|
Vendredi 10 septembre 2010; 15h 42min. 11sec |
|
|
|
DELHI CONFERENCE - CALL FOR PAPERS |
|
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
THE POLITICS OF ETHNICITY ON THE MARGINS OF THE STATE :
JANJATIS/ADIVASIS IN INDIA AND NEPAL
7th -9th DECEMBER 2010
INDIA INTERNATIONAL CENTER - DELHI
__________________________________________________________________
With the support of
the French Centre de Sciences Humaines (CSH), New Delhi
the Indian Council of Social Science Research (ICSSR) New Delhi
French National Centre for Scientific Research, Paris
Maison des Sciences de l’Homme,Paris
Convenors:
Marine CARRIN, National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS),Toulouse
Gérard TOFFIN, National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS), Paris
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
On the 7th, 8th and 9th of December 2010, we plan to carry out a seminar entitled “The Politics of Ethnicity on the Margins of the State: Janjati/adivasis in India and Nepal” which will take place at the India International Centre (IIC) in New Delhi. Our main concern is to study the reshaping of tribal and ethnic group identities at different levels in the two countries in the contemporary period. How have the modern identities of the indigenous peoples of India and Nepal been generated between official and subaltern legacies? What impact have the overwhelming changes over the last decades had on the cultures, the societies and the resources of these communities? The question is of particular importance at present, since those regions of Central India which have large indigenous populations are faced with instability marked by the rise of the extreme left, a situation which has provoked political crisis in the governments of several states (Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh) and led to the introduction of President’s rule. It seems crucial, therefore, to reconsider the issues facing the population of these regions, and in particular the indigenous peoples, whose survival is threatened by the present political crisis. Related questions have also marked the political developments of Nepal these last years.
This workshop will include nearly thirty scholars from different academic disciplines: anthropologists, sociologists, historians and political scientists. These experts will come from France, Germany, Austria, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, India and Nepal.
The scheduled tribes of India, known by the terms adivasi, janjati, vanjati, “tribe”, etc., number about 83 million persons from more than four hundred different groups. In Nepal, janjati/adivasi ethnic minorities amount to approximately 10 million (a little more than one third of the country’s population) representing about sixty distinctive entities. In the two countries concerned, these groups make up important minorities that deserve much more attention than they are usually given at present. From the sociological viewpoint, they represent a significant component of Indian and Himalayan civilizations, at a distance from the caste system. Janjati/adivasis also live in areas where the environment ought to be preserved, in collaboration with local people, from excessive industrialization. Official administrative discourse, however, tends to ignore their voices and their achievements in various fields. It is clear that tribal issues, which deserve special consideration, should be given a more central place in our discussions on India and Nepal.
More generally, the proposed seminar on “The Politics of Ethnicity in the Margins of the State” aim at studying the contemporary situation of these ethnic and tribal groups, in India as well as in Nepal, in the light of recent research on the field. The matter is urgent, since the spectacular development of the Indian economy and the impact of liberalism have by-passed indigenous people, who have become even more marginalized both in the rural zones, and on the fringes of big cities. Our objective is to broaden our understanding of the social, cultural and political processes that have shaped adivasi/janjati societies in recent times and to explore how these people experience their sense of identity and belonging in new shifting contexts. This scientific meeting should also throw light on comparative perspectives as between the two countries, at a time when Nepal is about to institutionalize new procedures, more or less inspired by India, to provide better integration of their janjatis at the level of citizenship.
Since Independence, the Government of India has tried to protect the tribal population by developing various schemes of development and applying a strong policy of job reservation (quota for “scheduled tribes”, STs). This political recognition has been accompanied by the idea of redistributive justice which emerged between 1946 and 1949.
Yet the implementation of measures to reduce inequalities and provide uplift has not given indigenous peoples the freedom to rid themselves of a certain marginalization. Furthermore, the introduction of the reservation system in the social and political life of the Republic of India has entailed numerous claims by different groups (particularly by groups classified as OBCs wanting to obtain advantages) struggling to get acknowledged as STs. Thus complex judicial situations have arisen which challenge the universalist assumptions of democratic systems. One aim of this workshop is to address these questions and to explore the implications of affirmative action in the social life of the groups in question.
By contrast, there is so far no reservation system in Nepal. In 1990, a federative association of the Nepalese ethnic minority groups, called the Nepal Janajati Mahasang, translated into English as the “Nepal Federation of Nationalities” (NEFEN), was formed. It serves as a federal umbrella bringing together several ethnic movements. Since then, this movement has been at the forefront of political life. It intends not only to promote the respective cultures of the groups but also to ban discriminations suffered by janjatis in all spheres of social life by creating quotas in various fields. However, the 59 ethnic groups listed by the federation are of very different economical and social levels, with some being “forward”, others “backward”.
In both countries, the recognition of the status of indigenous people (adivasi), i.e. of the first dwellers on the territories where they live, is a central issue. It is contested by a large range of persons and groups, not only among social scientist, but also within nationalist political parties. Yet nobody can ignore the significant religious and spiritual bonds linking these peoples to their homeland. The compelling international dimension of the concept of indigeneity needs to be stressed and questioned.
We will focus on four interrelated topics:
Federalism and New Administrative Territories
Over the last decades, federalism has been an answer to ethnicity movements claiming a separate state. India’s North-East has endured a progressive process of balkanization since 1960 with the formation of a number of ethnic autonomous states endowed with large powers. More recently, the creation of three states (Uttaranchal, Chattisgarh, Jharkhand) has raised new questions concerning the future of tribal people and has involved various kinds of administrative reorganization. The current proposals dividing the new democratic and federal republic of Nepal into various ethnic regions follow the same line. What are the different ways to assert one’s identity in these new administrative units? How has the acknowledgement by the state of indigenous forms of knowledge and resistance helped adivasi communities to conciliate their “tribal identity” with their identity as citizens?
To-day, different adivasi movements contribute to asserting “tribal identities”, but have not succeeded in forging a unitary consciousness which could produce an overall strategy. This topic should be linked to the issues of democratization and governance, and to the notion of citizenship. How have fifty years of activist practices and thought influenced the idea of citizenship in Jharkhand or in Assam? In some cases, tribal people have succeeded in promoting some of their interests and aspirations, which made them claim a state of their own (Jharkhand). In other cases, their assertion has been acknowledged within existing administrative divisions.
The Process of Acculturation and Religious Conversions
Castes and tribes have never lived in complete isolation from each other, though there are differences from state to state and between regions. The density of indigenous populations is an important parameter to be taken into account here. In the past, these contacts have contributed to reshaping “tribal identities” through Sanskritization, Hinduization and other religious movements which have developed alongside tribal and peasant resistance. In the sixties and seventies, the adoption of Hindu values by indigenous people became a way of improving their status in the local hierarchy of castes. This trend may now have decreased though Hinduization is still observed at the level of religious symbolism.
The influence of Protestant, as well as Catholic Churches, has been important among many groups, such as the Mundas of Central India, the Badagas of the Nilgiris and the tribal groups of Assam. Christianity is often part of a struggle to establish a new sense of self and to construct a new salient identity. The impact of Christianity has been central for the indigenous people, giving them access to education, and allowing them to forge new ideals based on equality. The same process can be observed in Nepal. More recently, we have seen a spectacular development of the Pentecostal Church among the Oraons of Jharkhand as this Congregation insists in promoting new models of self-achievement. Such movements are also important in other parts of the country. We propose to explore recent researches on Christianization to evaluate its importance in building indigenous elites and in transforming the local religion in both countries.
Similarly, conversion to Hindu sects and bhakti movements has long been important among adivasi/janjati as shown by the many reformist movements. In India, the recent proselytism of Hindu right-wing movements, such as the RSS, among these people needs to be further studied. In eastern Nepal, the influence of bhakti reformist cults such as the Josmani has not been sufficiently studied. As far as India is concerned, the RSS has recently targeted the Christian communities and the resulting violence has contributed to destabilizing these groups. How can we understand these conflicts and the politics of conversion among the scheduled tribes?
The Politics of Culture: Assertion in Literature and Art
The acknowledgement by the Constitution of India of indigenous languages and scripts has offered the possibility for janjati/adivasi assertion. Likewise, the recent policies in favor of ethnic minority groups and their culture in Nepal have generated various initiatives from local communities to develop their often endangered culture. Both in India and Nepal, these changes affect the discourse of the leaders who claim a history and culture for their own group. The construction through narrative, village theatre and other cultural expressions, has become part of the subtle process of reinvention of tradition. Tribal and indigenous peoples are now trying to create their own museums as a strategy of empowerment. It is also a way to assert their identity while stimulating academic and popular interest. Do these strategies contest the idea of “intangible heritage”, which aims at preserving authentic markers of janjati/adivasi culture as “tribal”?
The content of this culture and the way it is displayed need to be studied in detail. We may also explore the space allowed to popular agency in the construction of identities by looking more closely at elite formation and the formation of youth culture among indigenous people. The recent efforts of the governments to provide textbooks which take indigenous knowledge into account are important here. Tribal art has been encouraged over the last decade by State governments and NGOs, but these initiatives have also given rise new intermediaries in janjati/adivasi societies.
Resistance: Environmental Issues and Political Conflicts
In order to apprehend recent changes in the situation of janjati/adivasigroups, resistance to state integration and development programs launched in tribal territory need to be studied. In India, hydroelectric projects have led to the displacement of indigenous people deprived of their lands and severed from their social ties. These projects have sometimes resulted in ecological crisis whereby indigenous peoples emerge as champions of sustainability. In India as in Nepal, problems of agency and notions of resistance are crucial to understand how janjati/adivasis organize themselves to oppose deforestation and hydroelectric projects. Various examples in Sikkim, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, and Madhya Pradesh have already been documented in this regard.
Resistance has often taken violent forms, inspired by Naxalite and Maoist ideology. There is a significant correlation between tribal areas in the central regions of India and those where insurgency movements have been active. The Maoists in particular have succeeded in getting at least partial support from adivasis over recent years. In Nepal, the success of the “People’s War” (1996-2005) and the victory of the Maoists in the April 2008 election should be explained, at least partly, by the support of the ethnic groups of the hills, which feel rancor against the dominant Hindu castes. How far does this relationship hold true and how should we interpret it? Moreover, to what extent do these armed groups represent answers for indigenous people, disappointed by trade union and party politics? The case of Jharkhand is of special importance in this respect, as indigenous peoples forming a large part of the labor force remained exploited after fifty years of political struggle. We should also evaluate the extent to which Maoist/Naxalite movements are transforming the internal social and cultural life of the tribes.
By reflecting upon these and related questions, we intend:
-To gain a better understanding of the notion of ethnicity as experienced by adivasi/janjajati people in India and in Nepal.
-To document a number of cases of identity construction involving the influence of labour migrations, dispossession of land and debt which have excluded indigenous people from resource management since the colonial period. A special attention could also be give to adivasi/janjajati answers to oppression such as rebellions and religious movements which have been crucial to the formation and reshaping of ethnic identities.
-To inquire about the legal exceptions (or the legal reforms) which have mapped the terrain of policies which have intended to "protect" the indigenous people in India and Nepal. To investigate how some critical pieces of legislation have influenced people movements and claims for the restructuration of States.
-To analyze the construction and reshaping of ethnic boundaries through acculturation, conversion, education, and religious movements, particularly into conflict potentials as well as modes of peaceful coexistence.
-To understand the resistance to development programmes launched by the States which have led to further deprivation of indigenous people and conflicts associated with environmental issues.
-To grasp the understanding of difference and the reformulation of identities which have been influenced by cultural strategies of empowerment and the development of Maoist/Naxalite ideologies which aim at framing alternative citizenship.
-To capture, finally, how indigenous people of India and Nepal frame a new sense of identity often informed by "reinvented" custom which may offer a way to conciliate self governance and democracy. What sense of mutuality can be preserved when indigenous people facing the failure of electoral systems mobilize resistance against the State? Are ideologies still determining the multiplicity of political imaginations or are political affiliations influenced by local situations where identity and survival must be negotiated not only through ideological predilections, but as defensive strategies in a world where the idea of citizenship becomes contingent?
We have applied to diverse institutions to finance this Conference. We may be able to cover some travel expenses and stay in Delhi. Therefore those who might have difficulties to meet these exigencies should inform us by January 2010.We also kindly ask you to inform us before
January 1st whether you intend to participate in this Conference, providing a tentative title.
Deadline for submission of abstract: March 1st
Deadline for submission of full paper: October 1st
Contact:
marinecarrin@hotmail.fr ; gtoffin@vif.cnrs.fr
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
|
|
| |
|
|
|
