Bihar: The Internal Colony

Dr. Sachchidananda Sinha

NK SINGH

The delicate question of the right of self-determination is as old as the institution of the State itself. Be it Biafra, Bangladesh, Ireland, Nagaland, Kashmir or Tibet, it is the same old story. The whole of Indochina, especially Vietnam, is aflame because the biggest imperium List power in the world was deprived of its right to self-determination.

In this book, Mr Sachchidananda Sinha has forcefully pleaded for the right of self-determination and the right to secede of different nationalities "who for reasons of history is part of one of the existing nations, but in all other respects are different and capable of having an independent national existence". He bitterly criticises the federal system of government, points out the 'disturbing trend of centralisation of power and seeks to re-examine the whole Centre-State relationship in this light.

All this has been written with special reference to the Indian context, the author may be credited with having withstood the "emotional overtones" caused by the opiate of nationalism. According to him, the past legacy of colonialism has continued even an independent India, especially so in the rewarded States like Bihar, Eastern UP, Orissa and Assam. A study of the situation in Bihar and a study-in-copies of Delhi has been made to show the forms and effects of regional exploitation.

As far as the case study and the main topic of the book, regional imbalance, are concerned it goes fine; his thinking is not vitiated by emotional overtones'. However the shadow of 'personal overtones' is there. The author is considered one of the main theoreticians of the 'democratic socialist movement and a (self-proclaimed) follower of Lenin. 

Not that he is not an ordinary follower. Hence whatever he thinks must be followed by Lenin and not vice versa. He accuses Stalin of loving turned a "rabid centraliser and an opponent" of the rights of nationalities by amalgamating the Soviet Republics of Russia into the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. 

What about Lenin, who was in power at that time? "Due to ill health, he was kept away from active participation in the affairs of the party and the government. "

"However, in a series of three articles, the last to be penned by him, he bitterly denounced the move". Here the author quotes Lenin from a not too much authentic source, to be precise Bertram D. Woolle. Lenin died soon after and his views were suppressed".

It would have been better if the author had kept his fancies and commie-betting apart and refrained from including this material in his otherwise well-documented book. There are five chapters. In the first chapter-Nationalism:

The New Opiate -- the author says that nationalism is far stronger an opiate than religion.

The second chapter without Conquest deals with the federal system of government and points out that nationalism Invariably gets identified with the dominant interests within the nation. This frequently results in total subordination of the interests of those minorities who are incapable of defending themselves,

In the third chapter, A Case Study in Exploitation, the author shows that compared to other States Bihar is on the lowest rung of progress in all the spheres although its share in national revenue is not that insignificant, Even in the master of natural rewards is one of the rides States in the country.

Though the British ride ended in 1947, Bihar never knew the intensity se form ow a break in of colonial exploitation. As the role of British capital declined, Indian capitalists from outside Bihar jumped into the breach to continue the traditional colonial loot.

The point could be made clear if a comparison is made between the nature of the British exploitation of India and the exploitation of Biharis by non-Biharis. The sheet anchor of British policy in this regard was to hamper the development of the manufacturing industry as far as possible to keep a wide market for British manufacturers and to develop India mainly as a source of raw materials. 

Besides, they also had an interest in developing transportation to open up the country for their trade and in the plantation industry which could give them a monopolistic hold on certain important items in world trade. Since minerals, particularly coal, were essential for many industries including transportation, they had to develop mining also. 

It was only much later, in the face of foreign competition, when the clear advantage of cheap Indian labour and of using locally its raw material was realised, that manufacturing industries began to be encouraged. Of course, good care was taken to see that these industries did not harm British home industries. Irrespective of whether the local industries were thwarted or developed, the main aim of transferring the maximum possible tribute from India to England was always kept in view.

What is the present-day situation?

Bihar, the author says, continues to pay tribute to outside financial and other interests on each of the above counts. Almost the entire Industrial and banking interests in Bihar are controlled by outsiders. So also are a large part of its trade and transportation. 

A person resident in Bihar holds eight per cent of the total value of all categories of shares issued by companies registered in Bihar and one per cent of the total value of all categories of shares issued by companies registered in West Bengal and working in Bihar.

The share of the residents of Bihar in business capital in terms of both the number of shares and the amount of capital is small, and the bulk of business investment comes from external sources. 

Not only the ownership but even the higher executive posts in the industrial establishment in Bihar are held by outsiders. Similarly, most of the technical and even semi-skilled jobs are held by outsiders. In some industries, even unskilled Jobs (for example in mining) are held by outsiders. 

In fact, on this score, Bihar's condition is worse than that of Indians as a whole under the British. For reasons of geography, the British could not bring large numbers of their citizens to man the extensive network of business and political administration.

But Bihar has experienced a heavy influx of not only qualified and highly skilled but even semi-skilled or unskilled workmen, Since the ownership of these has been in the hands of outsiders a deliberate policy of discrimination against the Biharis had been pursued all along. 

Even in public sector undertakings, with their remote control from Delhi, the Bihari got a scant chance of entry or promotion except as select showpieces here and there, It sounds like 'fascist' and 'regionalist' propaganda. But the faces speak for themselves. The per capita development expenditure in Bihar

(1965-66) was only Rs. 12.40, compared to Rs. 29.57 in Tamil Nadu, Rs. 28.01 in Maharashtra, Rs. 25.29 in Punjab, Rs. 25 in Gujrat, Ra. 22.44 in West Bengal and the national average of Rs. 22.52. The distribution of loans by public financial institutions has done little to eliminate the disparities among the States. 

Between 1964 and 1968, Bihar received only Rs. 1.43 crores from the IDBI, whereas Maharashtra received Rs. 57.38 crores, Tamil Nadu Rs. 22 crores, West Bengal Re. 15.22 crores, and Gujarat Rs. 29.83 crores. While during 1961- 68, the per capita bank deposits in Bihar increased from Rs. 12 to Rs. 21, the per capita bank credits crawled up to only Rs. 7.8 from Rs. 5.2. 

During this time in. Maharashtra, the per capita bank deposits increased from Rs. 102 to Rs, 203, and per capita bank credit went up from Rs. 97 to Rs. 174. 

In the fourth chapter: A Study in Contrast the author wants to prove that "through the peculiar operation of the law of conservation Bihar's and other States' loss becomes New Delhi's gain. The disparities at the State level thus seem to follow the same logic that is evident throughout our economy, in that the rich grow richer as the poor remain where they are.

The fifth chapter, Rationale for Regional Movements, suggests a remedy against regional disparities: decentralisation and autonomy for the regions. The author gives three concrete proposals in the Indian context. First, the States must take over the ownership and control of all major industries, mines etc. within it or at least have the power to regulate trade in such a manner as to be able to give protection to new industries against competition from industries from outside the State.

Printing errors make painful reading.

Frontier 

December 29, 1973