A Review of Institutional and Developmental Issues in North-East India

Introduction

The North-Eastern Region (NER) of India extends to north and east of the narrow Siliguri corridor (West Bengal) and comprises the states of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Sikkim and Tripura. These eight states cover an area of 2,62,189 km², constituting 7.98 per cent of the country’s total geographical area and accounting for around 3.77 per cent of the country’s population (2011 Census). The region has a long international boundary, with China and Bhutan in the north, Myanmar in the east, Nepal in the west and Bangladesh in the south west. Most of the hill states in the region such as Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Nagaland are predominantly inhabited by tribal people with a fairly high degree of diversity even within the tribal groups (MDoNER, 2008).

Today, the NER of India is one of the most institutionalised regions of India. Going back to the 1960s, the region was segregated into different states in terms of language and culture. Subsequently, the arrangement of Autonomous District Council (ADC) was brought to decentralise the political arrangement at the grassroots level. The institutional arrangements for the development of industries and infrastructure were made through the North-Eastern Council (NEC) constituted by an Act of Parliament in 1971, and later a separate Ministry of Development of North-Eastern Region (MDoNER) was created in 2001 for better coordination between the region and the Union Government. To deal with the problem of militancy in the region, a special bailout package was adopted whereby many ceasefire agreements were made with different outfits at different points of time. The partition of India in 1947 caused the extreme geopolitical isolation of the Northeast, making it the most regulated, sensitive and exposed territory (Verghese, 2004). Despite the policy initiatives designed to cater to the development needs of the states of NER, the region still remains underdeveloped. The idiom of the political process and development of the region is in consonance with violence, insurgency, ethnic conflict, migration pressure, interstate disputes and so on (Datta, 2001). The NER vision 2020 identifies the gap between the region and the rest of the country in terms of various developmental outcomes such as productivities and capacities of the people and institutions. There are various social, economic, institutional and geographical issues that need to be addressed for an enabling growth environment. The region continues to remain in chaos due to identity issues of different tribes leading to demonstrations and debates for political solutions. The needs and aspirations of various tribes and communities, interstate border disputes, rising youth unemployment, threat of migration resulting in the demand for implementation of Inner Line Permit (ILP) further compound the problem. For instance, since the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 (CAA) was passed by the Parliament of India, there have been huge protests all over the NER especially in Assam leading to casualties of protestors. The protestors fear that granting Indian citizenship to any immigrant irrespective of any religion would create demographic imbalance in the NER. In Meghalaya, bandhs and hartals occur from time-to-time demanding implementation of ILP. Sporadic border disputes between Assam and Nagaland led to deaths of several people in the past. Similarly, among others, demand for a separate statehood of Bodoland and Greater Nagalim has been a major issue in the region. The rate of youth unemployment in the region as per 2011–2012 National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) reports was 6.5 per cent. The way these problems affect the development/under-development of the region is very vital. The post-Independence era saw the evolution of the administrative set-up and development policies that have been changing from time-to-time. Thus, the development issues of the NER of India cannot be studied in isolation without accounting for these varied political, social, economic and institutional factors.

Therefore, an attempt has been made in this article to give an understanding of the various institutional and developmental issues pertaining to NER of India.

This article analyses the theme in five sections. This section presents the background and introduces the theme. ‘Evolving Concept of Governance as Practiced in North-East India’ examines the nature and practice of governance in the post-Independence period of India. ‘Causes of North-East Turmoil’ investigates the causes behind the turmoil of NER; ‘Impact of Upheavals on Development’ assesses the impact of upheavals on development; ‘Development Potentials’ deals with the development status of NER and ‘Implications and Conclusion’ brings out the implications and draws conclusion.

Evolving Concept of Governance as Practiced in North-East India

Since the dawn of independent India in 1947, there have been spectra of policies to administer the north-eastern part of India. The Government of India has been intervening in various developmental and governance aspects of this region.

After independence, the Government of India considered the problem of the tribals in North-East India (NEI) as part of the problem of nation building. The pertinent question of the time was what should be the approach of development towards the NER of India? In this regard, two different policy alternatives, i.e. either assimilation or integration, were thought about to accommodate the tribals of NER into the nation. The policy of integration called for political, economic and administrative integration within a framework of cultural plurality, where minorities can join the majorities without losing their linguistic, religious and cultural identity (Haokip, 2010). Nehru, the then prime minister of India, however, cautioned over the tribal policy by which he mentioned that ‘at the same time we should avoid over administering these areas and in particular sending too many outsiders into tribal territory. It is in between these two extremes positions that we have to function’ (Elwin, 1958, p. xiii). Extremes positions implied treating tribal people as anthropological specimens for study and the other was allowing them to be engulfed by the masses of Indian humanity (Haokip, 2010, p. 90).

Following the independence of the country, ‘Nehru–Elwin policy framework’ was exercised in the NER of India. Accordingly, the framework for governance and development in this part of the country was to be guided by five cardinal principles, which got explicit mention in the second edition of Elwin’s book, A Philosophy for NEFA in 1959. The development priorities were communications, medical facilities, education and better agriculture. In the second five-year plan, an expenditure of a little over eight and a half crores was approved which gave first priority to communications, then to food and health. The five cardinal principles concerning the Government’s attitude towards the tribals to prevent the loss of identity and culture and also for their development were as follows:

People should indulge in developmental activities as per their own capabilities and we should avoid imposing anything on them. We should encourage in every way their own traditional arts and culture.

These principles outline the importance given by the Government of India towards self-development of the tribals of NER. However, it is important for us to enquire how these principles have been translated to the ground realities of tribal self-development?

The defeat against Chinese aggression in 1962 shook the country and changed the course of India’s security and even foreign policy leading to the introduction of a centre periphery model, considering the region as a ‘frontier’ that needs to be protected and defended militarily (Haokip, 2010, pp. 90–91). Thus, the policy of governance was shifted to the management of strategic security of the region with little emphasis on the developmental aspects of the people in the region. This had its repercussions on the region from which arose the desire for self-determination and political representation in the government policymaking. Since then, aspirations for self-autonomy among the various tribes of the NER led to the creation of different states without considering the financial and economic viability. The problems worsened in the region with the origin of armed struggle movement in the 1980s. This led the Government of India to realise that the region lacked political representation and it should be developed economically so as to cater to the various social and economic needs of the people, thus following the policy of development paradigm. Special packages were announced by successive prime ministers for NER (Ramesh, 2005). The underlying assumption of the policy of development paradigm was the belief that once developmental needs are taken care of, the demands for self-autonomy/separate territory could be tackled. This led to the massive financial aid to the region through various institutional arrangements. However, all these initiatives had little impact on the regional economic and social development (Bhattacharya, 2011).

Prakash (2011) pointed out that the NER has more issues to be addressed and challenges to face than any other parts of the country, of which the three important areas of immediate attention are insurgency, infrastructure and governance. The creation of a conducive political, legal and economic environment for building individual capabilities and encouragement of private initiatives depend on the quality of the governance—mechanism, process, systems, structures and institutions. Corruption, squandering of public funds, deteriorating law and order, lack of transparency and accountability, bureaucratic rigmarole, insecurity and so forth are rampant in the region.

Choudhury (2008) stated that governance means management of policy and society by way of adjustment of contesting claims and interests of different groups within a heterogeneous structure. If this notion of governance is at play, then developmental issues would definitely assume centrality in political discourse. As far as the colonial practice in NEI was concerned, two primary principles guided its governance:

to secure the eastern NE Frontier of the empire from the standpoint of their strategic locations and

The post-Independence system of development which followed Nehru–Elwin model deviated to certain extent from this colonial construct of governance. The idea of autonomy in administration was along the lines of safeguarding the values and traditions of the tribals. Although, the provision of the Sixth Schedule to the NER appears to have been a departure from the colonial mode of paternal governance; in reality, the postcolonial mode of governance offered a mixed bag in that it contained colonial traditions of conditional legislation. The study by Singh (2006) unfolded that the British policies of isolation of tribal communities, separate system of administration and their protection have been retained in the postcolonial India. For instance, ‘Inner line’ regulations (since 1873), District Councils, special powers of Governors in relation to tribal areas in the region under the Constitution are examples of British legacy.

Causes of North-East Turmoil

How have the problems of weak governance evolved? Or what problems disturb the peace in the region? In this aspect, Lacina (2009) attempted to give a detailed discussion on the problems of political instability and rule of law in NER. The author argued that the point of disputes in NER were created in the early periods of 1950s when different communities were striving for a subnational state. The prospects for peace got devastated due to the centre’s mishandling of those issues in the early periods. Since then soft autocracy, i.e. patronage of central/state government to one particular local group to maintain political stability has become a generalised pattern of governance in NE India. For instance, the case is presented by Lacina (ibid., pp. 1010–1017) about this nature of governance in different states of NER, which has not solved the issues permanently. Over the years, as the author identified, the aspirations and dissatisfaction of the people in the region have been expressed by youth mainly in two forms. One form is democratic way of protest and strikes in which youth particularly student organisations are active. Second form is extreme form of armed movements for separation and independence dominated by youth. This phenomenon reflects the extent of unemployment of youth and their dissatisfaction, directed against the leadership and governments both at state/regional and national levels. It also indicates the unresponsiveness and rigid attitude of political class and administrative establishments in the region (Singh, 2006).

According to Kikhi (2009), the strong sense of deprivation still exists in the NER. The ideal of pluralism had not taken roots in the NE at the time of Independence. The sense of deprivation as cited by the author may be in any area, viz. economic deprivation, discrimination in employment and other opportunities and political marginalisation. But the worst form of deprivation is the threat to the very existence of an ethnic group, as a distinct sociocultural community.

Consequently, ethnic movements in the region have taken three principal forms: (i) the demand for secession and independence from the Indian Union, (ii) the demand for a separate state and (iii) the demand for Autonomous District Councils under the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution of India.

Datta (2000) in her descriptive study of the vital determinants of the problems in NER of India has viewed the problem of NE India from the perspective of migration and economic resources. According to her, the NER of India suffers from the threat of slow growth of the ethnic population and the fast increasing migration from other parts of the country and neighbours. In the early period of colonisation, it has been found that the Britishers for their economic ventures absorbed Bengali clerks and officials. The Central Indian tribal people and Bihari labourers were absorbed in tea gardens and oil fields of this region. The political tension leading to destruction of peace in the NER was the result of ever-growing number of migrated labourers and the declining population of the native people. This tension was manifested in different forms, namely political agitations, violent struggles, militant activities and insurgencies. Many of the insurgents agree that unchecked migration was one of the prime reasons for their ‘struggle’ against the established order.

Hussain (2003), citing the situational conflict of interests from which sprang many underground groups, narrated that the militancy problem severely affected the functioning of the government, law and order and inter- and intra-community relations in Assam. In the process, a new political culture of violence, kidnapping, killings and extortion emerged forcefully in Assam since the early 1980s. This led to unending fights between the United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA) and the state’s armed forces. Similarly, in other parts of NER states, such types of situations were prevalent. However, these situations of conflict are different from the secessionists’ movements of earlier period, as the aims and objectives of the outfits were genuine and ethnic communities had large support for their noble cause.

Many scholars and intelligentsia hint at the poor economic development as the cause for the prevailing social upheavals in the NER. However, Piazza (2009) strongly argued that terrorism and insurgency are not always the products of poor economic development; rather these are the consequences of the unaddressed political issues. The author viewing the issue of terrorism from the perspective of political mismanagement, attributed it to state failure. It is further observed that countries plagued by state failures are likely to experience terrorism for two reasons: (i) their government institutions are not able to provide adequate political goods to their citizens or to peacefully manage domestic conflicts and (ii) they lack capacity to police their territories or promote law and order. According to Piazza, the root cause of terrorism is political mismanagement, separatist movements, ethnic conflicts, communal tensions, the presence of Scheduled Castes and Tribes, high population growth and the phenomenon of stateless areas. On close observation, the cause of terrorism in India are non-economic aspects such as political, social, demographic and geographic factors, highlighting the spatial distribution of terrorism. The presence of significant inter-ethnic conflict, inter-communal conflict, the significant presence of Scheduled Tribes (adivasis) or Scheduled Castes (dalits), high population growth rates and the presence of stateless areas explain the activism or the birth of terrorism in India.

Based on the question whether it is the state institutions or institutionalised violence (that) has been the cause of under-development in the NER, Hassan (2007) advocating the argument by Piazza argued that the collapse (of governance) in the NER is much more than just about ethnic and secessionist violence. It is really about the ineffectiveness of state agencies to perform their basic functions, i.e. to monopolise legitimate power, protect citizens and influence social and economic behaviour. For instance, the ability of state agencies to enforce laws, tax citizens and maintain transparency and accountability is also poor. The optimum provision of entitlements such as education and health, infrastructure and economic opportunities, etc. are lacking in this part of the country. The author suggested that to enhance institutional capacity, one way out could be to expand the scope of the functions of the state accompanied by transparency and accountability in accordance with the rule of law.

Impact of Upheavals on Development

At this juncture, an important point to ponder over is to know the extent to which the institutions affect the developmental outcomes in this part of the region.

Datta (2000) argued that under-development in the NER has been due to insurgency and violence. This is evident from the fact that many economic development projects have been disrupted in the past by protests against the perceived extractive and exploitative nature of such projects. Some examples are: stopping oil exploration and production in Nagaland, preventing railway extension in Khasi Hills, regular and systematic disruption of oil supply and railway lines in Assam among others.

Sharma (2014) highlighted some agonising effects of the bandh which are mainly economic loss, uneconomic price hike, hostile investment atmosphere and black marketing, institutional loss, effect on social front and so on. On the social front, disruption in educational functioning causes a loss of concentration among students as they have to miss classes. An important effect of this turmoil is the loss of faith, trust and understanding which has very high costs and consequences. The breakdown of institutions, the loss of credibility and the trauma heaped on the vulnerable population stimulate in the long run, a new basis of antagonism, which may take a violent turn with the slightest provocation. This is a long-term loss of social capital. Thus, in the midst of trauma and hostility, a good prospect for economic development and social stability can hardly be visualised.

Although the economic and social loss of the hostilities have not been quantified in NER, Goswami (2005) agreed that the economic development in NE states is very much affected by militancy. He emphasised that militancy imposes additional financial burden on the state government for counter-insurgency operation, diverting funds which could have otherwise been utilised for developmental purposes. He also pointed out that frequent bandhs, blockades and extortions impact the economy adversely.

Parallel to the effects of violence on the economy, another second reason for the under-development of NER is the prevalence of corruption. Corruption is one of the manifestations of governance failure. Corruption as defined by the World Bank is the ‘use of public office for private gain’. According to Kazi (2013), there has been a large leakage of public funds in this part of the country. He argued that the flow of funds from New Delhi to the NER without a foolproof accountability and transparency mechanisms has contributed to increased social tensions. In a nutshell, he attributed the problems of NE to the weak governance.

Kikhi (2009) also added that the measure of burden that corruption of all kinds and extortion by different groups impose on transport cost, increases transaction cost on the entire NER economy. For example, ‘A moving truckload of goods from Moreh to Dimapur, a distance of 316 km, costs Rs 50,000 … Traders claim that to move a truck from Imphal to Guwahati (487 km) costs Rs 35,000’. This implies that there is economic loss in terms of high transaction costs.

Having seen the detrimental effects of the menace of social upheavals and persistence of corruption, the question is: can we come to a generalisation that the people in this part of the country have been accustomed to these menaces? In this light, Sharma (2014) made a noble attempt to understand the perceptions of the people in Manipur regarding the prevalence of frequent bandhs and blockades. An important question of his study was: Do you think that economic blockades and bandhs are the right methods being employed by the civil society organisations to put across their demands in Manipur? The survey suggests that over 70 per cent (175 out of 250 respondents) of the people in Manipur think that bandhs/blockades are not the right methods adopted by the social organisations to put across their demands. Only 25 per cent (63 respondents) justify the bandhs. They feel that this is the only way to make the government listen to them, while 5 per cent remain undecided regarding bandhs. Therefore, it suggests that majority of them are not in favour of bandhs.

Development Potentials

According to Singh (2006), the presence of secessionist, insurgency or separatist activities in the region particularly in Manipur, Assam, Nagaland and Tripura indicate ineffectiveness of policies adopted by the Indian State for national integration and development since 1950. He puts his argument as follows:

Development is a comprehensive term. A developed situation means people not only have the basic necessities of life but equal opportunities are available to all. It is constitutional and moral responsibility of the State to ensure such a situation for its citizens. Failure to do so means that State has failed in its responsibility and lacks legitimacy. Such a State will face challenge to its authority from those who feel that they are left out and discriminated.

Given that the NER states are facing an unfriendly economic environment, it is imperative to know the level of economic development of the region. Hans-Peter Brunner and Global Development Solutions (2010) saw the economy of NER as dependent on agriculture with less scope of industrialisation due to weak infrastructure. They identified lack of small towns and market for goods as a constraint to develop commercial hub for products. They were of the view that property rights issues be dealt with and improvement in the operation of land, labour and capital markets are fundamental to the future development of the region. The export potential of the region and its comparative advantages are in agro-industries, pineapple trade, rubber trade, pisciculture, forests products, bamboo trade and tourism.

Rao and Brunner (2010) also examined the nature of economic governance in the NER. The region to catch up with the all India level has to have double digit growth, and for that, massive investment is the need of the hour. In order to create an enabling environment for market-based development, establishment of peace, law and order and an institutional framework for ensuring property rights as well as connectivity both within and outside the region is important.

Bhattacharya (2011) enquired into the status of NER on the development disparities vis-a-vis the other regions of India. Her works involved looking at NE in a new way, as internally differentiated terrain, where intra-regional specificities need to be given attention.

Another study by Ray and De cited in Bhattacharya (2011) showed that NE with only 3.58 per cent of the total Indian population accounts for 5.77 per cent of the poor in India. The observations noted with respect to the regional economic environment are: NER is highly backward in relation to India’s socio-economic performance and there is a paradox of poverty amidst plenty. These conclusions provoke us to take a deeper question with regard to the developmental initiatives that have been prioritised in NER. This unfolds many aspects of the issues prevalent in this part of the country. As Bhattacharya (ibid.) quotes, ‘for the northeast India, it is not only the size and geographical barriers that matter; a competitive economic environment is also missing’.

Similarly, Nayak and Mishra (2013) examined the level of development in NER in the national perspective by taking eight dimensions, namely (i) physical infrastructure, (ii) social or institutional infrastructure, (ii) industrial performance, (iv) service sector and openness of the region, (v) human development, (vi) employment of the human resources, (vii) privatisation of industry and investment and (viii) public efforts expressed in terms of government expenditure to facilitate promotion, maintenance and governance of development activities. They have found that except for Assam and Tripura, the other states show a very poor performance in almost all the indicators of development. In other aspects of development such as banking, financial services, employment generation, tourism, human development and public efforts to facilitate and maintain developmental activities, there is a mixed finding among different states in the region. The authors opined that under-development is due to rigidities, gaps and imbalances in priorities which broadly suggest governance deficits. Moreover, the authors alerted that two basic requirements of development such as land and labour are of limited supply in the region.

Implications

Governance in the NER is an evolving concept which has changed from time-to-time. The hallmark of the developmental policies and administrative set-up in NER in the post-independence era (since 1947) has been management of the border areas and conflict resolution with little emphasis on the economic and social needs of the people. It was only after 1980s, with the cry for self-autonomy, by various tribal groups, the government started to give attention to the developmental needs of the people. The state machinery here is very weak which is manifested in the lack of rules, law and order, violence, frequent bandhs and blockades.

The problems in NER may be classified into three categories, namely social, economic and governance (Figure 1). The region has been struggling on the one hand to maintain peace and ensure governance, despite timely and sporadic social issues of militancy, interstate border disputes, migration pressure, communal riots, etc. On the other hand, there are glaring economic issues of unemployment, lack of industrial development, infrastructural deficit, under-utilisation of resources. The findings of this study are presented in Figure 1.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Source: Author(s) compilation.

This study gives a fillip to the future course of research by identifying certain issues:

Whether provisions for self-autonomy in terms of institutional arrangements through district councils in many parts of the region and special provisions of constitutional rights in the case of Nagaland and Mizoram have led to the betterment of the NER society? Or whether these special provisions have worsened the situation in NER?

Conclusion

There is presence of cyclical paralysis of development in the NER of India. Lack of investment and infrastructural deficit are due to unfriendly economic environment and inadequate industrialisation and therefore they have pushed the region towards unemployment. In effect, they give rise to social problems of various kinds impacting governance.

The active dominance of insurgency is the cause of under-development in the NER and it is impossible to discuss this region without considering it. This perception about the NER needs to be taken seriously and addressed in the light of contemporary economic and social conditioning of the region. In the recent years, the involvement of militancy in the destruction of peace has come down to a great extent since many outfits have shunned violence and are in the process of peaceful negotiations with the state actors. The recent Bodo Peace Accord 2020 signed between National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB), All Bodo Students Union (ABSU) and the Government of Assam and Union Government of India is a manifestation in this direction. In addition, the number of communal riots in the recent past has declined significantly. The current stability in the governments should bring the region at par with other developed regions of the country in terms of socio-economic development and thereby ensure good governance.