NEW DELHI: Tamil Nadu’s protest over the withholding of central funds for schemes under Right to Education and Modi govt’s linking of these funds to implementation of the NEP by states, has reignited the “language war”. It’s a full-blown showdown between BJP and DMK for now, but there’s growing anxiety about whether it could force other players to take sides, adding to the already volatile political mix.
When CM M K Stalin wrote to PM Modi, demanding release of Rs 2,512 crore for RTE schemes, Centre pointed to TN’s non-implementation of NEP. Stalin shot back, declaring he would not agree to the “imposition of Hindi” even for many more crores. Education minister Dharmendra Pradhan reacted, telling Stalin: “NEP 2020 upholds the principle of linguistic freedom and ensures students continue to learn in the language of their choice.”
The north-south dimension of the issue is pronounced. Southern states like Karnataka and Kerala, and even others, take pride in their local languages and are receptive to suggestions that the north is imposing itself further — this, after having cornered political power post-Independence. Stalin’s remarks reflect DMK’s long-standing commitment to a two-language policy — Tamil and English — rooted in the state’s Dravidian ethos and its historical resistance to Hindi dating back to the anti-Hindi agitations of the 1930s and 1960s.
The lure of language as a political weapon is evident. Since TN upped the ante, Punjab in the north and Telangana in the south have announced that Punjabi and Telugu, respectively, would be compulsory main languages in schools.
The political edge to this spat has left the protagonists wary. While BJP is enthusiastic about Hindi, it also realises it cannot endear itself to the local population in the south by reinforcing its image as the party of north India. It is a key player in the bipolar politics of Karnataka, increasingly strong in Telangana, and is making an eager push in TN, Kerala and Andhra Pradesh by hoping to win over allies.
The tightrope walk for BJP was evident when its TN chief K Annamalai alleged DMK was “deliberately misconstruing the NEP for political gains”. It has stressed in the southern states that the DMK’s allegation of Hindi imposition is without a basis as the three-language, which was first rolled out under Congress govts, focuses on the promotion of all Indian languages, rather than a specific one.
Congress, meanwhile, has chosen to watch the battle from the sidelines. Party functionaries privately argue there is merit in DMK’s allegations, pointing to how acronyms of central schemes — and even the three new IPC-CrPC laws (Bharatiya Nyaya Samhita) — are chaste Hindi, without English equivalents. They call this new trend insensitive to southern sentiments, warning that it risks rekindling fears of “cultural imperialism”. They believe the row, if protracted, could also touch a raw nerve in the north-eastern states.
However, the principal opposition party is mindful that it is a north Indian party and cannot take a position where it is perceived as “anti-Hindi”. This is why AICC has adopted anuanced stance on the language issue. Many point to the historical handicap that national parties like Congress, which must cater to all regions, are saddled with — unlike regional parties, which can pander to very local sentiments.
This paradox was m ost evident in the 1990s when Samajwadi Party mascot Mulayam Singh Yadav crossed swords with late DMK neta M K Karunanidhi over the language issue, despite being allies at the Centre. The alliance along “secular vs communal” lines persists even today, though SP has since moderated its Hindi impulses by not joining the issue in recent years.
Despite lingering concerns, Congress sources claimed the risk of a blowback is minimal, as language has not been a significant issue in the north for many years. They believe political planks in upcoming elections — like Bihar and Kerala — will revolve around caste census, social justice and anti-incumbency, rather than language.
BJP will not make Congress’s tactical silence a big issue because it does not want its southern push to be hurt. But at the grassroots level, it will highlight Congress’s refusal to distance itself from Stalin in the same way it talked up DMK’s anti-Sanatan stand and Congress’s disinclination to disengage itself from it.