(This is the latest edition of the Political Line newsletter curated by Varghese K. George. The Political Line newsletter is India’s political landscape explained every week. You can subscribe here to get the newsletter in your inbox every Friday.)
West Bengal Chief Minister Suvendu Adhikari is one among the BJP’s pantheon of leaders who have crossed over from a different party. His strident pursuit of Hindutva politics is putting him at odds with the old school of the BJP in the State. Mr. Adhikari seems to have taken a leaf out of Himanta Biswa Sarma’s book. The Assam Chief Minister was in the Congress for most of his career until he joined the BJP in August 2015. Soon after, he became a Cabinet Minister in the first BJP government of Assam and the Northeast in May 2016. His statements and public positions have pushed the borders of Hindutva politics in an unprecedented manner. Just to cite an example, during the 2026 Assembly election campaign, Mr. Sarma urged people to pay Miya rickshaw-pullers only ₹4 if they charge ₹5. He justified his stand by claiming that as the Chief Minister, it was his duty to harass Miya Muslims.
West Bengal has been a target for the BJP for several decades and finally, having won power in the State in the 2026 Assembly election, it put Mr. Adhikari in charge. He had joined the BJP only in 2020 — 25 years after his political career started with the Congress in 1995. He had moved to Mamata Banerjee’s Trinamool Congress in 1998 and was Minister in the second West Bengal government led by Ms. Banerjee from 2016 to 2020. Citing differences with her, Mr. Adhikari resigned from the Trinamool Congress and joined the BJP in 2020. In 2021, he contested the Nandigram seat against Ms. Banerjee and defeated her in a closely contested election.
Subsequently, he became the Leader of the Opposition in the West Bengal Assembly. This year, Mr. Adhikari became the first BJP Chief Minister of the State after the party emerged victorious in the Assembly election. The Chief Minister’s recent statements and policy decisions have surpassed the BJP itself and the Sangh Parivar ecosystem. A most recent case in point is this: the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and several traditional BJP leaders in West Bengal were taken aback by the demolition of Leftist bookstalls near Durga Puja pandals. For example, Jishnu Basu, a prominent RSS leader from West Bengal, said vandalising bookstalls is not a matter of pride and termed those indulging in such acts “cowards”. He said, “Those intoxicated by power and using the police to close down bookstalls” fail to understand the country, and neither can refer to themselves as Hindu. Similarly, State Finance Minister Swapan Dasgupta sharply criticised the move to demolish bookstalls. However, Mr. Adhikari doubled down, and while continuing to target the bookstalls, said, “Everyone should be cautious of those whose forefathers are from China. They are the ones who are trying to create anarchy in the country.” At a Durga Puja event in his hometown, Kanthi, he said, “Communists do not participate in rituals.” He had previously defended the comments of Bageshwar Dham chief priest Dhirendra Krishna Shastri, alias Bageshwar Baba, who advocated consuming vegetarian food during Durga Puja in West Bengal. Mr. Adhikari said the saint had only expressed his views and did not impose them on anyone. He also urged the police to file cases against those responsible for burning posters of the saint in protest against the comments.
The Chief Minister also said only Sanatanis (those who follow the Sanatana Dharma) will be allowed to participate in Durga idol immersion. He said, “I have told the Commissioner of Police to note down the names and identity details of the people who will carry the idols. There is nothing communal in this.”
Federalism Tract: Notes on Diversity
A border dispute at home
The Centre is trying to identify and deport foreigners, through the special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and other means. Fixing people and their territories in clean categories is easier said than done. If it were so easy, perhaps the BJP should try to decide on the status of about 5,000 people that Andhra Pradesh and Odisha have been fighting over for decades. Territorial disputes exist even within the borders of the country. The two States are caught in a territorial claim over 21 villages in Koraput district of Odisha. Both States claim the territory, and they aggressively compete for the loyalty of the roughly 5,000 tribal residents (mostly Kondh tribals). Villagers often hold dual voter IDs and ration cards, receiving welfare benefits, infrastructure, and services from both Odisha and Andhra Pradesh. The issue is in the spotlight as the Telugu Desam Party-led Andhra Pradesh government has notified rural polls in the disputed region. Both Odisha and Andhra Pradesh held panchayat elections in the disputed region in 2021 and 2022, where the majority of voters hold voter identity cards of both States.
They are registered as voters for the Salur Assembly and Araku Lok Sabha seats in Andhra Pradesh, and the Pottangi Assembly and Koraput Lok Sabha seats in Odisha.
Are Odisha and Andhra Pradesh competing for the affection of these 5,000 people who live in the inaccessible, forested hills? If they are, that is touching. These hills are rich in gold, platinum, manganese, bauxite, graphite and limestone reserves, but that may just be coincidental.
Self-rule and its limits
For decades, the people of Ladakh agitated for separation from Jammu and Kashmir (J&K). In 2019, when the Centre divided J&K into Union Territories of Ladakh and J&K, it appeared like the long-standing wishes of the Buddhist region, which is also overwhelmingly tribal-dominated, had been achieved. But things are playing out quite differently since then as Ladakhis — who wanted separation from J&K and to be directly under the Centre’s administration — are now feeling insecure.
As talks continue between representatives of Ladakh’s civil society groups and the Centre, a draft proposed by the latter for a unique constitutional arrangement states that the Lieutenant-Governor (L-G) would be the final authority on any regulation issued by the proposed elected body of the Union Territory (U.T.). Earlier, on May 22 and September 9, the MHA had proposed an elected body for the U.T. of Ladakh by introducing a new constitutional provision under Article 371. Currently, discussions are ongoing between the Centre and two civil society groups, the Leh Apex Body and the Kargil Democratic Alliance, to ensure constitutional safeguards for Ladakh, which became a U.T. following the revocation of Article 370 in 2019, which gave autonomy to the erstwhile State of J&K.
Something comparable is playing out in Manipur as the Kuki-Zo groups that are in conflict with the Meities, and the Nagas are demanding the reimposition of President’s Rule in the State. President’s Rule was revoked on February 4 this year after being imposed a year earlier on February 13, 2025. The Kuki-Zo Women’s Forum, Delhi, has claimed that since March 2026, at least 32 members of the community have been killed by members of the Isak-Muivah faction of the Nationalist Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN-IM) and the Zeliangrong United Front (ZUF-Kamson). Kuki-Zo Council spokesperson Ginza Vualzong claimed that no Kuki-Zo civilian was killed during President’s Rule. The organisation reiterated its demand for a separate administration for the Kuki-Zo community in the form of a Union Territory with a legislature.
In Arunachal Pradesh, the BJP justified the SIR exercise in the State, emphasising the need for accurate voter lists amid concerns about the influx of “illegal migrants”. The State has 26 major tribes and more than 120 sub-tribes, some with a population of a few thousand. Most of these communities see the SIR as a shield to protect their land, culture, and identity against numerically larger “outsiders”. The State also witnessed tension between the APSTs (Arunachal Pradesh Scheduled Tribes) and the non-APSTs in areas bordering Assam. It also went through a tense phase during the SIR exercise in areas inhabited by the Buddhist Chakmas and Hindu Hajongs, who were settled in the 1960s after displacement in East Pakistan, now Bangladesh.