(Published in The News Minute on 20 June 2014)
The Prime Minister
Shri Narendra Modi's taking oath in Hindi during the oath taking ceremony, and
many of his ministers following suit had sparked a minor speculation about the
re-emergence of the most dangerous, yet, for long subsided, language debate in
our country. It was being said that there was a possibility that Hindi would be
made the official language of the Union of India. The speculation received
further mileage when the Prime Minister spoke in Hindi to the SAARC heads and
also in the Bhutanese Parliament. His speaking in Hindi shouldn't have been
given such a dimension given the simple fact that he is more comfortable and at
ease in communicating in Hindi than English.
However, the
development that has now taken place needs to be given some serious thinking.
The central government has ordered its officials to use Hindi on social media
accounts. Political reaction came immediately from the DMK head Shri
Karunanidhi. "No one can deny it's (the central government) beginning to
impose Hindi against one's wish. This would be seen as an attempt to treat
non-Hindi speakers as second-class citizens," said the former Tamil screen
play writer turned politician.
To understand the
language issue in perspective, one must turn back into the pages of history.
The first opposition to Hindi came even before independence in 1937 when Madras
was under the Congress ministry headed by Shri. C. Rajagopalachari. In order to
equip the people of Madras to be 'employable all over India' he had made
learning Hindi compulsory in government run schools. However, understanding the
difficulty that would be faced by some to learn a 'foreign' language, he said
that failing in the Hindi examination would not block the students' promotion
to the higher class. He likened Hindi to 'chutney on the leaf,' asking people to
'taste it or leave it alone.'
The issue was as simple as that but the
opposition parties in general and the Justice Party (which would later become
the Dravidar Kazhagham under Periyar E.V.R. and even later split to form the
DMK under Shri Annadurai) in particular politicized the issue and saw it as an
act of undermining the Tamil language. Hindi was viewed as Aryan and
incorporating it in Dravidian Madras was something that the parties could not
brook. Protests in large scale were organized under the leadership of Shri
E.V.R. Naicker. Arrests, by the beginning of 1939, had reached a figure of 683.
The policy was later dropped by the British when the Congress ministry resigned
following the second world war. The protests took a toll on the popularity of the
Congress party in Madras and strengthened the position of EVR (he was since
then referred with reverence as Periyar, the Elder One) and his
protege Shri Annadurai, fondly called Anna.
The next major
opposition came in 1965. Republic Day of that year was pregnant for it
celebrated the fifteenth anniversary of our cherished Constitution and it was
this date that was set by its makers to make Hindi the official language.
Fifteen years 'grace period' had been given for all regions to learn Hindi. The
makers of our Constitution had chosen Hindi as the official language, but not
without opposition. The fact is that the motion was passed with a majority of
just one single vote. However, when there were unending misgivings about Hindi
being given such a status, the Official Languages Act of 1963, on the
insistence of the then Prime Minister Shri Jawaharlal Nehru included a clause
that English 'may' still be used along with Hindi in all official
communications. But, sadly, Jawaharlalji would not live till 1965, the
deadline. After his death, the Hindi zealots had tried their best to
enforce what the Constitution had laid. Their main argument remained that Hindi
was the most spoken language in India. Strongest reactions came from Madras.
The ever articulate Anna, who was then the leader of DMK, replied with a
ridicule. 'If we had to accept the principle of numerical superiority
while selecting our national bird, the choice would have fallen not on the
peacock but on the common crow.' The centre did not relent.
On the Republic Day
two men in Madras self immolated in protest. I sacrifice my life at the altar
of Tamil, one wrote before committing the act. Madras was in a fury. There was
rioting, a police station was set on fire, boards displaying names in Hindi
were blackened, arrests crossed thousands and two central ministers from Madras
resigned. The centre then bowed. Prime Minister Shri Lal Bahadur Shastri
announced that Jawaharlalji's promise would be kept, notwithstanding what the
Constitution had laid.
Since 1965, there
hasn't been much of the language debate. But, the issue remains far from being
fully settled. It is like a sleeping volcano, the lava of which has gained more
heat and vigour because of Modiji and his government's order.
Shri
Mulayam Singh Yadav of the SP has demanded a ban on use of English in
Parliament. "We are ready to speak in Hindi if Mulayam Singh is ready to
talk in Tamil. Let him learn Tamil, and we will learn Hindi," Shri T.K.S.
Elangovan of the DMK is reported to have said some days back in response. More
recently, yesterday, he said that if the 'government respects the Parliament it
will respect Nehru's words.' The ruling party in Tamil Nadu, the AIADMK
had issued an order that only Tamil shall be taught upto class tenth. It says
that the students, if interested, can learn other languages later. It would be
detrimental if politicians and political parties make such demands and issues
such orders. They should be more accommodative and act as statesmen than
politicians. 'The bane of India,' said Shri Nani Palkhiwala 'is the plethora of
politicians and the paucity of statesmen.' Imposition will never help the
language cause. Debates and consensus alone will prove fruitful and lasting.
The
three language formula that had been advocated should be put to practice. What
Shri Robin Sharma said is true that 'what makes relationships, communities and
countries great are not the things that we have in common but the differences
that make us unique.' Of course as a sub continent, we are diverse, but, it is
good to have as an official language one that has its origin in our own land,
than having’foreign’ English. Whether it should be Hindi, or Tamil, or some
other language can be debated. Hindi may be numerically superior but the
concerns of every language should be taken into account. Politicians issuing
statements that are contradictory to each other from every corner of the
country can affect the existence of our country.
The
government at the centre should put an end to this debate once and for
all. It has a clear mandate to take a decision. It should immediately
convene a conference of states and find a concrete solution for the problem
lest it pave way for riots and unnecessary animus between people speaking
different languages. For the sake of its existence, the central government
should not sink responsibility and yet again leave the issue hanging. It is a
difficult decision to be made, but, imperative.
'Those who cannot
change their minds cannot change anything,' Mr George Bernard Shaw had said.
May those who take part in the language debate do so with ideas in their minds
that can accommodate change.
Jai Hind!
