Under academic guise

A recent proposal for Master’s programme at the Special Centre for the Study of North East India (SCSNEI) under Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) has raised serious attention from observers. According to analysts, the offer for the curricular programme under JNU is not merely academic but reflects ideological leanings that align with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and its political affiliate, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The programme’s approach to studying the Northeast as “Northeast Bharat”(note also the nomenclature ‘Bharat’) and its exploration of topics with regard to the spread of major religions such as Islam and Christianity and also why Hinduism did not take root in the hills, have been perceived as efforts to infect a communal narrative under the guise of scholarly inquiry. Structured as a two-year Master of Arts in Northeast India and Area Studies, the programme adheres to the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020. It promises a “deeper and holistic understanding” of the region, addressing aspects of history, geography, society, culture, polity, economy, development, and ecology. However, the syllabus raises serious concerns due to its explicit focus on probing the religious dynamics of the Northeast, particularly its emphasis on Hinduism’s interactions with tribal communities and its comparative failure to spread in the region. Also the inclusion of a case study on the ongoing violence in Manipur since May 3, 2023, has further fuelled concerns. Observers allege that this aspect of the curriculum risks becoming a tool to deflect attention against holding the central government and the BJP-led state government under Chief Minister Biren Singh, accountable for the horrific brutalities and incitement of communal war within the state. The violent conflict, marked by ethnic clashes and the destruction of public order, has been attributed to deliberate policy decisions and inaction. Allegations that the government has allowed communal divides to fester, compromised law enforcement, and enabled armed elements to wreak havoc have drawn severe condemnation. Therefore, some are concerned that a biased academic framing of these events could whitewash these actions and further polarize the discourse. The programme’s focus on religion, particularly its framing of Hinduism’s limited influence in the hills compared to the spread of Christianity and Islam, has also drawn criticism for potentially turning a historically diverse and tolerant region into a laboratory for communal experimentation. Many observers view this as an attempt to sow discord and division in a region known for its pluralistic ethos and harmonious coexistence of various communities. Rather than introducing a top-down curriculum with potentially divisive undertones, the programme would benefit from engaging directly with Northeast-based scholars and universities by offering the JNU students opportunity to come to the north east for acquainting themselves with the region. Immersive studies that celebrate the region’s cultural diversity, ecological uniqueness, and historical resilience would provide a richer and more authentic understanding of the Northeast. The focus should be on fostering unity, academic rigor, and genuine cultural appreciation rather than advancing politically motivated narratives. The Northeast does not need divisive studies on religion or biased interpretations of its current challenges. What it needs is an academic approach that honours its complex history, celebrates its diversity, and promotes inclusivity, tolerance, and peace.