Comparison of Federalism in Regards to Ethnicity in India and Ethiopia - Research Paper Example

Introduction Federalism in India came due to de-colonization while Ethiopia became a federal state after the fall of the military-Marxist government of the Derg in 1991. Both India and Ethiopia have struggled with various degrees of instability in terms of localized and regional ethnic conflict, tensions and secessionist movements. They faced movements that questioned the fundamental rights of citizens of challenging ethnic groups and continued claims of further subdivision and separate statehood for new ethnic groups. Movements that operated in India and Ethiopia that were Separatist were Kashmir and Punjab in India, and Oromiya in Ethiopia (Assefa 2005). The federation of India was still named as the most successful federal system. It is said to have showed a good example of how federalism contained claims from ethnic groups to secession. On the other hand, Ethiopia was most likely the only federation in the world which had declared the collective right of all ethnic groups in its boundaries the right to rule them selves. According to the Ethiopian Constitution of 1995, ethnic groups had the right to self-government, including the right to secession. Assefa (2005) adds that nevertheless the system of Ethiopia was marked by centralized government, and local ethnic disagreements were common, particularly in ethnically assorted regions. Ethnicity federalism in Ethiopia Ethiopia has large ethnic diversity with 84 ethnic groups. Twelve of these ethnic groups have a population of more than half a million out of a population of 53 million in 1994. The Oromo and the Amhara are the two major ethnic groups which make up over 62 percent of Ethiopia’s population. Tigray is the third largest ethnic group, and it has been the politically dominant ethnic group since 1991, but covers only 6 percent of the population. The three ethnic groups constitute more than two-thirds of the population. By 1994, four other ethnic groups, that is, Gurage, Somali, Welaita and Sidama, had attained a population of over one million each. The seven largest ethnic groups comprise approximately 85 percent of the country's population. The five minor ethnic groups; Afar, Gamo, Hadiya, Keffa and Gedeo, had reached populations of between 599,000 and 1,000,000 (Assefa 2005). The twelve largest ethnic groups constitute almost 92 percent of the population. Fourteen ethnic groups had populations between 100,000 and 500,000, while twenty-eight ethnic groups had a population ranging between 10,000 and 100,000 (Assefa 2005). The remaining twenty-three ethnic groups had a population of less than 10,000 each in 1994 (Assefa 2005). For all these ethnic groups, there is a distinctive language they use to communicate. As a result there are as many languages as ethnic groups in the Ethiopia. These languages can be estimated to be more than 80 languages (Assefa 2005). The constitution of Ethiopia initiated a federal republic composed of nine regional states created on the basis of major ethnic group, excluding the Southern regional state formed by 46 ethnic groups, and except two federal territories namely Dire Dawa and Addis Ababa. The constitution clearly stated and elaborated on the unrestricted corporate right of all ethnic groups. In article 39 of the constitution, the rights stated that every nation, nationality and people shall have the unrestricted right to self- determination up to secession. Aalen (2002) observes that for the act of secession to be passed and followed, it requires a two-thirds vote in the legislature of the independent ethnic group to be followed three years later by a referendum in the seceding region. The referendum does not need its approval from the federal legislature. All the ethnic groups are equally and proportionally represented in the upper House which is also referred to as The House of Federation .Its sole function is to guard and interpret the constitution. It handles matters concerning ethnic groups, nation matters and nationalities. The House comprises of at least one spokesperson from every of the 67 ethnic groups in the country and one supplementary representative for every one million population of each ethnic group. Due to this most of the ethnic groups are well represented in Upper House which houses 112 members. Ethnic federalism portrayed ethnic groups as important constituents of the state. It recognized them as social groups sharply separate from the overarching citizenship category. Many people are worried that it might lead to the downfall of the state altogether. However, no evidence has been shown that new ethnic nationalisms have emerged in Ethiopia as a consequence of ethnic federalism (John 1997). Ethnic federalism has formed conditions that are favorable to ethnic and regional autonomy in culture and language and in fiscal, administrative, police and judicial decentralization. Government supporters point out that the majority of the ethnic groups appear willing to live contained by the structure of the federal system as it is an important achievement of ethnic federalism. It is most likely the case that some ethnic groups like Somali that ordinarily would not have supported the regime are hinging their alliance, support, and membership in the state organization on the basis of the secession provision (Whelpton 2005). Ethnic federalism has also played part in contributing to creation of conditions beneficial to ethnic disagreement, though not secession. Ethnicity federalism in India India has a population of more than 1,027 million people. As a result it has a unique incorporation of ethnic groups displaying diverse cultures and religions. The uniqueness of the ethnic groups in India is what makes India different form other nations. India has a wide range of religions, cultural beliefs and so is the language (Lawoti 2005). From the early times, India has showed a variety of cultures, religions, language, races and many more. The variety in culture, race and religion is accountable for the many ethnic groups who live in the same nation and have different mode of social behavior and habits. This has led to different languages as each ethnic group has its own language. There are very many territories among the Indian people and they differentiate the different ethnic groups. The religions that are rampant in India are Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, Sikhism, and Jainism. The citizens have rights to worship and follow religion of their choice. Most of the ethnic groups are represented in the government which has 35 different states and union territories (David 2006). 22 different languages that are prevalent in the country have been recognized in the Constitution of India. From these languages, Hindi is recognized as the official language and is mostly spoken in the cities of India. Apart form the 22 languages; there are other hundreds of vernacular that add to the multilingual nature of the state of India. Comparison between federalism in Ethiopia and India There are various reasons related to the success of Indian and Ethiopian federalism. In India, the politics were very much incompatible between the national and ethno- regional identity. As a result is was possible to have a separate identity to the existing one. Secondly, India has a huge diversity and hence many ethnic groups, caste, religions which created many subunits for federalism (David 2006). Finally, the federal system of India displayed its strength and expertise in parliamentary democracy; this lead to democratic ideas and hence a centralized government. Ethiopia on the other hand had fundamental principles which governed its political system with different identity and ethnicity. According to Yash (2000), the societal cleavages were overlapping thus made it easier to solve controversies and conflicts. Federalism in Ethiopia lacked what India had: the political space for crosscutting cleavages, national in addition to ethnic identities, democracy, and a legitimately strong central state a functioning, all reducing the Ethiopian federation’s chances of creating a sustainable accommodation of ethnic diversity (David 2006). To achieve unity in both states, ethnic diversity had to be recognized and all citizens had a right to self determination. Ethnic rights have to be established and implemented too and the ethnic groups were to be equally represented in the government mostly in the legislative and executive section. In India regionalism has been deeply rooted which has encouraged the concentration of identify markers resulting to regional denial of natural resources. Federalism in India has become a way of accommodation or regionalism. This is because federalism is viewed as a political equilibrium which balances self rule and shared rule in governance (Lawoti 2005). Federalism enabled countries with ethnical differences that are distinct have territorial accommodation which became of great importance to the state. This was mostly in countries that had combined or shared rule which was associated with general functions of diversity and self rule which was concerned with regional/local intention of diversity. According to Whelpton (2005) Indian constitution was viewed as a major source of many movements that encouraged self determination and fought for the appropriate form of political power which was meant for securing ethno-regional identity. The constitution fought for rights to language, culture and minority. Federalism in Ethiopia and India received various diverse tasks which were contradicting .This were meant to show their expertise in handling the state matter and affairs. In Ethiopia and Indian federalism, constitutions used were as an outcome of the choices of the institution which were ordered by certain characteristics in the policy. Although Ethiopia was successful in federalism, it lacked two important ingredients that were present in federal systems in the West. They included; democracy of culture and democratic ethnic relations. India’s reconciliation in federal systems operated at two levels which gave it a democratic aspect. It provided a platform for many ethnic groups in India to take shape, define them and was able to protect, conserve and celebrate their ethnicity and identity just like in Ethiopia. Federalism in India and Ethiopia provided a room for self identity and recognition which encouraged self determination. Conclusion Ethnical tensions and conflicts can be a major source of state disintegration. To solve this problem, federalism has become the only way out and the popular formula for policy makers and theorists. According to Lawoti (2005) federalism system has centralized constitutional deliberations and discussions which are meant to come up with solutions to end ethnic conflicts and tensions within the nation. Federalism enables combination of shared and self rule to come up with one absolute power. A state can be said to be a federal state when its power and authority are divided between a centralized governments (Lawoti 2005). References Aalen, L. 2002. Ethnic federalism in a dominant party state: the Ethiopian experience 1991- 2000. Bergen, Chr. Michelsen Institute. Assefa, Fiseha. 2005. Federalism and the accommodation of diversity in Ethiopia: A comparative study. David, Turton. 2006. Ethnic federalism: The Ethiopian experience in comparative perspective Eastern African studies. The University of Michigan. John, Young. 1997. Peasant revolution in Ethiopia: the Tigray People's Liberation Front, 1975-1991. Cambridge University Press. Lawoti, M. 2005. Towards a democratic Nepal. Sage Publications: New Delhi. Whelpton, J. 2005. A history of Nepal. Cambridge University Press. Yash, Ghai. 2000. Autonomy and ethnicity: Negotiating competing claims in multi-ethnic states. Cambridge University Press. Read More