Paper short abstract:

East Bengal Hindu refugees settled in the Andaman Islands can be characterised both by their local “Indian-ness” and their translocal “Bengali-ness”. This paper will highlight three dimensions of memorisation among Bengali settlers by analysing the interplay of belonging, place-making practices, and politics.

Paper long abstract:

The post-partition history of the Andaman Islands is represented as showcase project of Indian secularism. Settlement policies aiming to uplift subaltern refugees, repatriates, and landless people were accompanied by labour migrations from all over South Asia. In nationalist speak, this multi-ethnic and multi-religious society is designated as "Mini-India" and stands exemplary for the communal "harmony" of 400,000 Andaman residents.

The state directed rehabilitation of 3652 East Bengal Hindu refugee families as agricultural pioneers on forest lands was influenced by secularist policies. As a result, Bengali settlers - coming both after partition and the 1971 war - have adapted to their new homelands by appropriating values, norms, and practices of Mini-India. Moreover, their place-making processes have been accompanied by an ethno-history composed of a nostalgia for their lost homelands in Sonar Bangla (Golden Bengal) as well as memories of violence and deprivation. Refugee settlers thus display a hybrid diasporic belonging encompassing both localised "Indian-ness" and translocal "Bengali-ness".

My paper will highlight in which way the trope of Bengal becomes efficacious in the present Andaman society. I will concentrate on three dimensions of memorisation: First, Andaman "Bengali-ness" can be regarded as a dynamic socio-cultural and ecological reconstruction involving an "ethnic" transformation of the cultivated landscape, environment, and infrastructure. Second, Bengalis adopt a political identification as nationalists by invoking the hegemonic memory of the anticolonial struggle focussing on the infamous Andaman Cellular Jail as a site where Bengali freedom fighters suffered for the nation. Third, they refer to historical victimisation and deprivation when claiming affirmative action.