Political Diary

New Delhi, 13 May 2025

Op Sindoor: Pak Badnam Hua,

DARLINGS,  KIS  KE  LIYE!

By Poonam I Kaushish 

Every tragedy falls into two parts: a complication is followed by denouncement and unraveling, said Aristotle. Pakistan learnt the hard way post 22 April’s terror strike killing 22 tourists in Pahalgam. In this battle, Prime Minister Modi has come out trumps. Not only did he payback for Pahalgam, change the terms of engagement “Water and blood cannot flow together” but showed the world “Jo kaha woh kiya! Ye nyay ki akhand pratigya hai.” 

In just 25 minutes Operation Sindoor, India defined a new normal: Raising Pakistan’s cost of a terror strike. Whereby, New Delhi made it unequivocally clear to Islamabad that terrorist incidents will neither be ignored nor tolerated. A calculated doctrinal of zero tolerance to terrorism. Whereby, it is willing to do the job that Pakistan is unwilling or cannot do --- Eliminate terrorists. 

Importantly, India sent three clear messages: Kashmir is no longer a bilateral issue between neighbours. It is no longer an issue at all. The only real matter between the two is Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK). Two, it has no compunctions of crossing the Line of Control (LoC) and striking Lakshar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Moammed’s bases Muridke and Bahawalpur. Alongside, debilitating strikes on over 12 military bases including Lahore and Jacobabad.

Thereby, reiterating every act of terrorism will be considered an “act of war” and receive proportionate response. Three, suspension of Indus Waters Treaty and trade bans will continue keeping relations strained given Pakistan's economic and financial constraints.

Clearly, Pakistan has got caught between a rock and hard place even as it conveys not rolling over and playing dead by starting a new cyclical political-economy of violence on military and civilian infrastructure. But to what avail? Showcasing to the world be it US, Saudi Arabia, Qatar etc   that it is the fountainhead of terror. Earning it the ignominy: Pakistan badnam hua,darling kiske liye! 

Little did it realize that terrorism and escalation by State actors need funding that leaves, however, nebulous a money trail. This is what got Islamabad on the grey list of Financial Action Task Force, the global money laundering and terrorist financing watchdog. 

Both sides have made their point. Both used military escalation to test the other's resolve and find strengths and weaknesses of their defenses. Both realize they cannot prevail in a war without inflicting and sustaining massive destruction. 

Undoubtedly, this precarious unpredictable uneasy truce has triggered long term instability and hostilities between the warring neighbours. It highlights the fragility of such agreements in the context of deep-seated mistrust and the complex dynamics of civil-military relations, particularly in Pakistan.

In fact since 2019 Indo-Pak ties have been delicate as there have been no diplomatic engagement and New Delhi and Islamabad are in the race for armed one upmanship and inflicting damage. Since 2014 India has had three military crisis with Pakistan, Uri 2016 , Balakot 2019 and now.

Underscoring this paradigm shift in its Pak policy, New Delhi made plain that past precedents are not binding on it in its dealing with recalcitrant Islamabad and its terrorists’ army. This was communicated to over 25 countries. Modi’s success internationally can be gauged by the firm US backing to the strikes, notwithstanding President Trump taking credit for the truce.

Despite India’s upper hand, not a few feel discontent over agreeing to a ceasefire arguing Pakistan should not have been spared this time. This is understandable but a deeper analysis shows India achieved its intended goals by inflicting significant damage on Pakistan through its operation.

Some observers believe this lull will hold in the short term due to international pressure with both countries recognising costs of escalation. Or it’s a ruse to reinforce before another offensive. Perhaps. The worry is the long term instability that these hostilities have triggered. The next Pahalgam attack would mean a full scale war. And this time it will start on a much higher escalatory ladder.

Undeniably, though the de-escalation might mark the end of India-Pakistan worst military confrontation in 25 years, relations with Pakistan are likely to continue to be challenging and will not lead easily to an enduring peace. Specially, till Islamabad shuts its tap on terrorism.

New Delhi has managed to push Pakistan to the margins of international relevance. Islamabad’s goal is to drag India’s confrontation so that the world starts viewing them as equals. But our goals are greater. Economic power-house and self reliance. We cannot let our guard down given that a hurt Islamabad might be licking its wounds but is readying to fight another day.

True, it is not in the interest of either country or peace and stability in the region to have a larger military conflict. Asserted a defence strategist “New Delhi is facing two difficult relationships at the same time – Pakistan and China. This escalation has created a two-front problem for India. India's Pakistan problem does not exist in isolation. It comes with other geopolitical factors like our difficult relationship with China. It has to manage all of this along with its ambitions of becoming a superpower, its growing economy and favourable external climate globally.”

With an economically and politically bankrupt Pakistan has less to lose and more to gain. India understands future containment requires more than kinetic action, it needs to force Islamabad’s hand by taking out terrorist infrastructure and its funding routes along-with shoring up international support in a Trump-skittled world. Make Pakistan’s Establishment know that wages of war are inexorably high.

For now, both militaries remain on high alert but the risk of further flare-ups --- for instance through misinterpreting drone activity or artillery fire --- remains high, especially in contested areas along the LoC. Pakistan will fight tooth and nail for the abeyance of the Indus Water Treaty by India

What next? New Delhi new assertiveness would need all the wisdom and restraint to ensure that it remains in control of the Indo-Pak script as both have limited room for imposing costs on each other, without risking major catastrophe. With Pakistan weak or strong there is no avoiding the political process in the sub-continent.   

South Block knows only too well a war with Pakistan would cast a shadow over India’s growing economy—it’s the fastest-growing big economy in the world—as well as raising international alarm. Holding out threat of a nuclear threat is more of a deterrent as it a well established norm that since Hiroshima in 1945 technology in a unipolar world talk of nuclear war is baloney. Hence the plan to escalate this diplomatically and politically.

It remains to be seen if the latest crisis has strengthened Pakistan Army Chief Gen Munir’s hold over power or it has cracked open some space for civilian leaders who pushed for de-escalation despite the Army Chief’s hard line. One hopes it realizes the dangers of war and results in deeper introspection of its tragic state of affairs, even as it continues the muscle-flexing and war rhetoric.

In sum much work is needed going forward to ensure we don't see a repeat of this crisis and that should be the primary focus for both sides. It will take a lot more to address the long-term distrust between the two countries. As a rising global power, India has a lot to lose and has a lot to manage because of this escalation. The next few years will tell us how it's going to play out.

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

Political Diary

New Delhi, 6 May 2025

Kamandal = Mandal 2.0 

NOT WHO, BUT WHAT  

By Poonam I Kaushish 

Circa 1901: “I don’t believe in caste in the modern sense as it connotes distinction in status and is an evil,” Mahatma Gandhi. After him, Ambedkar waged a relentless struggle against caste arguing for its annihilation to rebuild a social democracy. Alas, from a social phenomenon that divided people, caste has become central to our political system. Not who, but what you are. 

Circa 2025: Call it a turning point or milestone every Party wants to know the caste composition of a voter, constituency before selecting a candidate. Succinctly, its’ the State catching up with the lived socio-economic and political reality as it shapes hierarchy and discrimination, culture and belonging. That too, by using Ambedkar’s name to perpetuate a system that he fought. 

BJP which battled caste surveys that militated against its concept of Hindu unity has today embraced it marking a momentous ideological shift. Reason? Caste is at the heart of Indian politics as a mobilization tool polarised on caste basis with elections being fought on caste considerations. Voters are regressively but decisively voting along caste lines. The upsurge of OBCs and their demand for a more equitable participation and representation make quotas and queues the centerpiece of affirmative action policies at the Centre. 

Post its’ below par performance in last year’s Lok Sabha polls specially in UP BJP decided to bite the bullet aided by RSS putting its seal of approval and Bihar allies JD (U) and LJP plugging it. Blunting India Bloc shrill demand for caste census, it wrested the idea and announced it. No matter, it’s recent assertion of recognizing only four castes: women, farmers, poor and youth. 

Besides, it is worried about possible OBC attrition in elections in crucial States Bihar this year, followed by Assam, Tamil Nadu and Kerala 2026, the Saffron Sangh now seeks a broader social coalition that can translate into pan-India support. With Kamandal (Hindutva) as a steady ideological base, BJP is now experimenting with MandaI 2.0 aimed at socially inclusive vote consolidation. 

Consequently, as caste census becomes the central focus in national politics the Party doesn’t want to remain a mute spectator, instead become an active proponent signalling its intent to lead rather than resist by including caste enumeration in the coming census. 

In fact, a BJP insider avers the Party has repeatedly recalibrated its social engineering to suit evolving political realities and forms Modi’s rise in 2014  when it shed its ‘suit boot ki sarkar’ image through welfare schemes like Ujjwala Awas Yojana to appeal to poorer sections across castes. Post Supreme Court’s dilution of the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act 2018, NDA Government restored its provision despite backlash from upper castes in States. 

Thereafter, it introduced a 10% Economically Weaker Section (EWS) to retain upper castes votes. Thereby, showcasing its responsiveness to social undercurrents which worked in Maharashtra and Haryana but not Jharkhand resulting in two consecutive defeats. 

Pertinently, Bihar, Karnataka and Telangana have completed caste surveys. Interestingly, the results also subtly endorsed the idea of giving representation to Muslims based on their caste by categorising various Muslim communities under different caste umbrellas. 

But what will be done with that knowledge? BJP’s ally in Bihar JD(U) released its caste survey in October 2023 as part of RLD-Congress Mahagathbandhan whereby 63% of the State’s 13 crore population belonged to castes under EBC and OBC categories SC 19.65% and upper castes 15.52%. 

In Congress-ruled Karnataka Muslims are the single largest community 12.87%, next SC 12% with politically and economically powerful Lingayats 11.09% third, Vokkaligas10.31% fourth, Kurubas 7.38%, ST 7.1%, ST Valmiki-Nayaka 30,31,656 (5.07%). In Telangana 56.33% are Backward Classes, SCs/STs 17.43% and 10.45%, Muslim 12.56%. 

Currently, BJP sees OBCs as two blocks --- dominant and non-dominant, upper and lower. It intends to woo dominant castes like Yadavs, Kurmis, and Kushwahas in Bihar and UP and Vokkaligas in Karnataka. Any sub-categorisation will close doors on these sub-castes and make Mandal 1 progenies Akhilesh, Lalu and Nitish stronger in their communities. 

Both BJP and Congress recognize they have to address caste as a political category, not through patronage. True, enumerating caste will help with accurate information --- size, literacy levels, occupational structures. It helps structuring opportunity and social mobility. It influences choices and trajectories from education, employment, birth, marriage and death ritiuals. It would immediately be visible if a caste is denied basic facilities and infra.

A caste census would help address historical injustices and discrimination, be useful in formulating appropriate policies to target Government welfare schemes and policies ensuring they reach intended beneficiaries. Thereby, giving the rootless down-trodden a new identity and attitudinal changes. 

Questionably, none are wiser how JD(U) or Congress-ruled Karnataka and Telangana have used surveys for targeted interventions since there release? Also, caste sizes will always be a hot potato. See how Karnataka is facing deluge of accusations of inaccuracy from both within and BJP. What use caste enumeration if its outcome is limited to power politics? 

Already, BJP is worried about the running feud between UP’s upper caste Rajput Chief Minister Yogi with OBC MLAs alongside OBC allies Apna Dali and Nishad Parties Anupriya Patel and Sanjay Nishad. As also in Bihar. 

Indisputably, caste is a major socio-political fault line which will influence political alignments and voter choices and form the core of affirmative action by the State. A census will force Parties to reset their approach to political representation questions and reshape their stance on reservation. 

Truth is Governments have limited capacity to wholesale improve socio-economic inequalities as caste numbers are likely to spur agitations for more quotas in the name of affirmative action which is all a Government can do. To pull people out of economic backwardness Government needs to facilitate economic investment, education and training of youth for employment. 

Without these pillars no amount of data collected and collated it is going to be status quo for those discriminated against and forced to remain socially backward. Fundamental to progress is education, health, mobility, law and order and availability and access to justice. A caste census  is not vital to ensure this. Also it could ensnare one in an ‘identity trap’ which should be dealt with simultaneously. 

A lot will depend on how the caste questionnaire is designed along-with connecting the dots between data and Government policy. Certainly, the census will pave the way for delimitation exercise --- OBC numbers and the gaps they point to may blunt the North-South fault line. It may lead to demands for extending quotas and for removing Supreme Court’s cap of 50% reservation. 

Clearly, caste is a slippery slope as Janata Dal’s VP Singh of Mandal 1.0 learnt the hard way. There are many challenges ahead. For BJP it is a risky gamble as it goes against its ideological grain and presumed interest of its oldest and loyal support base. However, this pivot is inescapable as it pursues the idea of a consolidated Hindu society. If played smartly, it may help the Party sweep aside the Mandal legacy and assume ownership of OBC empowerment. 

In the ultimate, the fight for getting the upper hand and votes has been reduced to politics of optics and perception, underscoring present reality and exposes the socio-political undercurrents at play. Time will tell how the gambit of caste census plays out and shapes the future of Indian democracy.  ----- INFA 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

Political Diary

New Delhi, 29 April 2025

Pahalgam Terror Tango  

BLEEDING PAK WITH 1000 CUTS  

By Poonam I Kaushish 

Circa April 16, 2025: Twenty four year-old Himanshi is exhilarated and dreams of a married life with 26 year old Lt Narwal.

Circa April 22, 2025: Himanshi is widowed. Even as bridal bangles jingle on wrists and sindoor is fresh in her hair reminder of a honeymoon hacked to death.

Narwal was among 26 male tourists enjoying their holiday with families in salubrious Baisaran Pahalgam killed. Words fail me in the horror of the savage terror attack which began as collating beautiful memories, ended in a page soaked with blood and tears. Plunging the country into grief and provoking nationwide anger demanding retribution. 

Predictably, Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) offshoot The Resistance Front (TRF) owned up only to retract later in the face of worldwide condemnation. The denial is disbelieved thanks to the litany of Pakistani-directed terrorist attacks following 1999 Kargil conflict. 

Yet, one thought post Uri and 2019 Balakot strike to avenge the Pulwama attack on a 78 vehicles convoy of 2500 CRPF jawans travelling from Jammu to Srinagar, terrorists had learnt a lesson. But one was wrong.

Undoubtedly, payback will follow. Prime Minister Modi has made plain, “India will identify, track, punish every terrorist and their backers bigger than they can imagine and we will pursue them to the ends of Earth.” Already New Delhi has taken punitive action below the military threshold: Kept 64-year-old Indus Water Treaty in abeyance, closed Attari border, sent Pakistani visa holders back, expelled more Pakistani diplomats and withdrawn its attaches from Islamabad. 

Yet, as New Delhi chooses the next course of action it will be difficult to shake of the sense of despair this kind of terrorism produces. A successful military operation might be an act of justice. It might restore a sense of confidence in the Government’s capabilities and perhaps satiate the desire for revenge. But even if these actions are successful we will continue to remain close to the edge of an abyss. 

As we have seen this movie once too often, with antecedents going back to the 1980s and 1990s. Whereby, the script is tiresomely familiar: Islamist terror groups created, armed, trained, and guided by Pakistan’s ISI, kill innocents in India. Islamabad denies involvement even as groups therein “take credit” for attacks. The world denounces it. India carefully calibrates its response so as not to provoke a larger war. Once the tension settles everyone settles back to business-as-usual. Until it happens again. 

Undeniably, the attack exposes the tenuous links in Pakistan’s ruling troika ---- Establishment, Army and ISI. New Delhi, times out of number forgets that its neighbour has been nurtured on a military psyche whereby it views India as an ideological, not solely military problem fed on a staple anti-India tirade since 1947. For the troika seeped in armed tradition along-with its jihadist proxies, the ‘core’ issue of Kashmir is an article of faith. Succinctly, described by late Zulfikar Ali Bhutto as “bleeding India with a thousand cuts.” 

Pahalgam shows Pakistan is the biggest enemy of normalcy in Kashmir. Defence strategists aver  Islamabad timed the attack as it is desperate for wider confrontation to deflect global attention from its own existence-threatening domestic failings. It wants US, China to get involved. Confessed Pakistan Defence Minister, “We have been supporting, training and funding terrorist organisations for three decades as dirty work for the West --- US and Britain.”  

As India readies for a strong and swift response it should not take the bait, instead hit Pakistan where it hurts by working closely with Iran, Afghanistan and China. With US President Trump breathing down its neck Beijing wants to restore cordial ties with New Delhi. Can it get Islamabad to crackdown on terrorists? If not, we know it will never abandon its “all-weather friend.” 

In this age of real politik, India will remain at the mercy of terrorist organizations which will always have the upper hand in choosing the time and place of the next attack. Our leaders should not be under any illusion that the death of the fidayeens will deter jihadis operating from Pakistan and their State sponsors from carrying on their irrational jihad. In fact, they could raise a lethal phase of violence, notwithstanding Islamabad’s diplomatic isolation. 

What next? New Delhi needs all its wits, military intelligence, resources, wisdom and restraint to ensure that it remains in control of the Indo-Pak script and teach Pakistan their criminal behaviour will exact a heavy price. One way is to adopt the Israeli Defence Forces strategy which aims to cause the opponent more damage (quantitatively and qualitatively) than the opponent caused Israel in the same time span. The fear of punitive retaliation would delay the next conflict and restrain the enemy's ambitions.

For the success of any strategy be it combative or “limited” war one needs national will, great swiftness and sagacity more than readiness to use military power. War is an option every nation prepares. This entails a clear view of where the dangers lie, and of what kinds of responses are necessary to meet those dangers. It includes also a basic, crystalline faith that India is on the right path and that Kashmir is worth defending. 

While an overt message needs to be sent, covert operations will also have to be enhanced. Key militant leaders and infrastructure within Pakistan cannot be allowed to feel secure. India must also employ cyber warfare tactics to disrupt militant communications and operations. 

Consequently, the success of counter-terrorism lies in degrading LeT, JeM and TRF capabilities, forcing them to change their intentions and denying them opportunities to strike. New Delhi  needs to think of ways to neutralise their fast-growing domestic base, availability of hardware and human resource, collaborative linkages with organized crime, gun runners, drug syndicates, hawala operators, subversive radical groups etc.

For any anti-terrorist operation to succeed one must be focused on the vitals, keeping a watch on the essentials, deliberate and debate the options and leave the desirables till the vitals have been achieved and essentials addressed. One only hopes that whatever action the Government takes is prudent in the larger sense, not performative or reckless.

Certainly, in this zero-sum game, muscle-flexing, war rhetoric and one-upmanship will continue till Kashmir is resolved. Pahalgam’s horror is a stark reminder the policy of “benign neglect” India had pursued towards Pakistan doesn’t work. We need to be tough to punish and deter cross-border transgressions. Make clear that protection to terrorists by Islamabad is unacceptable. They need to be smoked out and bombed, a la US seals of Osama bin Laden at Abbottabad.

Our leaders must understand the nature of threat and adopt a strategy that’s in tune with the situation. Any Indian response to Pahalgam will therefore involve a mix of measures targeting Pakistan and international community. India's message must teach Pakistan's military leadership their criminal behaviour will exact a heavy price. Security agencies have to uncover terror networks and linkages to nail the perpetrators. It must choose targets and path carefully while firewalling citizens from consequences. 

Modi knows only too well staying ahead is the name of the game. The nation which survives is the one that rises to meet the moment, which has the wisdom to recognize the threat and the will to turn it back, and does so before it is too late. Modi has made plain: Let not any one kick India around with tall talk of bleeding India with a thousand cuts! Will Pakistan heed? ----- INFA 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

Political Diary

New Delhi, 22 April 2025

Language Wars

GAME OF POWER?

By Poonam I Kaushish

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet, said Shakespeare in Romeo and Juliet. A quote which underscores the war of words over language across India: Hindi vs Tamil vs Urdu vs Marathi etc. A political tongue-twister!

The decades-old spat over Hindi imposition in Tamil Nadu has erupted again. Wherein, Prime Minister Modi’s Government is locked in a bitter dispute with DMK Government accusing New Delhi of trying to impose Hindi on schools, a charge that New Delhi denies. Along-with a war of words over NDA Sarkar denying education funds to the State by using the Nation Education Policy (NEP),  as a smokescreen to push Hindi, given State’s refusal to accept the three-language formula.

Modi mocked Tamil leaders, “Ministers talk about pride in their language but always write letters to me and sign off in English. Why don’t they use Tamil language? Where is their Tamil pride?” Chief Minister Stalin replied with an ominous warning, “Don’t throw stones at a beehive…Don’t aspire to see the unique fighting spirit of Tamils.”

Questionably, what’s the spat about? Is Modi Government’s trying to force Tamil children to learn Hindi? Why is Hindi so divisive in Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra ? What do all have against Urdu?

Succinctly, the dispute is all about the NEP, introduced in 1968 and updated in 2020. The original policy mandated a three-language formula. Hindi-speaking States in Northern India were required to teach Hindi, English and a third Indian language in school – preferably a language from Southern India. Non-Hindi-speaking States needed to teach local language, Hindi and English. Tamil Nadu’s neighbouring States also speak Dravidian languages like Telugu, Kannada and Malayalam.

The idea behind the three-language formula was to push Hindi as a link language in a country which is home to the world’s largest pool of languages. The Constitution recognises 121 languages, including 22 as official. While, Hindi is widely spoken by 520 million (43%) Tamil, fifth in place, is spoken by 69 million (5.7%) people.

When revised 2020, the Education policy retained the three-language formula but allowed more flexibility for regions to choose three languages, with at least two being Indian. But even that is unacceptable to Tamil Nadu, because it never accepted the three-language formula. Only two languages, Tamil and English are taught in schools.

Ditto Maharashtra where language continues to be a sensitive issue. The State Government's move to introduce Hindi as a compulsory third language for primary classes in Marathi and English-medium schools has touched a raw nerve. Opposition Congress and Thackeray's Shiv Sena have voiced strong objections against Centre's three-language policy. They want a ‘Marathi first’ policy citing Tamil Nadu’s example.  Arguing the State formed in 1960 following an agitation by Maharashtra Sangarsh Samiti which advocated formation of a State of native Marathi speakers. 

Even as the State boasts of being a melting pot of people of different cultures, States and coexistence, the reality is different. The state of coexistence is not a given, but constantly negotiated by Marathi and non-Marathi migrant residents. Add to it competition for resources and jobs often upsets the delicate balance of interest and populist politicians weaponise language to fuel resententment and polarise voters for electoral gains.

In fact, many metros --- Bengaluru, Chennai, Mumbai and Gurugram have experienced such divisive politics vis-à-vis street mobilizations and privileging of local language over other languages to legislate action for reserving  job for native residents.

Besides, in 1953, Telugu speaking people, (81 million) agitated which led to Andhra Pradesh breaking away from Tamil Nadu. That set the template for linguistic re-organisation of all Indian States a few years later. State borders were redrawn, mostly on the basis of who spoke which language.

And many States other than Tamil Nadu also opposed mandatory teaching in Hindi under the 1968 education policy. But only Tamil Nadu broke with the national decree and pursued a two-language formula – Tamil and English.

Today, Urdu too has ignited a controversy. Supreme Court while hearing a petition challenging Urdu’s use on a municipal building’s signboard and whether it flouted ‘Rajbhasha’ Marathi observed, “The prejudice against Urdu stems from the misconception that Urdu is alien to India. This is incorrect. Urdu, like Hindi and Marathi is an Indo-Aryan language. It’s a language born in this land.”

Undoubtedly, the ruling highlighted the Constitutional right to linguistic diversity but also emphasized Urdu’s integral role in India’s syncretic cultural and intellectual heritage. Increasingly viewed through the narrow prism of identity politics that considered Urdu to be an Islamic import, there has been a push back against Urdu. In February, Urdu was noticeably absent in UP’s list of languages for translation in Assembly’s proceedings.

Critics argue, “Bluntly, language has always been a major fault line in our polity which has also shaped the contour of our federalism. Worse, language is a game of power, the power to impose your code or language. It’s not about communication. Like, you don’t know this language therefore you have less power than me.”

Pertinently, the three-language formula was not ever put in place keeping children’s education in mind but to address speakers who refused to accept Hindi imposition. Adding, Centre is supposed to represent India and all of its myriad languages but its focus is primarily n pushing Hindi.

 “Government is investing and promoting Hindi. Example: All Government’s schemes bear Hindi names: Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana, Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana etc. Also it has a dedicated Hindi Division to promote Hindi overseas, including translations, speeches and statements through embassies. It plans to send 3000 Hindi teachers to Northeastern States, where Hindi is not common”.

Other argue for treating all recognized languages as equals and against the imposition of any one language as official or national.

Realistically, while most non-Hindi speaking States taught Hindi, most Hindi-speaking States picked Sanskrit as the third language which is not in everyday use any more , though it is being taught in schools as it is a high-scoring subject

However, one fails to understand the brouhaha about Hindi as under NEP 2020, Hindi is an optional third language for non-Hindi-speaking States, not mandatory --- that too for the first time. The Government insists it promotes use of non-Hindi languages. Regional languages, including Tamil are used for in examinations for Central administration jobs.

Remember, language is not religion. It does not represent religion. Language belongs to a community, region and people. Language is culture. Rather than drawing a dividing line all languages should be celebrated as a meeting ground, an oven tapestry of ideas, culture and people.    

As a Hindi poet said, “Majdhaar mein naiya dole to maanjhi paar lagaaye, maanjhi jo naav duboye useh kaun bachaye? (If boat shakes midstream, boatman takes it across, if boatman sinks boat, who will save it?)

Clearly, the histories of States need to be kept in mind as Centre engages with their Governments which refuse to yield any inch on language. Aspiring for a monolingual existence is a fraught idea which militates against India’s political and Constitutional history. More so, in a unipolar and multi-language world.

The big challenge is to balance linguistic sub-nationalism with Unitarian demands of the nation- State. Both can co-exist in a federal system. The periodic and perhaps, inevitable rise in tensions need to be negotiated in a give-and-take spirit as also within principles outlined in the Constitution.  Will all abide? ---- INFA           

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)