Autonomy movements in India represent the demands by various regions, ethnic groups, and communities for greater self-rule or independence from central authority. These movements often arise from perceptions of political neglect, cultural alienation, economic exploitation, or a desire to preserve ethnic and linguistic identity.
Historical Context and Roots
India’s federal structure accommodates a significant degree of autonomy for states, but dissatisfaction has led to the rise of autonomy movements in several parts of the country. Some of these movements seek full independence, while others demand more powers within the constitutional framework.
- Northeast India has witnessed several autonomy movements. For instance:
- The Naga movement, which began in the 1950s, sought independence for Nagaland. Although Nagaland was granted statehood in 1963, insurgent demands continued. Groups like the NSCN (National Socialist Council of Nagalim) continue to seek greater autonomy or a separate homeland.
- Mizo nationalism culminated in an armed rebellion in the 1960s. However, through negotiations, the Mizo Accord of 1986 brought peace and granted Mizoram statehood with substantial autonomy.
- Bodo and Gorkha movements have also demanded either separate states or special autonomous councils to protect their linguistic and ethnic identity.
- Jammu and Kashmir had a unique autonomy under Article 370 of the Indian Constitution. The region had its own constitution and significant legislative powers. However, in August 2019, Article 370 was abrogated, and the state was bifurcated into two Union Territories. This move has intensified debates over federalism and regional autonomy.
- In Punjab, the Anandpur Sahib Resolution (1973) demanded greater autonomy for the state, focusing on more power over resources, language, and religion. Although the movement eventually led to violent separatism in the 1980s, it also reflected broader federalist concerns.
Causes of Autonomy Movements
- Ethnic and cultural distinctiveness: Many regions have distinct languages, traditions, and histories that fuel a sense of separateness.
- Economic neglect: Perceived or real economic marginalization often leads to demands for self-governance.
- Political marginalization: Lack of adequate political representation fuels resentment and calls for autonomy.
- Centralization of power: Over-centralized decision-making in Delhi is seen as neglectful of local issues.
Response by the State
The Indian state has generally responded to autonomy movements in two ways: negotiation and repression. In some cases, such as Mizoram and Darjeeling, dialogue has resulted in the formation of autonomous councils or new states. In others, such as Kashmir and parts of the Northeast, military intervention and strict laws like AFSPA (Armed Forces Special Powers Act) have been used.
Autonomy movements, while challenging for national integration, have also led to the strengthening of Indian federalism by encouraging the creation of new states and special administrative arrangements.