils face separatist movements.

 Regional demands must be addressed regularly in a large and diverse democracy

like India. The process of nation-building is never-ending.

 The second lesson is that dialogue, not repression, is the appropriate response to
regional ambitions.

 The third lesson discusses the importance of power-sharing. It is insufficient to have

a formal democratic organisation.

It is insufficient to assert that governments and regions have autonomy in their

domains. The nation is divided into regions.

As a result, regions must have a say in the destiny of the country. If areas are
excluded from national decision-making, they may acquire a sense of injustice and
alienation.

The fourth lesson is that regional economic differences contribute to a perception of

regional prejudice.

India's development has exacerbated regional imbalances. Naturally, backward

states or regions within some states believe that, first and foremost, their
backwardness should be addressed and that the Indian government's policies are to
blame for this imbalance.

Regional imbalances and migration between regions occur when some states stay
impoverished while others expand rapidly.

Finally, these cases reflect our Constitution's authors' forethought in addressing the
challenges of diversity.

India's federal structure is very adaptive. While the majority of states have equal
powers, some, such as Jammu and Kashmir and the states of the North-East, have
special provisions.

The Sixth Schedule of the Constitution vests each tribe with complete sovereignty
over their customary laws and practices. These clauses were crucial in resolving
some of the most challenging political issues in the North-most East.

In the region, separatist aspirations are discouraged. Regionalism has been

regarded as a necessary component of democratic politics in India.
 Sub-Topic: ‘The Kashmir Issue’
Since its integration with the Union of India, Kashmir has remained one of the
burning issues in post-independence India. The problem became more complicated
when it was accorded a special status in the Constitution through Article 370 and
Article 35A – the former giving it special powers like having its separate
Constitution/Constituent Assembly/Flag, new nomenclature for Chief Minister as
Prime Minister and Governor as Sadr-e-Riyasat, and the non-enforcement of most of
the Union laws in the state while the latter imparting it special citizenship rights
prohibiting the non-Kashmiris from buying property in the state.

It was against the special status of the state of Jammu and Kashmir that there was a
clarion call for abrogation of Articles 370 and 35A. Others equated Article 370 and
35A as ‘constitutionally recognised separatism’.

It was against this backdrop that the current NDA Government presented the Jammu
and Kashmir Reorganization Bill in Rajya Sabha on 5 August 2019 for the abolition
of Section 370 and 35-A from Kashmir, which was passed by a majority. The bill was
passed by the Lok Sabha on 6 August 2019. After the President's assent on 9
August 2019, Sections 370 and 35A were repealed, and Jammu and Kashmir was
divided into two Union Territories of Ladakh and Jammu and Kashmir.

Picture/Map Based Questions [5 Marks]

1.On a political outline map of India locate and label the following and
symbolise them as indicated:
Questions
1. The 22nd State of India due to its merger.
2. The state out of which the states of Meghalaya, Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh
were created.
3. Article 370 has a special significance for this state of India.
4. The state whose leader signed an agreement with Rajiv Gandhi.
5. An important state whose leader was Lai Denga.
6. Two states which were not part of state of Assam at the time of India’s
Independence.
7. The state associated with Golden Temple and ‘Operation Blue Star’.
Answer:
1. Sikkim 2. Assam
3. Jammu and Kashmir
4. Punjab
5. Mizoram
6. (a) Manipur (b) Tripura
7. Punjab
 Ch-8 Recent Developments in Indian Politics

What Kind of Political Changes Occurred After

Indira Gandhi?
Following Indira Gandhi's assassination, Rajiv Gandhi was elected Prime Minister. In
the Lok Sabha elections conducted shortly after, in 1984, he led the Congress to a
landslide win.

Five events occurred in the country that had long-term consequences for our politics.

 The defeat of the Congress party in the 1989 elections, which signalled the end of
the Congress system, was the most significant event of this period.

 The advent of the "Mandal issue" in national politics was the second development.
'Anti-Mandal' protests erupted in various sections of the country as a result of this.

 Third, the various governments' economic policies diverged dramatically. In 1991,

there were new economic reforms.

 Fourth, in 1992, the controversial edifice in Ayodhya, the Babri Masjid, was
demolished. These changes are linked to the rise of the Bharatiya Janata Party
(BJP) and 'Hindutva' politics.

 Finally, Rajiv Gandhi's assassination in May 1991 resulted in the Congress party's
leadership changing. While on an electoral campaign tour in Tamil Nadu, he was
slain by a Sri Lankan Tamil affiliated to the LTTE.

Era Of Coalitions
In 1989, the Congress party was defeated in elections, but no other party was able to
secure a majority.

The National Front (a coalition of the Janata Dal and various regional parties) was
backed by two radically opposed political forces: the BJP and the Left Front. The
National Front formed a coalition government on this premise, but neither the BJP
nor the Left Front joined.

Congress's Rejection
What led to the defeat of Congress?
The defeat of Congress signalled the end of the congressional party system. Under
the leadership of Indra Gandhi, the Congress Party's supremacy was threatened, but
the party was able to reclaim its position as the most powerful political force in the
country.
The Congress's strong position was again challenged in the 1990s. A multi-party
period began. In our country, there have always been a significant number of political
parties competing in elections.

Representatives from a variety of political parties have always been present in our
legislature.

Following 1989, several parties emerged, with no single party receiving the majority
of votes or seats.

Since 1989, no single political party has won a clear majority of seats in the Lok
Sabha. This ushered in a new age of coalition governments at the national level, with
regional parties playing an important role in forging ruling coalitions.

What were the Alliance Politics?

In the 1990s, major Dalit and backwards-group-oriented parties and movements
arose. These parties not only represented strong regional assertions but also played
a key role in the United Front's 1996 election victory.

The United Front, like the National Front of 1989, contained the Janata Dal and
several regional parties. The BJP refused to back the administration this time. The
Congress backed the United Front government, demonstrating the political
landscape's instability.

Both the Left and the BJP backed the National Front Government in 1989 to keep
Congress from gaining power.

The Left continued to assist the non-Congress government in 1996 because both
Congress and the Left wanted the BJP to be defeated.
Despite all of its efforts, the BJP was able to maintain its majority in the 1991 and
1996 elections. It was invited to form the government after winning the most votes in
the 1996 election.

The BJP government was unable to win a majority in the Lok Sabha since most
other parties were opposed to its policies. It was re-elected in October 1999 after
leading a coalition government from May 1998 to June 1999.

Both of these NDA governments were led by Atal Behari Vajpayee, who served as
Prime Minister for the entire duration of his 1999 government.

In India, a long period of coalition politics preceded the 1989 elections.

Since then, there have been nine central governments, all of which have been
coalition governments or minority governments with the assistance of other parties.

Any administration could be formed in this new phase only with the involvement or
support of a large number of regional parties. In 1989, the National Front, the United
Front in 1996 and 1997, the NDA in 1997, the BJP-led coalition in 1998, the NDA in
1999, and the UPA in 2004 were all examples of this.

The phrase 'Congress system' originated with the Congress party, which was a
'coalition' of various interests, socioeconomic strata, and organisations.

Other Backward Classes' Political Rise

The growth of Other Backward Classes as a political force was a long-term trend of
this period.

Other than SC and ST, some communities are educationally and socially
disadvantaged. These are also known as the "backward castes."

As Congress's popularity among the 'backward classes' waned, so did their support
for it. This opened the door for non-Congress parties to gain traction in these
localities.

The Janata Party government of 1977 was the first political expression of these
parties' emergence at the national level.

Many of the Janata Party's components, such as the Bharatiya Kranti Dal and the
Samyukta Socialist Party, had a strong rural base among the OBC.

How was the ‘Mandal' put into action?

In the 1980s, the Janata Dal pulled together a similar coalition of political parties with
considerable OBC support.

The National Front government's decision to follow the Mandal Commission's

recommendations further shaped the politics of the 'Other Backward Classes.'
People from the OBC community were more aware of their identity as a result of the
heated national debate about job reservation. It aided those seeking to mobilise
these groupings for political purposes.

During this time, various parties arose to advocate for better chances for OBCs in
school and work, as well as to address the issue of the OBCs' share of power.

These parties argued that because OBCs make up a significant portion of Indian
society, they should be given proper representation in administration and a fair share
of political power.

Political Fallouts
The Dalit political organisation grew in the 1980s.

The BAMCEF (Backward and Minority Classes Employees Federation) was founded
in 1978. This was not your typical government employee's trade union.

It took a strong stance in favour of Bahujan—SCs, STs, OBCs, and minorities—

gaining political power.

Kanshi Ram founded the Dalit Shoshit Samaj Sangharsh Samiti, which ultimately
became the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP).

The BSP began as a minor party in Punjab, Haryana, and Uttar Pradesh, primarily
supported by Dalit people. However, it made a breakthrough in Uttar Pradesh during
the 1989 and 1991 elections.
This was the first time in independent India that a political party with a majority of
Dalit voters had won such a large number of votes.

The BSP, under Kanshi Ram's leadership, was envisioned as a pragmatic political
party. It took comfort in the fact that Bahujans (SC, ST, OBC, and religious
minorities) made up the majority of the population and were a powerful political force
due to their numbers.

Since then, the BSP has grown into a dominant political force in the state, serving in
government on several occasions. Its strongest supporters are still Dalit voters, but it
increasingly has backing from a variety of other social groups.

Dalit politics and OBC politics have developed separately and often in rivalry in
various places of India.

Communalism, Secularism, Democracy

The Birth of Bharatiya Janata Party
Following the Emergency, the Bharatiya Jana Sangh merged with the Janata Party
to become the Janata Party. After the Janata Party's demise and disintegration in
1980, followers of the old Jana Sangh created the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

The BJP embraced ‘Gandhian Socialism' as its ideology and established a broader
political platform.

After 1986, the party's philosophy began to emphasise the Hindu nationalist element.
The BJP embraced 'Hindutva' politics and a mobilisation strategy aimed at Hindus.

Hindutva
Hindutva, which means 'Hinduness,' was characterised by its founder, V. D.
Savarkar, as the foundation of Indian (and Hindu) nationhood. It effectively meant
that everyone who wanted to be a part of the Indian people had to recognise India
not just as their "fatherland" (Prabhu) but also as their "holy country" (punyabhu).

Hindutva supporters think that a great nation can only be established on the
foundation of a strong and united national culture.

Around 1986, two events became pivotal in the BJP's politics as a 'Hindutva' party.
The Shah Bano case, which occurred in 1985, was the first. In this case, a 62-year-
old divorced Muslim woman had sued her former spouse for support.

Her case was heard by the Supreme Court, which found in her favour. The Supreme
Court's decision was seen by orthodox Muslims as a violation of Muslim personal
law.

The government passed the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act,
1986, at the request of some Muslim leaders, nullifying the Supreme Court's
decision.

Many women's organisations, Muslim groups, and the majority of academics

condemned the government's decision.

The BJP slammed the Congress government's policy as an unwarranted surrender

to the minority community and "appeasement."

What was the Ayodhya Dispute all about?

In February 1986, the Faizabad district court ordered that the Babri Masjid be
unlocked so that Hindus might pray at the site, which they deemed a temple.

The Babri Masjid mosque in Ayodhya has been the subject of a long-running
controversy. Mir Baqi, the Mughal emperor Babur's General, erected the Babri
Masjid in the 16th century.

Some Hindus think it was built after a temple for Lord Rama was demolished near
what is thought to be his birthplace.

The argument escalated into a legal battle that has lasted decades. The mosque
was shut up in the late 1940s because of a legal case.

Mobilisation began on both sides as soon as the Babri Masjid's locks were opened.
This local conflict grew into a huge national issue, causing communal strife.

This has become a huge electoral and political issue for the BJP. It organised
several symbolic and mobilisation programmes alongside numerous other
organisations, such as the RSS and the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP).

This massive mobilisation resulted in a heightened atmosphere and numerous

instances of communal violence. The BJP organised a large march dubbed the
Rathyatra from Somnath in Gujarat to Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh to gain public
support.

The Supreme Court handed down its decision in the Ayodhya Ram Janma Bhoomi-
Babri Masjid land dispute case on November 9, 2019.

Before the announcement of the verdict, security measures were intensified around
the country. In UP, Delhi, and other states, Section 144 was enacted.

The Mosque's Demolition

In December 1992, the temple's supporters organised a Karseva, or volunteer
service by devotees, to help build the temple.

The situation has deteriorated across the country, particularly in Ayodhya. The State
administration was required by the Supreme Court to ensure that the contested
location was not jeopardised.

Thousands of people from all across the country assembled in Ayodhya on

December 6, 1992, to demolish the mosque.

In many regions of the country, this news sparked conflicts between Hindus and
Muslims. In January 1993, the violence in Mumbai erupted once more and lasted for
over two weeks.

The State government, which was led by the BJP, was overthrown by the Centre.
Other States in which the BJP was in power were also placed under the President's
administration.

The Supreme Court has filed a case against Uttar Pradesh's Chief Minister for
contempt of court after he gave an assurance that the disputed edifice will be
protected.

The BJP has publicly expressed regret for the events in Ayodhya. The federal
government established a commission to look into the events that led to the
mosque's demolition.

Most political parties denounced the demolition, claiming that it violated secularism's
values. Since 1984, this democratic climate of communal harmony has faced
numerous challenges.

This occurred in 1984 when anti-Sikh riots erupted.

Anti-Muslim riots in Gujarat

 In Gujarat, large-scale violence against Muslims occurred in February and March
2002. An incident at a station called Godhra served as the initial catalyst for this
violence.

The bogie of a train returning from Ayodhya, which was packed with Karsevaks, was
set on fire. That fire claimed the lives of 57 people. Suspecting Muslims for setting
fire to the temple, large-scale rioting against Muslims occurred the next day in
several regions of Gujarat.

This violence claimed the lives of about 1100 people, the majority of them were
Muslims. The Gujarat government's role in failing to contain violence was criticised
by the National Human Rights Commission.

The Indian Election Commission has decided to postpone the assembly elections.
The Gujarat riots, like the anti-Sikh riots of 1984, demonstrate that the governmental
machinery is subject to sectarian passions.

Emergence Consensus
After 1989, the period is commonly referred to as the decline of Congress and the
emergence of the BJP. In the 2004 Lok Sabha elections, the NDA was defeated by
the UPA, a new coalition government (United Progressive Alliance).

The Left Front parties came out in support of the administration. The Congress party
saw a partial resurgence in the 2004 elections. After the 1990s, the political
processes that unfolded around us revealed several Coalition factions.

What are the components of Consensus growth?

Despite fierce competition and several confrontations, most parties appear to have
reached an agreement. There are four components to this agreement.

 A new set of economic policies has been agreed upon.

 Acceptance of the backward classes' political and social claims
 Acceptance of the role of state-level parties in the country's governance
 A focus on pragmatic factors rather than intellectual beliefs and political alliances
that are not ideologically compatible.

Sub-Topic: ‘NDA III & IV’

The Bharatiya Janata Party, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, got an absolute
majority in the Lok Sabha elections held in May 2014, and after nearly 30 years in
Indian politics, a strong government with an absolute majority was established at the
Centre. Though called NDA III, the BJP-led coalition of 2014 was largely different
from its predecessor coalition governments. Where the previous coalitions were led
by one of the national parties, the NDA III coalition was not only steered by a
national party, i.e., BJP but it was also dominated by BJP with an absolute majority
of its own in Lok Sabha. It was also called a ‘surplus majority coalition’. In that sense,
a major transformation could be like coalition politics, which could be seen from a
party-led coalition to a dominated coalition.
The 2019 Lok Sabha elections, the 17th since independence, once again brought
back BJP-led NDA [NDA IV] to the centre of power by winning more than 350 seats
out of 543. The BJP, on its own, won 303 seats in Lok Sabha, the biggest number
any single party had won in the lower house since 1984, when Congress swept the
elections in the aftermath of Mrs Indira Gandhi’s assassination. Based on the
tumultuous success of the BJP in 2019, Social Scientists have started equating the
contemporary party system with the ‘BJP System’ where an era of one-party
dominance, like the ‘Congress System’, has once again started appearing in the
democratic politics of India.

Sub-Topic: ‘Issues of Development and Governance’

In addition to schemes already existing, several socio-economic welfare schemes
have been initiated to make development and governance accessible to the masses,
such as –

Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana, Swachh Bharat Abhiyan, Jan-Dhan Yojana,

Deendayal Upadhyaya Gram Jyoti Yojana, Kisan Fasal Bima Yojna, Beti Bachao
Beti Padhao, Ayushman Bharat Yojana, etc. All these schemes are intended to take
the administration to the doorstep of the common man by making the rural
households, particularly the women, real beneficiaries of the Central Government
schemes.

Picture/Map Based Questions [5 Marks]

1. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:

Questions
1. What does the cartoon represent?
2. Describe the role of such government in Indian Democratic set up.
3. What does this statement “Support the government from outside” mean?
Answer:
1. A puppet government showing example of coalition government.
2. It plays negative and positive role both. In a negative way, it provides unstable
form of government.
In a positive way, it provides opportuni¬ties to regional parties also in forming ruling
alliances.
3. No direct participation and position in government but support in the formation of
government.

2. Study the picture given below and answer the questions that follow:

Questions
1. What does the picture indicate?
2. Which party is being referred to as one party dominance?
3. Identify female character in the cartoon.
Answer:
1. It depicts change from one party dominance to a multi-party alliance system.
2. Congress.
3. Mrs. Indira Gandhi.