header
Home | About Us | Contact Us | Set as homepage | Add to favorites
Search the Site   Advanced Search »
Sections
Archive
Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su
12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031

Newsletter
Subscribe to newsletter:

Poll: 4th Tripartite Meeting
During the 4th Tripartite Talk, GJMM has been immensely pressurized to focus only on the creation of Gorkhaland, besides, the conclusion of the Meeting seems to be only TALK on POLITICAL LEVEL in next round. Do you think 4th Tripartite Talk has been successful?
Yes
No
Poll results | Old polls


email Email to a friend | print Print version | comment Comments (20 posted)

The Never-Ending wait for a homeland

By Dr. Sonam B Wangyal on August 14,2008

image
THE NEVER-ENDING WAIT FOR A HOMELAND
 
By Dr. Sonam B Wangyal

The following is a chronicle of the long and enduring struggle of a peoples' movement for a separate homeland for over a hundred years. It is not a testament to ridicule or chastise our Bengali counterparts but simply to let them understand the sense of helpless predicament that a minority community suffers under the weight of an overwhelming majority population, the helplessness under the dark cloud of political chauvinism, and the helplessness in suffering financial nepotism. This is also a testament to illustrate many states in India have had the good sense to agree to a partition(s) without feeling a loss of prestige even when there was a possibility of another bifurcation. Assam has been split more times than Bengal can even dread of, and it is still alive and kicking, despite the threat of even more partitions. Consider the strong and proud martial state of Punjab which was partitioned into Punjab and Haryana, it was further partitioned with the formation of Himachal Pradesh and a third partition created Chhandigarh. Punjab still survives not humiliated, not politically weakened and not financially at any great loss. The partitioning of Madhya Pradesh created Chhattisgarh; Andhra Pradesh was a result of the partition of Madras (Tamil Nadu), and Jharkhand was a result of partition of Bihar. New states have been created but the partition or the process and the subsequent evolvements have never reduced the prestige and the standing of the 'mother' states. Examples abound and my prayer is that Bengal politicians should draw lessons form history. I am absolutely confident that a Bengali will be at home in Gorkhaland as a Gorkha will be in Bengal as has been for a Sardar in Haryana or a Jat in Punjab. The exercise is basically to give an identity to a community, race or language, in the form of a separate homeland. I seriously empathized with one of my good friend, a Bengali from Cachar in Assam, who used to feel isolated, violated and insulted, for his community was an absolute minority with Cachar and its Bengali population like an island surrounded by non-Bengalis. I would request my Bengali friends to co-relate the plight of the Cachar Bengalis in Assam to the dilemma of the Gorkhas and tribal people in West Bengal and then fashion one's opinion. One is naturally inclined to believe, and even entirely agree, that Bengal has always been above fair and square with the hills but the present Chief Minister himself is on record commenting that enough had not been done, a statement that comes after 61 years of independence of India and 73 years after the creation of Bengal Legislative Assembly. It is therefore not surprising that numerous Bengali intellectuals are openly espousing Gorkhaland and that is so because history is their testimony, not misplaced sentiment, undue pride or jingoistic political fuss. Of course some confrontational groups of Bengalis and a few politicians do share a different opinion, and the former has over-reacted occasionally and the latter harps on non-acceptance of another partition, but in the end history and reality have to be respected, agreed upon and accepted. No where in India has a community ever had such a profound and protracted struggle like the toil, effort and endeavour for a homeland and I for one believe that an amicable separation is any day better than a rancorous and a bitter divorce. The story of a struggle for a creation of a separate homeland unfolds in 1907, in the last century, and even continues to the present one. As a non-political observer I find it amazing that despite the Bengali politicians generally being highly cultured, refined, well-educated and staunch believers in human dignity and rights to self determination feels no embarrassment in retaining Darjeeling and the Dooars as parts of West Bengal.    
 
1907: The FIRST DEMAND for a Separate Homeland: Following the division of Bengal the Darjeeling district was put under Bhagalpur Division in Bihar. This did not solve the problem for us because even in Bihar we were still a wretched minority. The very act of shunting the district from one division to another became a proof that the British did not quite know where to place the district. This must have stirred into an awakening amongst the educated people in the district on the feeling that their hills were doomed to exist as a minority through attachment to a bigger state in the plains. Whether Darjeeling was thrown into Bihar or Bengal the hillmen would be an ineffective minority amongst the teeming millions of plainsmen. Furthermore, educationally or financially the hillmen were no match against the plainsmen who had established colleges, universities and commercial industries. Then came the news of the Morley-Minto Reforms (1909)[1] which promised constitutional changes and some voice to the Indians in deciding public matters. This must have appeared like a small light at the end of the tunnel and so two years before (1907) the actual reforms came into practice the "leaders of the Hill people" submitted to the government a joint petition on behalf of the Bhutias, Lepchas, and Nepalis demanding a "separate administrative set-up" outside the influence of Bengal. At that period of time, most of the new states that have come up in the past decade or two, had not even been conceptualized, let alone demanded or struggled for.
 
Nothing materialized out of the 1907 petition and it could be called a failure except for the fact that it was for the first time the three major communities had come under one umbrella, united for a common cause, to seek a homeland of their own. Despite the government's indifference the year in history did not draw a total blank for Kurseong and Siliguri obtained municipality status in that year.
 
1917: The SECOND DEMAND for a Separate Homeland
After a gap of ten years on 5th December, 1917, The Hillmen's Association petitioned Edwin Montague, the Secretary of State for India that "Darjeeling's inclusion in Bengal was comparatively recent and only because the British were rulers common to both places. …Historically, culturally, ethnically, socially, religiously, linguistically there was no affinity whatsoever between Bengal and Darjeeling." The petition further stated that, "In laying down the plans for the future, the Government should aim at the creation of a separate unit comprising of the present Darjeeling District with the portion of Jalpaiguri District which was annexed from Bhutan in 1865."[2] This would translate as Darjeeling and the Dooars and it was the first demarcation of the homeland in the minds of our forefathers as far back as 1917. It is of no surprise that the Prant Parishad, Gorkha National Liberation Front and the Gorkha Jana Mukti Morcha sought or seek nothing more than that. The petition also proposed the formation of North East Frontier Province (cf. North West Frontier Province) which would include Darjeeling District, Dooars, Assam and NEFA (Arunachal Pradesh). Signatories were S.W. Laden La, Dr. Yensingh Sitling, Khardgabahadur Gurung, Meghbir Singh, Lachman Singh, Narprasad Kumai, and Deonidhi Upadhaya.    
 
1920: The THIRD DEMAND for a Separate Homeland:
The Hillmen's Association once again appealed to Edwin Montague on 11 February 1920. The Ninth Dispatch on Indian Constitutional Reforms had placed the district as a "Backward Tract" but the Association rejected this label as derogatory and also as a camouflage to keep the Hills under Bengal. The Memorial stated, "It appears to us that our case has been somewhat obscured  by including the dispatch under "Backward Tracts" and our prayer for separation from Bengal has been misunderstood…We respectfully ask that at the present time, when the question of our political future is being determined, we should be granted the recognized rights of self-determination. We do not wish to be dominated by the people of the plains. We are sure that if we were, we would be swamped by the millions of Bengal and our own people would not get their rightful place in the Government of their own country. …Moreover, if our original proposal be adopted, viz., that the portion of the Jalpaiguri District which (along with the Kalimpong Sub-Division) was annexed from Bhutan in 1865, should be excluded from Jalpaiguri and included in our unit, then, we should have a population about as large as that of New Zealand.  
 
1920: The FOURTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland
In 1920 something strange and unexpected occurred. The Darjeeling Planters' Association and the European Association of Darjeeling along with the Hillmen's Association petitioned the government to create an "Excluded Area" comprising of Darjeeling District and the Dooars. Of interest here is that the first two associations' memberships consisted entirely of Europeans and it becomes apparent that even they felt their interests threatened under the increasing power of native Bengali administrators. The Europeans had huge investments in tea, real estate and hotels and they calculated they would be better protected if the area was administratively detached from Bengal. It is not any great task to imagine the fear and insecurity the hillmen must have endured considering that even the members of the ruling race were worried scared of a continued existence under Bengal. Because of this one joint petition with the British subjects very occasionally some mischievous people try to subject all other later petitions as being influenced by the Darjeeling resident British people. The British were never admitted to any of the hill organizations and they were never taken into confidence nor sought out for guidance or advice, never.  N.B. Statehood for Chattishgarh was first mooted in this year by Rangpur Congress Unit, Thirteen years junior to our demand. The agitation for a state commenced only in the mid-1960s and the first united all party movement came about only in 1990 under Chattishgarh Raj Nirman Manch. In 2000 a new state was born. They were chronologically years behind us but they passed us by because in 1990 All Parties came together including the Congress and the BJP in a bid to create a new state. Maybe there is an important lesson here for our leaders: Chhutay-ra chhuttai rajya paonu garo chha, ektamai hamro jeet chha. A year later in 1921 Thakur Chandansingh (Dehra Doon) formed the Gorkha League,[3] predominantly consisting of retired Gorkha soldiers. In 1921 Mahatma Gandhi launched the Non-cooperation Movement in which Dalbahadur Giri from Darjeeling and Chhabilal Upadhaya from Assam contributed appreciatively.
 
1929: The FIFTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland

The Hillmen's Association's demand of 1917 was reiterated once more when Simon Commission visited India in 1929.[4] This was the year that the First memorandum for a Jharkhand state was placed, junior to our demand by 22 years. In 1947 the All India Jharkhand Party was formed followed by Sonat Santhal Samaj under Shibu Soren in 1969, both junior to out All India Gorkha League by 4 and 26 years respectively. Nothing much happened till when the Maoist Communist Centre once more reiterated the demand in 1971. By this time we had already petitioned the government 18 times. In 1972 Soren formed the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha and coincidentally we too have a Mukti Morcha. Jharkhand Area Autonomous Council was conceded to in 1995 but even this was junior to our autonomous Hill Council by 7 years. AND yet Jharkhand became a state in 2000 and we are still languishing even today. If Jharkhand's famous wicket-keeping son M.S. Dhoni had been born in our hills he would have surely questioned "How's that?" Yes, how is that possible?
 
1930: The SIXTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland

On 25th October 1930 the "Gorkhas settled and domiciled in India" placed before the government a demand for homeland stating, "Darjeeling, where the Gorkha population predominate, should be excluded from Bengal and treated as an independent administrative unit, with the Deputy Commissioner as the Administrator, vested with much more powers than that of a District Magistrate, and assisted by a small Executive Council, representative of all the interests in the administration of the area."[5] Signatories: Rai Saheb H.P. Pradhan (President, Hillmen's Association, Kalimpong), Lt. Gobardhan Gurung (President, Gorkha Army Officers' Association), P.M. Sundas (Secretary, Gorkha Library, Kurseong), N.B. Gurung (Secretary, Hillmen's Association, Kalimpong) and P.P. Pradhan (Secretary, Hillmens Association, Darjeeling).
 
1934: The SEVENTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland
The Hillmen's Association had pleaded for a separate homeland five times and each time the government had failed to respond positively. So on 6th August 1934 the Hillmen's Association once more submitted a memorial to Sir Samuel Hoare, Secretary of State for India which stated: "No consideration had been given to the hill peoples" (this is in reference to the previous appeals) "…whereas all minority communities in India had received due consideration of their claims …your memorialists emphatically urge that the District of Darjeeling should be totally excluded from Bengal by the creation of an Independent Administrative Unit with an Administrator the Head of the Area assisted by an Executive Council … the area should be placed directly under the Central Government, the Governor of Bengal acting as the Agent to the Governor-General."[6] The signatories to the memorial were S.W. Laden La, Lt. Gobardhan Gurung, and Madan Thapa.
 
1935: The EIGHTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland
Rupnarayan Sinha appealed to The Bengal Government in 1935, on behalf of the Hillmen's Association, and opposed the 1915 Act, as did almost every responsible Indian. But Sinha went a step further and he even added a demand for the creation of to a Separate Homeland.
 
1937: The NINTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland
Rai Saheb Hari Prasad Pradhan, the former President of the Hillmens Association (Kalimpong Unit), indirectly appealed to the government that the hills should be separated from Bengal.[7] "The Hill people as a minority in the Province under the new Constitution have not failed to realize the drawbacks and disadvantages of the present arrangement and they are now apprehensive that their social solidarity and their existence as a community is being threatened with serious disruption owing to various factors coming into play chiefly by the realization by many of them that the hill people's welfare is now dependent on the exigencies to party politics in the Bengal Assembly and their utter helplessness to make their voice heard." How very prophetic!  
 
1941: The TENTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland
There are some people who claim that up till now the hill people had only resorted to petitioning, or paper pushing, and the absence of any aggressive move had stalled the creation of a homeland. The opposite opinion is that there were no political parties till then and in the absence of any political organization the best that could be done was to place repeated petitions before the government. When the 1940s came the emergence of political parties also became a reality and the disintegration of the Hillmen's Association became imminent. The Association made its last appeal in 1941 with a petition to Lord Pethik Lawrence, Secretary of State for India, for a creation of a separate Chief Commissioner's Province.

Two years later, 1943, the All India Gorkha League was formed by Dambarsingh Gurung. The Darjeeling unit of the Communist Party of India was also formed in the same year and surprisingly these communists also became members of the AIGL.
 
1944: The ELEVENTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland
There is a little known story of the next plea for a homeland and this was not addressed to the British government, despite India not having attained independence then. In Bhagirath Rawat's Matoko Maya, 1982, page 32, we learn that when Mahatma Gandhi and M.M. Jinah came to Darjeeling, a deputation had met them and had demanded that the hills be separately treated else the hillmen would suffer in the fields of security and development. It appears that our forefathers had the common sense to realize who the next masters were going to be. The approach was correct but as in the previous cases the response was nothing short of indifference. In the following year (1945) the communists dissociated themselves from the AIGL. In this year the AIGL mouthpiece, a periodical called Gorkha mooted the idea of 'Gorkhastan' (Year 1, issue 12).
 
1947: The TWELFTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland

In 1947 India was to become an independent nation but the hill people were far from being locally independent. In this year of our national independence the Communist Party of India (Darjeeling District Committee) made one of the most preposterous demands ever made by Communists. The Communist Party of India (Darjeeling District Committee) tendered a Memorandum to the Constituent Assembly (6 April 1947), addressed to Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru (Vice-President of the Interim Government of India) and Liaquat Ali Khan (Finance Minister of the Interim Government of India and leader of Muslim League). The memorandum stated: "The Communist Party of India…demand, after making necessary revisions of the existing boundaries, the three contiguous areas of Darjeeling District, Southern Sikkim, and Nepal be formed into one single zone to be called 'GORKHASTAN'." Since Gorkhastan is not designated as a country it would technically fall under India. It sounds all very well but not when it comes out of the mouths of die-hard communists. The thought of robbing Sikkim of all its fertile lands and fleecing Nepal of its sovereignty is quite incomprehensible. The whole idea reeks of colonialism. Had the brainstorm come from capitalists, imperialists, and the bourgeois beasts it would have been understandable but what is even more surprising is that not a single enlightened communist criticized the memorandum. Whatever be the merit or demerit of the demand one can safely say that this was another demand for a separate homelamd. This was a period when the All India Gorkha League could have also voiced a demand for a separate homeland and with its huge following, possibly also uniting with the Communists, a strong point could have been made. It is unfortunate that the AIGL leadership was too busy with lesser causes to have a vision of the greater goal.

Even in those days the politicians had their own axe to grind but our litterateurs also proved to be no less and they commenced the verbal war of Gorkha versus Nepali. After decades it has settled to the language being designated Nepali and the community as Gorkha.
 
1948: The THIRTEENTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland (1948)
After the death of Dambar Singh Gurung a shift in the thinking of the AIGL could be noticed. The new President of the All India Gorkha League, Nar Bahadur Gurung, wrote to the Prime Minister Pandit Nehru proposing three alternatives in regard to a separate homeland:
 
1.                A Separate Administrative Unit under the Central Government.
2.                A Separate Province comprising of Darjeeling district and neighbouring areas.
3.                The district of Darjeeling with the Dooars be included in Assam
 
In this year the Territory of North East Frontier Agency (later Arunachal Pradesh) was formed and was placed under the administration of the Union Government. In 1972 it was declared a Union Territory and on February 20, 1987, it became a full-fledged state. It did not require dozens of petitions, years of peaceful struggle, violent agitation or a no non-cooperation movement for this to materialize. In this same year (15 April) Himachal Pradesh was declared a Centrally Administered territory and despite the State Reorganization Committee's strong recommendation that Himachal Pradesh be merged with Punjab it still became a new state on 25 January 1971.
 
1949: The FOURTEENTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland
The Deputy Foreign Minister while on a visit to Sikkim was met by a delegation of the All India Gorkha League and a demand replacing the above one was made where a state consisting of the district of Darjeeling, Jalpaiguri, Sikkim and Cooch Behar was suggested.
 
Post our independence the creation of a separate homeland became virtually impossible for amongst the policy makers was the tough man Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, the first Deputy Prime Minister, who held very strong and racial views against us and our likes. His letter to Pandit Nehru, dated 7th July 1950 is quite unbelievable and racially slurred:
 
"All along the Himalayas in the north and northeast, we have on our side of the frontier, a population ethnologically and culturally different from Tibetans or Mongoloids. The undefined state of the frontier and existence on our side of a population with its affinities to Tibetans or Chinese have all the elements of potential trouble between China and ourselves…

Let us consider the political conditions on this potential troublesome frontier. Our northern or northeastern approaches consists of Nepal, Sikkim, Darjeeling and the Tribal areas of Assam. …The contact of these areas with us, is by no means, close and intimate. The people inhabiting these portions have no established loyalty or devotion to India. Even Darjeeling and Kalimpong areas are not free from pro-Mongoloid prejudices." (Emphasis added)
 
Can any leader say the same today?
 
1949: The FIFTEENTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland
With the misguided and prejudiced opinion of the second most powerful man in the nation what hopes could be entertained for a separate homeland! It is reasonable to presume a bit of that evil legacy still lingers on in Kolkata and New Delhi. Anyway, unknown of the above letter and the distrust nursed in the highest quarters of the country our ancestors kept on appealing and a fresh petition was submitted to the one person who would have never agreed to the demand, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel.

On 30th October 1949 various leaders of Darjeeling, Sikkim, Jalpaiguri and Cooch Behar met in Darjeeling and formed a bloc known as Uttar Khand Pradesh Sangh. This Sangh submitted a petition to Sardar Vallabhai Patel, pleading for the creation of a new state comprising of Darjeeling district, Sikkim, Jalpaiguri, Cooch Behar and Goalpara of Assam. With Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel firmly entrenched in Delhi what could be a better example of barking up the wrong tree. As expected, Sardar Patel opposed this demand tooth and nail and the movement lost its wind un the face of such a strong opposition.
 
1949: The SIXTEENTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland
Towards the end of the October of 1949 Dr. B.V. Keskar, the Deputy Foreign Minister, was in Sikkim, and the All India Gorkha League suggested that in an laternative to an earlier proposal to join Darjeeling to Assam a separate Province could be created with the District of Darjeeling, Jalpaiguri, Sikkim and Cooch Behar.
 
1952: The SEVENTEENTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland
Prime Minister Pandit Nehru came to Darjeeling in 1952 and when he was in Kalimpong to visit the famous Dr. Graham's Homes he was presented with an appeal by the All India Gorkha League seeking the formation of a North East Frontier Province.  Note: 1952 was the year when the FIRST demand for a statehood came up for Uttaranchal, a late starter by 45 years, we were already on our sixteenth demand for our own state. The first practical political party in the proposed Uttarkhand (Uttaranchal) came up only in 1979 (Uttarkhand Kranti Dal), 36 years younger to AIGL, and yet it was awarded statehood in 2000. In less than 50 years it became a state (the Congress and BJP gave support with the latter asking a name change to Uttaranchal) and Gorkhaland with a history of over a hundred years is yet to see the end of the tunnel.  Sardar Patel was no more around to scuttle the proposal, so where did we go wrong?  
 
1955: The EIGHTEENTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland
In 1953, 11 districts of Madras State were joined to form Andhra Pradesh. Two years later in 1955 the hills were fortunate to have the Chairman of the State Reorganization Committee on a visit to Darjeeling.  The District Shramik Sangh submitted to him a memorandum where the President of the Sangh, Shri Daulatdas Bokhim stated that, "The Kochayas, Meches, Lepchas, Bhutias, Nepalis and Rajbanshis are the original inhabitants of this district whose customs,systems and traditions fundamentally differ from that of the rest of West Bengal. …I put forward this profound demand of the creation of a part 'C' State of North Bengal inclusive of Darjeeling, Jalpaiguri, Cooch Behar districts…" The final outcome, a year later, was negative for the hills but for Andhra Pradesh the SRC recommended the addition of 9 districts of the former Nizam's dominions and it was made a full-fledged state with Hyderbad as the capital. Madhya Pradesh also came into existence in the same year.
 
1955: The NINETEENTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland
It might be added here that up till now petitions/demands were put up by single organization or a single political party. In 1855 a more united forum placed an appeal before the State Reorganization Committee on behalf of the All Committee District Organization. The Secretary, Shri S.B. Ghosh, defined the areas of the new state to include Darjeeling district, Sikkim, Jalpaiguri and Cooch Behar.
 
1980: The TWENTIETH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland
There is a period of relative inactivity as far as the demand for a state is concerned. It was a period when the All India Gorkha League dominated hill politics and the party was virtually an instrument of Deo Prakash Rai's calls. Furthermore, the agitation for the recognition of the Nepali language seems to have sapped some of the energy and interest. There were also attention-diverting offers or suggestions like Autonomous Area, Regional Autonomy, Autonomous Administrative Set-Up etc.   But while all these were going on Nagaland became a state in 1961 and Meghalaya in 1972. In the background there were regrouping of forces and about the most active was the Prant Morcha (previously Prantiya Sanstha and in future Prant Parishad). Having garnered good support amongst the people it telegrammed the Prime Minister, Mrs. Indira Gandhi: "Our long felt demand for a separate State Gorkhaland be carved out as soon as possible. Separate State only solution. We welcome our people from Assam to our own State Gorkhaland but not to be deported in other States. Gorkhaland always salutes to the national and your leadership." Dated 23 April 1980.  
 
1981: The TWENTY-FIRST DEMAND for a Separate Homeland
Now not to be outdone, the AIGL suddenly revived its old demand after a hibernation of 29 long years. The All India Gorkha League stated to Shri Zail Singh, Home Minister, during his visit to Darjeeling, that it "is very much relevant in our demand to get a Separate Statehood outside West Bengal to ensure administrative efficiency and convenience and coordination of economic development and welfare activities for this region." This memorandum also included the causes leading to the increasing law and order problems, deforestation, neglected development and the need to include Nepali language in the 8th Schedule of the Constitution.
 
1982: The TWENTY-SECOND DEMAND for a Separate Homeland
By the time the 1980s were ushered in Prant Parishad was losing its appeal to the Gorkha National Liberation Front and eventually when the latter got the upper hand the Prant Parishad leaders were slighted, abused and threatened. Despite winds of popular support blowing in GNLF's direction the President of the Prant Parishad, Shri Indrabahadur Rai, wrote to the Home Minister Shri Zail Singh, demanding a full fledged state: "We demand the formation of the State of Darjeeling comprising of the Nepali speaking regions North Bengal i.e., the Nepali speaking areas of the Darjeeling and Jalpaiguri districts.

…The Darjeeling Prant Parishad is of the opinion that nothing short of full-fledged statehood for Darjeeling and no other administrative scheme will ultimately found to be workable." Dated 4the January 1982. Thus the 21st demand came to a close and soon Prant Parishad too was to become a closed chapter in the history of a search for a eparate homeland.
 
1986: The TWENTY-THIRD DEMAND for a Separate Homeland
A widespread allegation was circulating in West Bengal, and not without truth, that the movement led by the GNLF had only hearts but no brains, since Subhash Ghising refused to take assistance of intellectuals and professionals. At this juncture, the more cerebral gentry of Darjeeling, calling themselves "educated and the professional hill people" petitioned the Prime Minister, Shri Rajiv Gandhi.  These concerned people had come together as "Study Forum" and had such eminent people like Advocate B.K. Pradhan, Advocate Bal Dewan, Advocate Uttam Pradhan, Advocate D.K. Pradhan, Publisher-Printer Uday Mani Pradhan, MBA, Dr. Pinto C. Lama, Prof. Amar Rai, Prof. L.B. Rai, Prof. T.B. Chhetri, Sanitation expert Shri Gagan Gurung, internationally acclaimed bakery owner Shri J.B. Edwards, including social workers and luminaries like Shri Enos Das Pradhan, Shri Lee Pradhan, Shri L.B. Rai, Shri Ratan Mothey,  and Shri Deep Waiba. Their petition of 31st August 1986 is a long document but just one paragraph will be quoted which more or less sums up the whole: "The demand is an expression of the belief in the best democratic tradition that the right to a state within the Indian Union is an inalienable right. It is therefore not a matter of acceding to the demand condescendingly but giving what is rightfully ours." This petition slightly blunted the allegations mentioned above but I have a strong feeling that the intelligentsia was doing this more for the love of the land than any respect or affection for the leader, Subhash Ghising. By now the hills were gripped with violence. For 85 years the hillmen had tolerantly accepted one rejection after another. The highlanders had endured police firing at Rohini Tea Garden (1949), another firing at Magaret's Hope Tea Estate (1955), evictions at Rangli-Rangliot Tea Estate, and even the uncalled for killing of 6 people at Kurseong on 25th May 1986. Patience and tolerance was stretched taut and it just needed one more needless provocation and matters would come to a head. On 27 July 1986 the whole district took part in burning the Indo-Nepal Treaty of 1950. No one quite sees anything illegal in a simple act as burning of a Treaty but the administration responded by meeting the demonstrators with a hail of bullets in Kalimpong leaving behind 13 dead and about 50 injured. The hills erupted.    
 
1986 The TWENTY-FOURTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland
I would like to include the entire movement, but more specifically the record-shattering 40 days continuous strike as well as the huge list of martyrs, under the GNLF, as the TWENTY-FOURTH demand for a separate homeland. The importance of the whole exercise is that it now became violence for violence and most of the time it was difficult to point out who initiated the carnage. It proved to West Bengal and to the Centre that the highlanders were capable of extreme violence too. The hillmen claim 1200 of them were martyred and what can be a stronger, a more emphatic demand than hundreds of people sacrificing their lives for a separate homeland.  This demand and movement eventually fell victim to an agreement that resulted in Darjeeling Gorkha Hill Council. Subhas Ghising agreed to 'drop' the demand for a homeland. The clarion call from Subhas Ghising had bee "Do or Die" and the final outcome was Ghising dod not 'do' and many people did 'die'. All these years the Central Government and the State Government had disappointed the hills and there was now someone within to disappoint the highlanders. No wonder the West Bengal government always treated Subhas Ghising with velvet gloves.
 
1986: The TWENTY-FIFTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland
West Bengal Assembly elections had just been completed on 23rd March 1987 and the hills had unanimously registered support for Gorkhaland by sending back empty ballot boxes: 129 empty boxes out of 154 in Darjeeling constituency, 147 empty out of 156 in Kalimpong, 151 empty out of 170 in Kurseong, 151 empty out of 170 in Mirik and even Dooars sent 10 empty ballot boxes. On 13th March 1987 the GNLF wrote to the Home Minister, Shri Buta Singh, that this was as good as a referendum in favour of a state outside West Bengal and demanded "a separate State of Gorkhaland within the framework of the Indian Constitution." A copy of the demand was also dispatched to the Prime Minister, Shri Rajiv Gandhi. What could have been a more emphatic non-violent protest and demand than this! Nevertheless, the state and the Centre remained unmoved. The question on everyone's mind was when will a full-scale and no-holds-barred agitation commence since sporadic acts of violence were being reported from different parts of the district.
 
 
The TWENTY-SIXTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland
The ongoing demand for a separate homeland under the banner of Gorkha Jana Mukti Morcha and the leadership of Shri Bimal Gurung has now become the TWENTY-SIXTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland. So far it has ducked off any major violent move, despite the occasional provocations, and if this brings about the desired results all the better for us and for West Bengal.
 
The TWENTY-SEVENTH DEMAND for a Separate Homeland

We hope it will not come to this but…
 
 
 
 *****************************************
 
 
[1] The Morley-Minto Reforms of 1909: The most important change in the Morley-Minto Reforms was the provision that qualified Indians would have a greater voice in deciding public questions. Thus one seat in the Governor-General's Executive Council was reserved for an Indian member (Satyendra Prasanna Sinha, later Lord Sinha of Raipur, was appointed Law Member of the Governor-General's Council, the first Indian to be so honoured.) The number of members in the Central Legislature was raised from sixteen to sixty and in the Provincial Legislative Councils the number of members was raised to fifty in the major provinces. The non-nominated members were to be elected by groups of local bodies, landholders, trade associations and universities. Darjeeling district and Dooars did not fit into any of these categories.

[2] Before coming to India Edwin Montague had on 20th August 1917 announced in the House of Commons that "…the policy of His Majesty's Government… is that of the increasing association of Indians in every branch of the administration and the gradual development of self-governing institutions with a view to the progressive realization of responsible government in India…"  The Hillmen's Association therefore wanted the "self-governing institution".

[3] Not to be confused with All India Gorkha League formed by Dambarsingh Gurung in Darjeeling.

[4] It was felt that the Reforms of 1919 did not fulfill the aspiration of the Indian nationalists and the demand for legislative began to grow stronger and so under the chairmanship of Sir John Simon was to make a report. His Commission had seven members who were all British and though Indians by and large boycotted the Commission it filed a report announcing "that the natural issue of India's Constitutional progress…is the attainment of Dominion Status."

[5] The Report of the Simon Commission was published in May, 1930.

[6] This memorial was presented keeping in mind the Government was to present a White Paper regarding modifications to the Indian Constitution. (The Joint Committee of both Houses of Parliament approved the White Paper and presented its report in October 1934.)

[7] The Act of 1935 proposed Provincial Autonomy. It also created Sind, separating it from Bombay and Orissa Presidencies, Burma was separated from British India and Aden also ceased to be a part of India.   


3398 times read

Did you enjoy this article?

1 2 3 4 5 Rating: 4.74Rating: 4.74Rating: 4.74Rating: 4.74Rating: 4.74 (total 61 votes)
comment Comments (20 posted)
  • image Excellent Work! Who is this Tashi Pemba? A Marwari stooge! Definitely not one of us.
    (Posted by raj, February 8, 2010, 10:36 PM)
  • image "ektaa mai jeet cha".....really....this is all we need. I absolutely admire your work and your dedication. If only all of us are as dutifully intelligent and irresolutely unified, we will definitely see light at the end of the tunnel. We need to bring awareness of this level into the heads, and instill love for the soil in every heart that was concieved in the hills. There are so many things to be done........
    (Posted by ektaa, October 4, 2009, 8:13 AM)
  • image THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN RECENTLY PUBLISHED IN PRINT FORMAT WITH SOME ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OF Dr.Wangyal on three email critcs of the demand for Gorkhaland. Please see below one such criticism with my comments. GORKHALAND MUSINGS Posted by Tashi Pemba I came across a small booklet released by Dr.Wangyal in support of Gorkhaland entitled “Brief notes on Gorkhaland “. The larger part is related to the factual narration of the history of Darjeeling and the history of Nepali influx into Darjeeling with the stated aim of proving them to be original inhabitants (contradiction in itself as if they came in --- whenever --–they are not ethnic but immigrants---- both Marwari and Nepalese.) A large portion lists the many memorandums etc to the various authorities for the grant of an exclusive Nepali homeland. Dr. Wangyal vigorously refutes three opposing viewpoints, (taken from the internet) with both gusto and passion but with little substance. For a self acclaimed intellectual he certainly takes umbrage very easily and takes all opposition very personally . He promptly categorizes opposition as non-Historian or non-economist or non-local and so unworthy and without locus -standi to comment !! For somebody who proclaims “WRITING REJOINDERS IS NOT MY CUP OF TEA” he has sent rejoinders to three people in the booklet. Produced below as an example is his reply to one P.C. Mundhra's letter and the good doctor plays a lot of "gulchay" (in the doctors own use of the vernacular.) Format used is First Mundhra's views (Paranoid Mundhra) then Doctor Wangyal's reply (Gulchay Doctor ) and finally my comments. A “PARANOID MUNDHRA." The Nepalese have immigrated to Darjeeling (Sikkim) area, at best within just the last hundred and fifty years, and are, (leaving aside the Bangladeshi's), the most recent substantial immigrants into India. Today the chicken's neck is in dire threat of going under the control of these two groups, (until very recently the vast majority were of foreign citizenry), because of the folly of vote bank politics which has allowed and encouraged them to freely populate this area. Even today more than 50% of the Nepalese residents are immigrants who have entered India after 1950 which fact legally bars them from Indian citizenship as per the provisions of the Indo-Nepal Treaty of 1950—- and as for the Bangladeshi's we all know where they come from ,in what numbers they enter India , and where their faith and beliefs lie. (Subba an alleged murderer from Nepal is now a member of parliament in India!) In addition both these citizen groups enjoy the benefit of going back to their country of origin as and when they want to, to the welcoming arms of their respective governments who grant them instant citizenship. (In fact Nepalese law expressly provides that a Nepalese person may return at any time and claim citizenship. And of-course both these governments openly harbour anti-Indian forces on their soil and look on with fierce favour at these forces collaborating with India's enemies from Bangladesh and Pakistan through their surrogate separatist fronts in Assam and Coochbihar. (Ironically these very same outfits, till very recently, when they comprehended the mischief potential from this group, accused the Nepalese of being Foreigners!!) "GULCHAY DOCTOR." 1. A lot has been said about certain people being 'immigrants' and for P.C. to single out the Nepalis as immigrants amounts to 'The pot calling the kettle black'. After all P.C. timro babu-bajay pani ta Rajeshthan bata Sikkim paseko immigrants thiyo ani aaja pani tapaiharu immigranta nai ho. Or were your ancestors there in Sikkim when Phuntshog Namgyal became the first Chhogyal. Satya kura yo ho…Sikkim ko sabhai Marwari haru including the Mundras, Bhojraaj, Lakhotias, Sardas, Agarwals etc. etc. etc are also immigrants. You have mentioned of the Nepalis "until very recently the vast majority were of foreign citizenry" but you probably don't realize how many times the Marwaris appealed to the Sikkim Maharaja to make them SIKKIM SUBJECTS when Sikkim was not a part of India. This amounts to dumping one's Indian citizenship for that of Sikkim's and with that in reference how can you cast aspersions on another community's loyalty! Gilasko gharma basney harulay aruko gharma dhunga hirkaunu hundaina. COMMENT. Accusation of Marwari's also being immigrants does not absolve the Nepalese from being immigrants .In fact it actually reinforces the position. At best both communities are immigrants and after Sikkim became a part of India all became Indians except if they held any other nationality. However, a Nepalese residing in India before 1950 was given special rights to acquire Indian citizenship by the 1950 treaty between two countries and similarly an orginal East Pakistani refugee was also given privileges. As long as the king ruled in Sikkim --- the plains origin people in Sikkim were treated as immigrants along with the vast majority of Nepalese in Sikkim who mostly came from Nepal .So both had equal negative status. 3. Dr. Wangyal is simply wrong to allege that the plainspeople petitioned the king for Sikkim citizenship. In fact "Indians" as they were known were not allowed to apply for citizenship and were not given citizenship except as an exceptional favour by royal decree. Anyway how does Nepalese forsaking Nepalese citizenship translate to loyalty and Marwari's doing ditto with Indian citizenship "disloyalty"? 4. Equating the Marwari's love for accumulating money through business (good and bad practices) as similar to the Nepalese love for money through mercenary soldering (atrocity or legitimate battle) certainly does not do credit to the latter in a comparison. B “PARANOID MUNDHRA." The Gorkhas, famous in battle, have always proved deadly enemies, whether in ruthlessly exterminating freedom fighters on behalf of the British in Jalianwala Bagh or in maintaining British imperialism on Argentinean soil. They have an equally well deserved reputation for putting moral concerns of right and wrong completely aside when delivering services for contracted payment—- very often even with their lives. In fact they also have more than an equal reputation for single minded tenacity and foolhardy courage in pursuit of ensuring blood payment against their monetary obligations. They are in short the perfect mercenary breed. "GULCHAY DOCTOR." A strong mention has been made that the Gorkhas would do almost anything, even to the extent of losing their lives, for the sake of a buck or two…isn't that what exactly P.C.'s glorified 'traders' have always done, are doing and will do, and that includes you too, P.C. bhaiji. Exceptions do occur and it will be a rare event to see a trader leave his green pastures for a lesser lucrative area to express solidarity to his community, district, state or nation in problems. The best perfume, to have and to flaunt, to a trader has always been money, money and more money. The more the merrier. Three cheers to the banks and three, much louder, cheers to the black economy. COMMENT. Three cheers indeed and where is the negative in this. I assume that a trader's contribution is to make money for the economy and this is welcome especially when he does do this without sacrificing precious life. How does this become a negative? More to the point how does it compare to the foolhardy nature of losing your own life for petty money after leaving your home and hearth and nation. One uses brains the other brawn ----- but both for money. Obviously neither Gorkha soldier nor Marwari trader would leave home for a less lucrative arena. Both go for money and that is the only valid comparison here. At best again both are traders. The Rajput and Gorkha are both great soldiers as the Newars and Marwaris are great businessmen with positive or negative connotations, as they deserve. C “PARANOID MUNDHRA." Today, they form a forced majority in the Darjeeling hills, and conspire by threat and sheer force to actually constitute a state that compromises India's strategic chicken neck corridor. (In which specific area, ironically they do not actually constitute even a remote majority and the inclusion of which actually deprives the proposed Nepalese State of its very political basis) So why would they fight for a state where they might be in a minority and who would plan and pay for such a scenario. Things might become substantially clearer when you apply the likely proviso , that the Bangladeshi element of the population in these plain areas could in conjunction with this hill population decisively out vote the actual inhabitants or Bhumiputras of this region .(Note that there is a pre-independence history of an attempt in both Darjeeling and Islampur to secede to East Pakistan .) How are immigrants demanding a state? "GULCHAY DOCTOR." And in this case let me just tell you about the REAL exception: an absolutely exceptionally exceptional event. Just before our independence the Gorkha Regiments were divided between Britain (2nd, 6th, 7th and 10th Regiments) and India (the rest up to the 10th Gorkhas, the eleventh being a post independence event). The cocksure British wanted to drive home the point that they had been good masters and in an effort to prove it they announced that any of the Gorkhas transferred to the British Regiments (2nd, 6th, 7th and 10th Gorkhas) could voluntarily leave it in favour of the Indian Gorkhas. To the surprise, shock and dismay of the British 90% of the Gorkhas opted to serve under the Indian Gorkhas despite the better salaries, cushy living standards, better food and health care, and fatter pension under the British. (Col. C.L. Proudfoot: Flash of the Khukri, Vision Books, New Delhi, 1984, p. 27) How many traders (cultural ambassadors, did you say!) turn their noses against the smell of crisp sterling pounds in favour or the rupee which is eighty times less the value in the market. But the story has a tail that wags to the discomfort of people like PC. Col. Khanduri recalls that the Gorkhas "were officered exclusively by high grade British officers and the process of 'Indianization' was not allowed to seep in…" (Chandra B. Khanduri: A Re-constructed History of Gorkhas, Gyan Sagar Publication, Delhi, 1992, p. 280) and even then the Gorkhas opted to serve under the Indian Gorkhas. Need anything more be said! Ah! Yes, Khanduri is a Garhwali whose ancestors had been conquered and slain by the Gorkha khukuri during the Nepali expansion under Prithvinarayan Shah and his sons. Khanduri, like a true historian, does not scratch the old wound to make it bleed again. COMMENT. Of-course they would opt for India, as it was the better bargain. It was closer to home and India required a bigger numbers of recruits. India offered security of identity and citizenship while the British would pay their servants well, but they would never be awarded equal Status with the British. Similarly Ranks and promotion were restricted in the British army for the mercenary outsider and after service tenure was completed he had to return to Nepal/India. So India was simply the better choice. Also the British atrocities in India by then had created a general revulsion toward that race --- so much so that an army under Netaji with Indian Gorkhas also in tow was fighting against the British. People are confusing legitimate Indian Gorkhas with the non-Indian immigrants who have obviously to be verified for their integrity along with similar Bangladeshi immigrants to ensure that they are not inimical to Indian interests. D "PARANOID MUNDHRA." In such a scenario, (with the well established proclivity of the Nepalese in the hills to blackmail the ordinary citizen and weak governments into acceding to their every whim by frequent and long bandhs) they could demand any price from an enemy state to rustle up trouble in the new state. Remember Ghising frequently called bandhs, even for 40 days and he did this every time the tourist season came around so that the suffering of the ordinary people in the plains or in Sikkim could be made to bear on the inevitable government reaction. This success only made the blackmailers bolder every time they succeeded in getting their impossible and even illegal demands accepted. Finally ,to their utter astonishment ,when even the illegal 6th schedule constitutional amendment was conceded, it dawned on them that this weak and corrupt governments would knuckle down to every demand right or wrong and so the bold new demand for a state with Siliguri in tow to cut India in two. "GULCHAY DOCTOR." Jalianwala Bagh is an unfortunate incident. The Gorkhas just happened to be the right people at the right time for the wrong purpose. 'Right people' because the strongest and therefore the most valued quality in a soldier is to obey a command, even if it means to charge 'into the valley of death' and the Gorkhas would obey any command ( Hukumko jawab chhaina). 'Right time' because it so happened that the Gorkha were garrisoned at that place else it could have been the Sikhs, Marathas, Rajputs etc COMMENT. Mundhra's comment about Ghising is unfortunate as portraying a mad man as a representative of a community is unfair. However, obeying illegal commands (British or Ghising ) or putting India's security at stake or making illegal political demands without any sense of constitutional regard or propriety is not what a true Indian would be expected to support. "Right people" for obeying such terrible orders? Why. "Right time "? To crush the Indian freedom movement ? I think the doctor will find from his own quoted sources that the British choice of solders was very specific and not by chance . General Dyer specifically discarded other available solders, as it was perceived that they would surely revolt against such a murderous command. And doctor where is the honour in obeying an order to shoot helpless children and women to the extent that they were forced by the sheer barbarity of the soldiers to throw themselves into a well where they drowned. Comparing forcing children to charge into wells in fear to solders with "charging into the valley of death" is going a bit to far. Talk about below the belt arguments. Doctor declares “nothing more needs to be said about soldering of this kind" Really should we say nothing about obeying an illegal command to commit murder and for which even the British themselves punished Dyer?? Perhaps the Punjab government should put a stop to the planned observation of the centenary of the ghastly event. It is difficult for Indians in general to forget and Sikhs in particular not to remember this event? Of course the Sikhs would not have obeyed such an order nor would the Gorkhas against helpless Nepalese women and children. E "PARANOID MUNDHRA." The opposition meanwhile is only too well aware that it has the communists by the hip and true to Gorkha characteristics will press for the kill mercilessly. This division has the potential to separate the Indian republic from the seven eastern states exactly as Pakistan was rent apart from Bangladesh. "GULCHAY DOCTOR." In this regard one must venture back into Indian history and there we find that the British always used the Indian sepoys (sipahi) for the expansion of the British empire. It was the sipahi from a conquered Indian kingdom that was used to conquer another Indian kingdom and from this conquered kingdom more sipahis were recruited to conquer another Indian kingdom or principality. Without the assistance of the Indian sipahis even Clive would have lost Plassey and we would have been spared the drudgery of learning our history punctuated by Governor-Generals, Viceroys, Sirs, Lords, and all that crap. Just prior to the Sepoy Mutiny/Revolt Indian sipahis were used to conquer Punjab . When the sipahi mutiny broke out the British used the Sikhs, who had an axe to grind, to quell the rebellion. Now to whom do we point the accusing index finger to? The Indian sipahis, the Sikhs or the British (the latter didn't care a hoot, anyway, as to who killed whom as long as the job was done). Each of this must be remembered for its tragic consequences but not as a point of argument to pit one against another. Jalianwala Bagh massacre has been fortunately remembered, re-written and recalled by historians for its gross tragedy and its aftermath but not necessarily because the Afghans and Gorkhas pulled the trigger. But P.C. is not a historian, not even by the most generous of concessions, and so he will delight at punching home the point for, unfortunately, the wrong reasons. COMMENT History must be remembered not for its tragic consequences but to ensure the mistakes are not repeated to repeat past blunders. (Debacle of Pakistan in Bangladesh or killing of innocents in Jallianwalla Bagh.) Solder against solder in battle and solder for murdering unarmed and helpless children and women are surely different or am I missing a point. P.C. is certainly not the Historian but the good Doctor does claim the nomenclature and he will agree that Jallianwalla Bagh is remembered because it was different from all his examples of legitimate battles between soldiers----- and there lies the rub and the difference between atrocity and tragedy. Methinks even the British punished Dyer for his atrocity and not because of any tragedy associated with the horrendous massacre. F "PARANOID MUNDHRA." Little do the Paper Nepalese Tigers in Sikkim and Darjeeling realize that people like Tiger Bal Thackeray and the North Eastern states like Meghalaya are watching their every move with rapt attention .Should these (RESERVATIONS FOR MAJORITY COMMUNITY )law pass Judicial scrutiny all these governments would quickly pass similar laws and over one Crore Nepalese from Maharashtra alone would be at the receiving end of a law which would have been promoted by their very own Nepalese champions. Earlier a similar situation in Shillong when the Nepalese were specifically thrown out of the state required much tact, deft handling and effort on the part of the central government to restore the status quo ante. Were such a law to pass in Sikkim they would be one more reciprocal mass Exodus of Nepalese from the North East and they would all flock to Sikkim and Darjeeling. This area has already seen a huge influx because of the refugees from Bhutan and another influx would create many social tensions in the foothills which would certainly bode ill for the interests of the Government of India. Of-course the supreme irony of any such law would be that a Nepalese would be responsible for implementing a law that the Nepalese have historically been fighting against literally in every corner of the world that this community has migrated to in search of employment hearth and home. "GULCHAY DOCTOR." There are several places where Mundra hits below the belt. (Kina gulchay kheleko!) Where an issue is so encompassing as DARJEELING-–BIMAL GURUNG–SIKKIM–CHAMLING–KOLKATA– DELHI one should not let personal animosity to be one of the operating drive to move an argument. COMMENT Mundhra's figures are from his imagination. The total population of Nepalese in India is not more than 30 Lacs and only half of these are in the Darjeeling area. Where does this "One Crore" Nepalese total come from? However Doctor with his obvious animosity towards Marwari's and traders can hardly comment as it would be like the pot calling the kettle black. G "PARANOID MUNDHRA." Instead an impotent central government and its corrupt bureaucracy shares in the institutionalized corruption of Chief Ministers like Pawan Kumar Chamling who is openly pumping in money into this separatist movement. Chamling has been successfully postponing a well documented corruption case in the Supreme Court and Officers of the Central Government are openly helping him in this exercise. Now the same central governments will send in army and paramilitary forces to die fighting in these same hills pitted against the money and forces provided by this same Chamling under the guise of promoting singers etc. A classic case of the right hand and the left hand of the same body destroying each other in full public view. Were this case of misappropriated assets followed up vigorously, one of the main source of finance could at least be stopped from becoming a tool in the hands of India's enemies. Instead Chamling is successfully diverting the attention of the people by pretending to fight a another Nepalese cause so that he can claim political dividends at India's cost and simultaneously he also aims to scare the Judiciary from proceeding against him by projecting a national emergency in the region . "GULCHAY DOCTOR." About Chamling amassing ill-gotten wealth, the last word is yet to be said. Till the courts pronounces the verdict any attempt to buttress one's line of reasoning using a pending suit amounts to deception. I could very well file a suit saying P.C. Mundra is an alien and should someone else use the litigation to structure his argument that whatever P.C. is writing is in the interest of aliens would not do fairness to reasonable assertion. The same goes for Mani Kumar Subba's nationality and his supposed guilt of murder. Using unproven matters as proofs takes away any credibility that P.C. might have achieved earlier. COMMENT But both these matters are matters that have been discussed in the Supreme Court of India and the Indian Parliament and in the print and televised media. It is even acknowledged in televised sting operations where both parties have spoken in the public domain. And yet because it is inconvenient the doctor would not allow mention? It is now being said in the public domain that Chamling even holds Nepalese citizenship and so has dual nationality! H "PARANOID MUNDHRA." Remember that this area is of prime importance to a. The Chinese who apart from wanting to create problems for India see the Rumtek throne as a serious challenge to their authority in Tibet as the Karmapa will certainly in due course replace the Dalai Lama as the chief of the Tibetan movement. b. The Pakistani's to limit the size and strength of India.C. There is no dearth of Chinese and Pakistani agents in the garb of monsters, monks, mullahs and monastery's ready to inundate this area with any amount of money to destabilize India. "GULCHAY DOCTOR." A lot of generalizations have been resorted to and any student of debate and logic knows that generalization is one of the biggest and deepest pitfalls in a discussion. Take for example the Jains. Almost all the major financial scams in India were the handiwork of one Jain or the other. Nevertheless, a public debater will invariably and instinctively distance himself a long way off in generalizing that all Jains are scamsters…he would be wary of even saying 'most Jains are scamsters'. Don't let personal dislike cloud your argument and don't generalize to argue a specific point. COMMENT How can you bring in a new generalization into an argument yourself and then claim that one should not use a generalization to buttress an argument. Where is the generalization in separating Indian Nepalese from others just as foreign Indians of any tribe are different from their Indian counterparts. Generalizations about Chinese or Pakistani intent are absolutely in order in view of past experiences. Specific mention of Chamling not allowed! General mention of Gorkhas not allowed! But the generalization about the Marwari trader and money made earlier on is fair? Did somebody talk about logic in debate? J " PARANOID MUNDHRA." In fact a chauvinistic Chamling cares little for Indian concerns or the Indian constitution .He recently used his brute majority in the Sikkim assembly to pass a patently illegal act reserving 95% of the jobs in the state .The Governor returned the bill as patently unconstitutional and promptly in defiance of even the Governor's constitutional office Chamling re passed another similar Act, again an illegal bill, this time reserving 80% of the jobs for the majority community.! It is truly amazing that the Sikkimese Nepalese have forgotten so quickly the discrimination that they suffered for decades under the erstwhile ruler and now actually seek to impose similar discriminatory laws on others in the state. Supposedly in fulfillment of an apocryphal prophecy the betrayal of the king of Sikkim by the Nepalese apparently forewarned the king of Bhutan. He than supposedly took preventive action and the Government of India also realizing their earlier folly in Sikkim helped the Bhutanese monarch to save both his people and larger Indian interests. "GULCHAY DOCTOR." Anyway, there is a point where I find a convergence of view with Mundra. 80% reservation of jobs for a single community is wrong. It will invite judicial enquiry, if it hasn't already. On this matter I P.C. my best wishes. COMMENT Yes indeed Doctor you would need to support this because if Bimal Gurung lets out that he plans exactly the same fate for the minority communities that Chamling aims at in Sikkim --Nobody just Nobody from the Doars or the Tibetans or the Bihari's or the Marwari's of Mundhra's tribe or the Bhutia's of Doctors tribe would join the Gorkhaland brigade. The concept would be restricted to the hills where a total of a ridiculous 14 Lacs Nepalese would be demanding a Gorkha state in a huge area which encompasses more non-Gorkhas than Gorkhas. "PARANOID MUNDHRA." Simultaneously and shamefully the same rights that Indians doled out without a thought to Nepalese in India, Indians in Nepal , living there for generations, were and are systematically denied —-and our impotent representatives in the Indian Embassy have actually turned their back every time that an insult or injury has been hurled at the Indians in that country. Any self respecting government would rush to the help of their citizenry. We have seen both British and U.S. government's fight tenaciously for even criminal citizens like Peter Bleach who they have ultimately even repatriated. The Indian foreign service bred on Nehruian contempt for the trading class has still not realized that the van guard for any propagation of Indian culture, thought ,values and views in any area of the world can only succeed when the Indian trading class in that country succeeds and not because of any supposed promotional efforts of the embassies or government departments.( Today the business community in USA and U.K. for example do much more to promote Indian political interests than any government effort etc) Unfortunately our foreign service has always held our trading class in contempt and our diplomats would not normally been seen dead in their company in the various countries where they are posted. In fact they treat them as pariahs and actually propagate that Gandhi's tribe are not true representatives of India and Indian ness. So true to form, a weak central government actually allowed, under Nar Bahadur Bhandari's pressure, 80,000 Nepalese immigrants "citizenship rights" overnight. Under Chamling these very same immigrants now support the separatist movement. Simultaneously the same central government deprives Indian citizens of fiscal benefits, freely given to these recent immigrants, even though the deprived Indians are older residents and have contributed and sacrificed much much more for this region and its development. Epilogue. The Madheses of southern Nepal fed up with the age old discrimination and bias of the Nepalese in the North have decided on and are near succeeding in an armed struggle to carve Nepal into two halves. North : Nepalese. South : Indian Madesh.
    (Posted by tashi Pemba, February 23, 2009, 6:46 AM)
  • image Great work! We are glad to have you as an expert on the history of Gorkhaland.Can you please be more elaborate and analyse in your next article on the reasons of failure of various parties on the issue of Gorkhaland and where they had gone wrong despite such painstalking efforts by them since 1907. And please exclude GJJM as it is on the job.
    (Posted by kiran Rizal, October 23, 2008, 12:30 PM)
  • image Sorry, did not know about this site. But better late than never. Great work, ever since the Friday Column days in the Statesman, I knew you had it in you for details and hard work to achieve it.
    (Posted by Pratap Singh Rai, October 8, 2008, 6:23 AM)
  • image Excellent research and presentation. Similar to the 'COME ON/CAMAN' depth
    (Posted by Tshering Lama (Norden), August 23, 2008, 2:30 PM)
  • image an excellent article...an eye-opener...for me atleast.i was unaware of this long on-going struggle for gorkhaland.thank you,ashyang.
    (Posted by rinchen, August 17, 2008, 6:12 PM)
  • image Inspite of more than a century of contribution to the nation building process by the Gorkhas, what more will it take to clear the illfounded perception of Iron Man Sardar Ballabhbhai Patel and his ilk that ". . . The people inhabiting these portions have no established loyalty or devotion to India. Even Darjeeling and Kalimpong areas are not free from pro-Mongoloid prejudices.”? That's the biggest point, I think, we all need to ponder.
    (Posted by Bharat Mani Pradhan, August 16, 2008, 10:08 AM)
  • image One thing i noticed here is u hav no respect for ghising the ishkuse...all leaders name were addressed as "Shri" or "title"...but u just mention subhash ghising....anywys...ciao..
    (Posted by rubin, August 15, 2008, 5:46 PM)
Most Popular
Most Commented
Advertisements
SUPPORT DARJEELINGTIMES




}