top of page

By:

Akhilesh Sinha

25 June 2025 at 2:53:54 pm

Between illegal migration and the promise of development

New Delhi: Assam's 2026 election reflects a fierce contest over identity, illegal migration, and development, where youth sentiment, tribal rights, border anxieties, and welfare politics converge to redefine the state's-and Northeast India's-political future.   Over the past decade, Assam's politics has undergone a transformation of remarkable intensity. This shift is not merely a story of power struggles or the thrill of electoral victories and defeats; rather, it reflects a deeper internal...

Between illegal migration and the promise of development

New Delhi: Assam's 2026 election reflects a fierce contest over identity, illegal migration, and development, where youth sentiment, tribal rights, border anxieties, and welfare politics converge to redefine the state's-and Northeast India's-political future.   Over the past decade, Assam's politics has undergone a transformation of remarkable intensity. This shift is not merely a story of power struggles or the thrill of electoral victories and defeats; rather, it reflects a deeper internal conflict within the state, one caught at the intersection of identity, demography, land, and development. What emerges is a portrait of a society negotiating competing anxieties and aspirations, where political change mirrors a broader search for equilibrium. Congress seeks to craft a broader social coalition built around the "shared concerns" of tribal.   In the current electoral landscape, an unexpected emotional issue has also surfaced, the reported death of popular singer Jubin Garg. This development has triggered a strong reaction, particularly among young people. The surge of sentiment on social media, marked by calls for justice and visible public outrage, suggests that if this issue sustains its presence in the campaign discourse, it could significantly influence youth voting behavior.   Another crucial dimension of identity politics is the demand to grant Scheduled Tribe status to six indigenous communities. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) had made this promise in the previous election, but it remains unfulfilled. The opposition has framed this as a case of electoral betrayal, while the BJP has cited administrative and constitutional complexities as the reason for the delay. The issue continues to carry both symbolic and electoral weight.   Political Narratives This election is not merely about the arithmetic of seats; it is equally about the reconfiguration of alliances and the reconstruction of political narratives. The Congress has distanced itself from the All India United Democratic Front (AIUDF) and formed a new platform, the "Assam Sonmilito Morcha," which includes regional players such as the Assam Jatiya Parishad. In the previous election, the alliance with AIUDF helped Congress consolidate Muslim votes, but it also enabled the BJP to polarize Hindu voters more effectively. This time, Congress appears to be attempting to move beyond that image, seeking to craft a broader social coalition built around the "shared concerns" of tribal, Assamese, and other communities.   On the other hand, the BJP's strategy also reflects notable recalibration. Its cautious approach to seat-sharing with the Asom Gana Parishad (AGP) and its focused attention on 15 seats in the Bodoland Territorial Region illustrate this shift. In this region, the BJP has allied with the Bodoland People's Front (BPF), with BPF contesting 11 seats and the BJP 4. In the previous election, BPF had aligned with Congress; however, its resurgence in the Bodoland Territorial Council elections has altered the political equations. This shift is significant, as the Bodoland Territorial Region remains central to Assam's evolving geopolitical balance, making it a decisive arena in the state's new political calculus.   Central Issue In this election, the question of "illegal immigrants" has once again emerged as a central and polarising issue. In Assam, concerns around undocumented migration, particularly involving those alleged to have entered from Bangladesh, have long shaped political discourse. Recent statements by Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma referring to "Miya Muslims," along with large-scale eviction drives targeting what the government describes as illegal encroachments, have further intensified the debate. The state claims to have cleared thousands of acres of government land, framing these actions as necessary for restoring law, order, and enabling development.   The opposition, however, views these measures through a different lens, arguing that they deepen social divisions and disproportionately target specific communities. At the same time, proponents within the state's ruling establishment contend that without addressing illegal land occupation and demographic imbalances, "balanced development" remains unattainable. This assertion is being challenged by the Congress and other opposition parties, who invoke constitutional protections and the need for social harmony.   The impact of eviction and "de-bonding" drives has been particularly visible in sensitive border belts, often referred to as the "Chicken Neck" villages. In these fragile frontier regions, communities such as small farmers, tea garden workers, and borderland populations find themselves in a state of uncertainty, grappling with questions of security and identity. Here, electoral politics is often caught between two competing narratives: resistance to illegal immigration and the urgent demand for local livelihoods.   Direct Inducement On the development front, the ruling BJP is foregrounding its governance record, with the Orunodoi (Arunodoy) scheme as a centerpiece. Just ahead of the elections, under its third phase, direct financial assistance of Rs 9,000 was transferred to nearly four million women beneficiaries, amounting to an outlay of approximately Rs 3,600 crore. Beyond its welfare dimension, the scheme is also widely seen as a calibrated political strategy aimed at consolidating women voters, a demographic that is nearly equal in size to male voters in Assam and, in several regions, exhibits higher turnout rates.   The opposition has sharply criticised the scheme, describing it as a form of "direct electoral inducement." In its "People's Chargesheet," the Congress has leveled serious allegations against the government, including corruption, the prevalence of a "syndicate raj," the transfer of land to corporate interests, and misuse of administrative machinery. According to opposition claims, a structured network influences the allocation of contracts and resources, adversely affecting small businesses, tea garden workers, and ordinary citizens. Alongside these concerns, broader issues such as unemployment, inflation, and growing social discontent have also become integral to the electoral narrative.   While the BJP highlights its administrative assertiveness, such as crackdowns on child marriage and measures aimed at curbing polygamy, as key achievements, the opposition dismisses these as selective interventions, arguing that they divert attention from deeper economic challenges.   Ultimately, the Assam Assembly election of 2026 is not merely about a change in power; it represents a critical inflection point in the state's political trajectory. On one side, the BJP is seeking to legitimize its governance model by linking the issue of illegal immigration with development, security, and stability. On the other, the Congress is attempting to position itself as a viable alternative, emphasizing social balance, institutional politics, and renewed leadership.   For voters, the choice is stark: whether to endorse the promise of stability and continuity, or to pivot toward change. The results on May 4 will not only shape Assam's future but are also likely to influence the broader political direction of Northeast India.

The Price of Plenty

In India’s farm policy, arithmetic often collides with reality. Nowhere is this more evident than in Maharashtra, where the official logic of Minimum Support Prices (MSP) struggles to keep pace with the lived economics of cultivation. As the 2025–26 agricultural season unfolds, fresh evidence from the state’s Agricultural Price Commission suggests that the gap between what farmers spend and what they earn is widening.


At first glance, Maharashtra appears an agricultural powerhouse. Its farms span roughly 165 lakh hectares, covering more than half the state’s land. But beneath this impressive expanse lies a structural fragility. Barely a fifth of this land enjoys assured irrigation. The rest depends on the caprices of the monsoon. In such a setting, farming is less a business than a gamble, with rainfall serving as both benefactor and executioner. The average landholding, a modest 1.34 hectares, offers little cushion against adversity. A delayed monsoon or a brief dry spell can swiftly transform anticipated profits into mounting debt.


Tightening Vice

Costs, meanwhile, are rising with disquieting speed. For the 2026–27 season, machinery rentals are projected to increase by nearly a fifth. Fertiliser prices have surged even more sharply. Diammonium phosphate (DAP) and muriate of potash (MOP), both essential inputs, now command prices of Rs. 27,000 and Rs. 34,000 per tonne respectively. Though urea remains subsidised, this offers only partial relief. Labour, transport and other ancillary expenses continue their steady ascent. The cumulative effect is a tightening vice, leaving farmers increasingly reliant on credit.


Against this backdrop, the MSP regime appears curiously detached. Designed to provide a safety net, MSP is calculated using the A2+FL formula, which accounts for paid-out costs and the imputed value of family labour. This framework, administered by the Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices, has long served as the backbone of India’s price support system. Yet in regions like Maharashtra, where farming conditions are harsher and risks more pronounced, its limitations are becoming apparent.


The alternative, known as the C3 cost framework, offers a more expansive view. It incorporates not only direct expenses and family labour but also the rental value of land, interest on owned capital, managerial input and a notional profit margin. When MSP is evaluated against this broader measure, the inadequacy of current pricing becomes stark.


Consider paddy. For the 2025–26 season, Maharashtra’s calculations suggest a remunerative price of around Rs. 4,783 per quintal. The central MSP, however, stands at just Rs. 2,369 - barely half the estimated cost under the C3 framework. Similar disparities exist for other crops, including pearl millet (bajra), a staple of the state’s rainfed regions. They represent tangible income foregone, and, in many cases, the difference between viability and distress.


Such estimates are grounded in extensive fieldwork. Four of Maharashtra’s agricultural universities - located in Rahuri, Parbhani, Akola and Dapoli - collect data from nearly 2,800 farmers across diverse agro-climatic zones. Their findings capture the granular realities of cultivation: fluctuating input prices, regional variations in yield and the hidden costs that seldom find their way into official calculations. This evidence lends weight to the argument that a one-size-fits-all MSP is ill-suited to India’s heterogeneous agricultural landscape.


Raising MSPs to reflect C3 costs would undoubtedly improve farm incomes, but it also carries fiscal and market implications. Higher procurement prices could strain government budgets and distort cropping patterns. Yet ignoring the problem risks perpetuating a cycle of indebtedness and disinvestment in agriculture.


Reducing Costs

One promising avenue lies not only in recalibrating prices but also in reducing costs. Maharashtra’s push towards natural farming is instructive in this regard. By minimising reliance on chemical fertilisers and external inputs, such practices can lower expenditure while enhancing soil health. For rainfed areas, where irrigation constraints already limit productivity, this approach offers a measure of resilience. It shields farmers, to some extent, from the volatility of global input markets and the vagaries of supply chains.


Still, cost reduction alone cannot bridge the gap. What is required is a more nuanced MSP framework that accounts for regional disparities, incorporates a fuller spectrum of costs and remains responsive to changing economic conditions. This need not entail a wholesale abandonment of the existing system but a shift from uniformity to flexibility, from abstraction to empiricism.


Ultimately, the debate over MSP is not merely about numbers. It is about the social contract between the state and its farmers. Ensuring that farmers receive prices commensurate with their costs is not simply an economic imperative; it is a moral one.


(The writer is a member of Maharashtra Agriculture Price Commission. Views personal.)

 


Comments

bottom of page