From Navnirman to the anti-Mandal riots: the political trajectory of Gujarat (1974–1985)

Abstract

This essay examines the impact of the Navnirman mobilization of the 1970s and the anti-reservation Mandal agitations of the 1980s on Gujarat's essentially bi-polar political landscape. It shows how, despite being marked by violence and the dominance of upper-caste elites, the two movements differently influenced politics in the state and India more generally. The Navnirman movement fizzled away without any tangible strengthening of the opposition in Gujarat but paved the way for the imposition of national Emergency in 1975. The Congress's subsequent caste arithmetic and the KHAM policy alienated upper castes and ultimately provoked the anti-Mandal riots in 1985, which later turned anti-Muslim. The anti-reservation agitations coincided with the mobilization of Hindu right-wing forces and eventually helped consolidate the eventual political rise of the BJP in Gujarat.

Keywords:

• Congress
• Gujarat
• KHAM
• Mandal riots
• Navnirman

Notes

1. The emergence of Narendra Modi as a strong centre of power on his own has led to an opinion that the BJP in Gujarat acts more as a regional outfit rather than as a part of the national organization. But such a statement would be invalid both in fact and in form. During the Lok Sabha elections (2009), the regional choice of candidates for three constituencies had to be altered at the instance of National Parliamentary Board of BJP. Modi was chosen by national executive to campaign in other states. Gujarat leaders of the BJP accept the hegemony of National Executive of the party and are bound by the party discipline.

2. This article uses the word ‘Bombay’ in the interest of historical accuracy. The name of Bombay city was offically changed to Mumbai only in 1995.

3. Hathi, As it Happened!, 42

4. John Wood has argued that the politics in princely states was more benign than the rough and burly of Congress politics. See Wood, ‘British Versus Princely Legacies and the Political Integration of Gujarat’. This would be a sheer travesty of truth. The States People's Conference always denounced the cruelty, the maladministration and the injustices suffered by the people under native states. The opinion prevalent in India is better represented by Sardar Patel's address to the princes when he described them as ‘ulcers on the body politic of India that needed to be operated upon unless they chose to cure themselves’. This is why hardly any voices were raised when the princely states were liquidated within less than 10 months (1947–1948) or when the privy purses promised to the princes in the constitution were abolished in 1972.

5. Hemant Babu, Himmat magazine, July 6, 2003.

6. Butler, Lahiri, and Roy, India Decides, 1991.

7. Instead of inviting Maharao Lakshmanshinh of the Swatantra party who had the support of the largest number of legislators, Governor Sampurnanand invited Mohanlal Sukhadia of Congress and gave him time to procure support in the house by means that were not very fair. This violated the established norms. Sampurnanand was the leader of the Congress party in Uttar Pradesh and an ex-chief minister of Uttar Pradesh.

8. Secretariat Gujarat Vidhan Sabha, Lokshahi na Dhabakara, Vol. 1.

9. Personal interview at Gandhinagar, February 1992.

10. Sheth, Patterns of Politics in Gujarat.

11. Dawn Jones and Rodney Jones quoted in Kohli, Democracy and Discontent.

12. Shah, Protest Movements in Two Indian States.

13. Shah, ‘60 Revolutions’, India Today, December 20, 2007.

14. Quoted by D.K. Singh in ‘Indira's Secret Wish and Other Stories by Natwar’ Financial Express, December 22, 2009.

15. Chief Election Officer Gujarat, Elections in Gujarat Statistical Reports.

16. Nagindas Sanghavi, Gujarat, 285.

17. Concerned Citizens’ Tribunal Report, 2002.

18. Ibid.

19. Ibid.