Module Detail

Political Science
Subject Name

Indian Politics
Paper Name

Processes of Dis/integration: National

Module Name/Title

Module Id

Pre-requisites

To explain the concept of national

Objectives integration; causes of disintegration and
promotion of national integration in India.
Integration, Nation, National Integration
Keywords Council, Disintegration

1
Role Name Affiliation

Professor Ashutosh Kumar

Principal Investigator Panjab
University,
Chandigarh

Prof. Sanjay Lodha;

Paper Coordinator MLS,University,
Udaipur

Prof. Rekha Saxena Delhi

University,
Delhi

Madhura Damle (Research JNU, New Delhi

Content Writer/Author Scholar)
(CW)

Content Reviewer (CR) Asha Sarangi JNU, New

Delhi

Language Editor (LE) Professor Ashutosh Kumar, Panjab

University,
Chandigarh

Module: Processes of Dis/integration: National

Introduction

What is a nation? Is it a natural entity? Is it a psychological feeling? Is it an ideology? Does it

exist from the time immemorial? Were there ‘nations’ in the world before, say, seventeenth
century? When and how did various nations come into being? Were they ‘invented’? Are
nations built?

2
 Benedict Anderson defines nation as ‘an imagined political community’.1That is to
say, all members of a nation never get to see, meet or interact with all their fellow-members;
yet, they think or imagine that they are members of one community, that is, nation. For
example, a villager in Kerala may not have visited any place outside Kerala, she may not
have met any individual from the other parts of India, yet she is able to imagine that that
people residing in Kerala, Maharashtra, Orissa, Mizoram and Himachal Pradesh are all
members of the same nation. A nation is defined here as a community because it is always
conceived as a deep, horizontal comradeship.2 Integration or national integration, as it is often
called, is a process of developing this comradeship, a feeling of unity amongst the members
of a nation. The process of national integration is closely connected to the projects of nation-
building as well as state formation. It is a process common to most of the national states.

1. Conceptual Framework
1.1 Meaning
Integration refers to coming together. It is a process whereby people living in an area
develop a feeling of a sense of community.3 No nation is culturally or ethnically
homogeneous. People speaking various languages, professing various religions, belonging to
numerous cultural and ethnic groups reside in every nation. Integration is the process of total
or partial merging of these communities, groups, people into one nation. It means
subordinating one’s linguistic, religious, regional or cultural identity to the national identity.
For example, one would say, ‘I am an Indian first, and only then a Sikh’ or ‘my primary
identity is Indian. Then I am a Bengali.’

It is important to note that diversity, pluralism or presence of multiple communities within a

nation are not necessarily prone to balkanization, secession or disintegration. Diversity
enriches a country. Diversity may lead to conflicts but they are not necessarily impediments
to national integration. Secondly, integration does not mean smoothening out all the
diversities or crush identities other than the national identity.

1
Anderson, Benedict. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London,
New York: Verso, 1990.
2
Ibid.
3
Rajagopalan, Swarna. “National Integration in India, Sri Lanka and Pakistan: Constitutional and Elite
Visions”. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 3 no. 4 (1997): 1-38 .

3
 Myron Weiner presents a range of meanings attached to the term ‘integration’ in his
article “Political Integration and Political Development”.4

Firstly, Integration refers to “the process of bringing together culturally and socially
discrete groups into a single territorial unit and the establishment of a national identity.”
There are multiple groups characterized by various languages, religions and cultures within a
nation. They may or may not be coterminous with territorial units of a nation. For example, in
India, the Telugu speaking community is more or less coterminous with the Andhra Pradesh.
On the other hand, Christian community is spread all over the nation. Now, a Telugu
speaking person might identify herself with Telugu community, and a Christian with the
Christian community. Integration means subordinating one’s identities towards linguistic,
religious or cultural communities to the national identity. In simpler words, one might say: I
am first an Indian and only then a Telugu or a Christian. This type of integration is termed as
National Integration by Weiner.

Secondly, the term integration denotes ‘problem of establishing national central

authority over subordinate political units or regions which may or may not coincide with
distinct cultural or social groups’. Various states in India namely U.P., Chhattisgarh, Gujarat
are political units or regions in India. Integration also means establishing that all these
regions/ states are ultimately ruled by one central government. While in previous meaning of
the term, emphasis was on integration of cultural groups, in this definition, the emphasis is on
territorial units and establishing authority. This type of integration is termed as ‘territorial
integration’ by him.

The third sense of the term described by Weiner is ‘elite-mass integration’, that is,
bridging the gap between rulers/elites and the governed/ masses.

Fourthly, integration also means ‘the minimum value consensus necessary to maintain
a social order’.

Finally, integration, or integrative behaviour as he calls it, refers to ‘capacity of

people in a society to organize for some common purpose’. In spite of the cultural, social
differences people belonging to one nation may unite for a common goal. For example, the
spirit of oneness shown by the people in time of war.

4
Weiner, Myron. “Political Integration and Political Development”. Annals of the American Academy of
Political and Social Science 358 (1965): 52-64.

4
 Weiner maintains that the problem of integration, or holding a political system and
society together, is felt more in the developing societies than either modern or traditional
societies. He argues that in a developing political system, the political leadership or people
aspire to expand the functions of the system. That is, government undertakes new tasks and
functions. To carry out these new functions, a new level of integration, togetherness, unity is
called for. For example, he explains, colonial regimes permitted only limited political
participation by people. But the independent new nations permit a greater public participation
in politics. This is an expansion of the functions of political system, and requires more
integration of the people. Therefore, the question of integration arises in such a nation.

1.2 Indian Definitions of National Integration

In the Indian context, the concept of national integration is often described as ‘unity in
diversity’. Kothari Commission (Education Commission, 1964-66) defines it thus: “By
National Integration, we understand as oneness of India and Indians despite the fact that we
belong to various regions, speak different languages and profess faith in numerous religions
we are one.”5

In the National Integration Conference of 1961, S. Radhakrishnan explained,

“National Integration is a psychological and educational process involving the development
of a feeling of unity, solidarity and cohesion in the hearts of the people, a sense of common
citizenship and a feeling of loyalty to the Nation.”6

1.3 Integration as an Aspect of Modernization and Development

In 1950s, the theories concerning political development and modernization evolved in

the discipline of political science (comparative politics). The modernization theories
distinguished characteristics of ‘traditional’ and ‘modern’ societies and gave an account of
the process of modernization, i.e., transition of ‘traditional’ societies to ‘modern’ ones.
Samuel Huntington, in his article “The Change to Change”, lays down the characteristics of
the process of modernization, agreed upon by scholars.7 One of the important features of
modernization, as pointed out by him, is that modernization is a homogenizing process.
“Modernization produces tendencies toward convergence among societies. Modernization

5
As cited in Deol, Harbhajan Singh, ed. Approaches to National Integration. Patiala: Punjabi University. 1997,
p.136.
6
Ibid.
7
Huntington, Samuel P. “The Change to Change: Modernization, Development, and Politics. Comparative
Politics 3 no. 3 (1971): 183-322.

5
involves movement “toward an interdependence among politically organized societies and
toward an ultimate integration of societies”8 (Italics mine).

‘National integration’ is one of the central characteristics identified with ‘political

development’ as well, as observed by Huntington.9 It was usually assumed in the theories on
political development that a developed polity must be a nation-state. Therefore, nation-
building or national integration was considered as a key aspect of political development.

Thus, integration is also defined as a rationalizing process that is necessary for

development, adjusting the traditional to the modern, the greater to the lesser traditions and
smoothening the path of modernization.

1.4 Measures to Achieve Integration

How is national integration achieved? Weiner describes public policy strategies which
are generally employed for the achievement of national integration.10 The governmental
policies aimed at integration may have an assimilationist approach or ‘unity in diversity’
approach, according to him. The assimilationist policies aim at the elimination of the
distinctive cultural traits of minority communities and the construction of a national culture,
which is usually culture of the dominant cultural group. The second type of policies is that of
unity in diversity - establishment of national loyalties without eliminating subordinate
cultures. In practice, he notifies, the states generally pursue policies that involve element of
both of these policies.

Anthony H. Birch points out to various steps taken by governments to promote

national integration.11 He classifies them into two categories: direct initiatives to foster
integration and reactive measures to minimize political effects of social and political
cleavages. In the first category, he includes creation of symbols of national identity such as
flags, anthems, sports teams, national airlines etc, socialization through education system,
establishment of political institutions representing all sections of society, efforts to ensure
economic welfare of minorities and so on. In the second category are included policies like
unsegregated schools, legal ban on ethnic discrimination etc.

8
Ibid. p. 289.
9
Huntington, Samuel P. “Political Development and Political Decay”. World Politics 17 no. 3(1965): 386-430.
10
Weiner “Political Integration”. 52-64.
11
Birch, Anthony H. Nationalism and National Integration. London: Unwin Hyman, 1989.

6
 Birch shows that national integration is not merely an outcome of public policies. It is
partly a by-product of other social and economic developments too. He calls the latter as
‘social mobilization’, which is, according to him, “the process by which industrialization
induces workers to leave their native villages so as to seek work in the new industrial areas,
thus eroding the social communities of rural areas and mobilizing the workers for absorption
into the larger national society”12. He also recognizes the role of means of transport and
communication and mass media in this process. Thus, he stresses on the role of technology
and industrialization in the integration process.

2. Problem of (Dis)Integration in India

2.1 Disintegrative / Fissiparous Forces

The anti-colonial movement in India led to the emergence of nationalism. However,

Hindu-Muslim schism which resulted into partition of the country, and ‘the centrifugal force
created by ten major languages each entrenched in its own historic territory, numbering
speakers in the tens of millions and wedded to differing time-honored scripts’13 were viewed
as major challenges to the process of construction of a new nation-state. As Selig S. Harrison
suggests, for Nehru, the major threats to Indian nation in the post independence period were
from within and hence he always appealed above all for national unity.14

The foremost threats to India’s national integration are identified as Communalism,

linguism, and regionalism. Let us look at them one by one.

2.1.1. Communalism

The colonial rulers played an important role in heightening communal consciousness

and communal stereotypes in India. It was during the British rule that the communal schisms
in medieval India were emphasized and communal identities concretized. The nationalist and
anti-colonial sentiment culminated into revivalist thinking in some cases. Thus, the newly
emerged nation was plagued with divisive forces of communalism, which further grew after
the independence.15 As Zoya Hasan puts across, ‘Communalism has served a pernicious
function by diverting attention from the objective condition of the systemic crisis and its

12
Ibid, p. 36
13
Harrison, Selig S. “The Challenges to Indian Nationalism”. Foreign Affairs 34 no. 4 (1956): 620-636.
14
Ibid.
15
Hasan, Zoya “Communalism and Communal Violence in India”. Social Scientist. 10 no 2 (1982): 25-39.

7
implications; instead, people tend to accuse the other community for their troubles.’16
Communal ideology leads to communal riots. Unfortunately India has witnessed numerous
small and massive riots from time to time.

2.1.2 Linguism

India is a multilingual country. Indian citizens, including those belonging to linguistic

minorities have right to instruction in their mother tongue. Linguistic diversity and people’s
love for their (respective) mother tongues is not problematic, what is problematic is linguistic
chauvinism, e.g. incidents of beating up people hailing from other states and speaking
different languages. Imposition of a particular language on the other linguistic communities
(whether by government or by dominant linguistic community) often creates ill-will. The
efforts of the central government to promote Hindi as the official language were met with
resistance in the Sothern India in form of Dravidistan movement. Linguism is closely linked
with regionalism and casteism since in many cases (especially in non-Hindi speaking
regions), language area coincides with state boundaries (after linguistic reorganization) and
caste structures.

2.1.3 Regionalism

Regionalism has taken a number of forms in India - emergence of regional political

parties invoking narrow regional sentiments, separatist movements, demands for (greater)
autonomy for states, inter-state disputes on various issues including river water and
boundaries, anti-migrant agitations along with demands for preference to be given to sons of
soil and so on. Disparities in regional (economic) development is one of the key factor giving
rise to regionalistic sentiments.

Apart from these, a number of other elements cause serious threats to integration
including casteism, rural-urban divide, socio-economic inequalities and do on.

2.2 National Integration Council (NIC)

The constitution makers and national leaders were very concerned about safeguarding
unity integrity of the nation. However, a need for devising special measures for promoting
national integration was felt only in 1961 when the first major riot between Hindu and
Muslim communities broke out in Jabalpur. The then Prime Minister of India Jawaharlal

16
ibid

8
Nehru convened a conference of the Chief Ministers and other state and central ministers in
May-June 1961 to consider the question of national integration. The ministers were
“unanimous in their decisions to check disruptionist tendencies which were opposed to the
very basis of the Indian constitution, and to provide equally for the growth of all minority
communities in India, whether religious or linguistic, and thus give a solid basis for national
integration.”17 Another conference of the Chief Ministers was held in August of the same
year in which the focus of discussion was question of language; followed by another
conference in September- October. The Conference decided to set up a National Integration
Council (henceforth NIC) to review all matters pertaining to national integration and to make
recommendations thereon. Nehru conceived of the NIC as a non-legal, non-official body of
eminent citizens from all walks of life. The NIC was constituted accordingly and its first
meeting was held in 1962.

The first NIC consisted of the Prime Minister, the Union Home Minister, the Chief
Ministers of all the states, leaders of political parties present in the parliament, the chairman
of the National Integration Committee of the Indian National Congress, the chairman of the
UGC, educationists, Commissioner for Linguistic Minorities, Commissioner for the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and individuals nominated by the Prime Minister.
However, it proved to be short-lived. The objective of national integration was supposed to
be achieved in 1962 because of the upsurge of national solidarity seen during Sino-Indian
war. The NIC was adjourned in November 1962.

It was revived by the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in 1968 after the outbreak of
violence in eastern India. The objectives of the Council (as declared in 1968) were:

“The foundation of our national life is common citizenship, unity in diversity,

freedom of religions, secularism, equality, justice-social-economic and political, and
fraternity among all communities. The National Integration Council reiterates its faith
in these values and dedicates itself to their achievement.”18

17
Decisions Taken by the Chief ministers’ Conference Held on 31st May and 1st June, 1961 and 10th, 11th and
12th August, 1961. National Integration.
18
http://mha.nic.in/pdfs/NICBackG.pdf

9
 In 1980, it was again reconstituted because of the attacks on Scheduled Caste persons
by savarnas.19 Till date the Council has met for fifteen times. The fifteenth meeting of the
NIC was held in 2011.

While in the initial period NIC focused on the problem of communalism, it shifted its
focus to inter-state disputes and combating regionalism and secessionist tendencies especially
in 1990s. Recently its focus has been fighting all forms of terrorism and extremism.

2.3 Measures

Education is seen as the most important means for bringing national integration. For
example, three language formula, revision of textbooks, fostering a national feeling through
teaching of Indian history, community singing of national anthem in schools, scholarships for
students going to other states for education and such other recommendations have been made
from time to time in order to foster integration. The right to instruction in mother tongue at
primary as well as secondary levels – especially right of minority language groups – have
been reaffirmed on several occasions and conferences. Mass media like print, films, radio and
literature have also been used for this purpose. Various government departments – central as
well as state – have been organizing a variety of programmes for promoting national
integration, e.g. arranging an exhibition giving account of unity and valour displayed by the
Indian forces in wars, inter-state youth exchange programmes, celebration of national
integration day, issue of commemorative postal stamp, coins, translation of literature from
one regional language to the others etc. However, as NIC asserts, promotion of national
integration is not merely a task of government; it is ‘the collective responsibility of all
citizens-politicians, educationists, artists, writers, teachers, parents and students, intellectuals,
businessmen and trade union leaders’.20

Summary

19
(Author not mentioned) “Charade of integration”. Economic and Political Weekly. 15 no. 11 (1980): 633-534.
20
http://mha.nic.in/pdfs/NICBackG.pdf

10
o National Integration is a process whereby people living in an area develop a feeling of
a sense of community. It involves subordinating one’s linguistic, religious, regional or
cultural identity to the national identity.
o Various implications attached to the term integration are: national integration,
territorial integration, elite-mass integration, value integration and integrative
behavior.
o In the modernization and development theories, national integration is considered as
an important feature of modernization and political development. Thus, integration is
considered as something modern, sign of development in these theories.
o Integration is promoted through various governmental policies - assimilationist or
unity in diversity kind of policies – which can be direct or indirect. It can also be
outcome of social mobilization.
o Communalism, linguism and regionalism are considered as the major disintegrating
factors in India.
o National Integration Council was set up in India in 1961. There have been fifteen
meetings of NIC till date.

11