THE SOUTH ASIAN DIASPORA - A DIASPORA IN THE MAKING BY N. KLIOT DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY, UNIVERSITY OF HAIFA (CURRENTLY SCHOOL OF 6; 0 <W/VWK. UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD) PA PE P. ?^ sEH -r/T ^ ^ -r ^ST ^W£^^ ,?// ^ 1 5 P A5 iA ^^ A-c ,^, C ^/?^ > ^ ^ ^ Y. y < 9?-' H' 93 ^- ^ 302838207X INTRODUCTION Diaspora is defined as the dispersion of the Jews or any group of people similarly dispersed . Diaspora communities generally have inherent complex social dynamics which have gradually developed from their initial formation to form an autonomous reality reflecting the characteristics of the worldwide community. Diaspora communities such as the Jews, the Armenians , the Greeks and others have had to confront many difficult problems in order to be able to establish the necessary framework for the survival of their identity . The most significant among these problems is the preservation of the culture. This creates a barrier against total socioeconomic and political integration . Another complementary problem is that of assimilation : how to stop the next generation losing its identity in the surrounding host nation. These lead to the development of a diasporan culture with its unique characteristics (Gorfc y, 1988). The South Asian diaspora is a recent creation : it was mainly formed during the last hundred and fifty years, although Indian traders have settled in distant countries for at least the last two centuries . Until the late 1940s, the emigration from the Indian sub-continent is referred to as "Indian emigration ". Only since India and Pakistan have become separate independent states have their emigration statistics appeared under their respective national origin and the same is true for Bangladesh since the 1970s. However , this differentiation does not apply to many of the South Asian communities in the diaspora as many of them were evolved many years before the Indian sub- continent was sub-divided into its national separate entities . Therefore , in this paper, the definition "Indian communities" is applied to all the South Asian communities which developed in the 19 th and 20 th centuries without national characterization . Only recent emigration waves from South Asia are referred to as country of origin . The paper will portray the Indian diaspora evolution along the following lines: size and distribution , patterns of immigration , the colonial context and the social, political and economic feature of Indian communities in diaspora . 1. SIZE AMD DISTRIBUTION Table 1 provides the data on the size and distribution of the Indian communities in the world in the years 1967 and 1987, in both their absolute size and relative proportion in their host countries , that is, wherever Indians represent more than 2 per cent of the total population . Table 1 points to a widespread diaspora . There were Indian communities in some 57 countries in 1987; thus their dispersal has increased . While there were about 5. 5 million people in the various Indian communities in 1969, their number reached 12.7 million in the mid 1980s. The growth in the number of Indians living outside the South Asia^i sub-continent is an outcome of both natural growth and the continuing emigration from the Indian sub-continent. A word of caution is needed in connection with the reliability of statistics and other data concerning the Indian communities abroad . As both countries of origin and destination have an interest in suppressing data on emigration , the data provided are often unreliable and contradictory (Owen, 1985). There are also problems with the legal status of the migrants . Many South Asian labourers move to neighbouring countries such as Nepal or Sri Lanka without registration . Most return to their countries of origin immediately after their employment is terminated , but some stay in their destination . There is also the problem of illegal South Asian migration : in Asian countries and the Middle East there are significant numbers of illegal migrants who are from time to time deported back to their country of origin . With these limitations in mind, some general characteristics of the Indian diaspora can be presented . First, the number of Indians abroad almost doubled within 18 years . Secondly, their regional distribution is M course of transformation : Indian communities are dispersing and expanding in Europe, the Middle East, North America and the Pacific, whereas in Africa they are diminishing in size and importance . There is almost no change in the size and distribution of Caribbean and Latin American Indian communities and it is difficult to draw any specific conclusions from the Asian statistics as many of the Indian migrants were not registered and are not accounted for, except for Burma Myanmar where about 500,000 Indians left or were forced to leave the country between 1930 and 1942 and 300,000 more were expelled in the 1960s (Tinker, 1990). In terms of absolute size, there are only twelve large Indian communities in diaspora, the most important being the UK, Mauritius , South Africa, Malaysia , Nepal, Sri Lanka, the Gulf States (about 2. 5 million in the early 1980s), Trinidad and Tobago , Guyana, Suriname, Fiji and the USA. Some of these concentrations of Indians are transient due to the fortunes of the labour market ( Sri Lanka, Nepal , the Gulf States ) or to political upheavals such as the recent war between Iraq and Kuwait or the 1987 coup in Fiji, which initiated Indian nonvoluntary movement . In terms of their relative proportion within the host countries , Indian communities constitute a majority in Mauritius , and about 40-50% of the population in the United Arab Emirates , Guyana, Fiji and Trinidad . Indians comprise a large minority ( more than 7 - 8%) in Malaysia , Singapore , Sri Lanka, Nepal, many of the Gulf States and Guadeloup. Finally, it is important to note that the number of South Asians living outside the indian sub-continent is about 1% of the current combined populations of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh . Much higher ratios of overseas to home-based populations are recorded by Jews (over 11 million worldwide compared with 4. 5 million living in Israel) or Chinese ( some 22 million overseas with 1000 million living in China) or Africans (estimated at 300 million outside Africa compared with 540 million in Africa itself ), (Clarke , Peach and Vertovec , 1990/1). However , from the 12.7 million South Asians who are residing in 70 countries, only 7. 4 million hold citizenship of their host countries, thus the size of the "dejure" Indian diaspora is even smaller than 1% of the combined population of the Indian sub-continent. TABLE 1: Indian Communities in the World 1969 and 1987, relative and absolute size Country/ 1969 1969 1987 1987 Motes Years Size in Relative Size in Relative  1000 Size 1000 Size EUROPE  UK 270,000 1 - 2% 1,260,000 2.5% 673,000 (1984)4 Netherlands 1,500 less than 1% 102,800 101,500 (1984)4 France 1,400 42,000   Germany (FRG) 4,681 32,335  Spain 1,600 10,000 Portugal - 7,300 Sweden - 7,046    Austria - 3,131 Norway - 2,900 Switzerland - 2,863       Denmark - 2,552 Other - 9,107 Total Europe 279,181 1,482,034    Country / 1969 1969 1987 1987 Notes Years Size in Relative Size in Relative 1000 Size 1000 Size   AFRICA Mauritiu s 520,000 68.0 % 700,712 70 % 19844 623,000    South Africa 614,000 956,000 3.1% 1984" 750,000 Kenya 182,000 2.3 % 70,000 0.4 % 19844 79,000   Tanzania 105,000 1.0% 40,000 less than 1% only 40,000 citizens 1984 30,000 Uganda 76,000 1.0% 1,000 " 50,000 Indians expelled in 19724 Reunion 65,OOP  Libya 35,500 less than 1% Malagasy 12,350 less 1 % 21,250  Zambia 10,705 20,900 Mozambique 20,850 " Zimbabwe 10,000 16,000 Nigeria 1,600 14,000 Seychelles 5,200 Malawi 11 ,299 5,000 Liberia 3,066 Algeria " 3,003   Ethiopia 4,520 3,000 Zaire 3,000 2,711 Sudan 2,550 Ghana 1,750 Somalia 1,360 " Other 13,260 Total Africa 1,556,134 1,389,722 " Country / 1969 1969 1987 1987 Notes Years Size in Relative Size in Relative  1000 Size 1000 Size ASIA  Burma 272,000 less than 1% 250,000 less than 1% 400,000 (1984)"   Malaysia 810.000 8 - 9% 936,000 10.65 1.2 million (1984) 4  Singapore 125,000 8 - 9 % 174,300 9.25 Nepal 3.8 million 20% (1984)  Sri Lanka 1,234,126 8% 1.3 million 7.5% 1.3 million (1984)4 Hong Kong 5,000 less than 1% less than 1% Indonesia 27,000 "  Japan 1,141 " Laos 1,800 " " Philippines 2,516 " Thailand 18,014 " " Vietnam South 2, OOP " Afghanistan 20,000 " Total Asia 2,519,084 6.7 (estimate) Country / 1969 1969 1987 1987 Notes Years Size in Relative Size in Relative  1000 Size 1000 Size MIDDLE EAST  Emirates 5,000 less than 1% 382,302 50% 3 152,000 (1984) 4 Oman 4,500 " 190,000 12% Kuwait 12,006 355,947 15%3 1990: 172,000 Indians , 90,000 Pakistanis & 74,000 Bengalis6 Yemen PDR 2,000 103,230 8 % Iraq 12,000 " 85,000 1990; 9,000 Indians , 9,000 Pakistanis and 15,000 Bengalis6    Saudi Arabia 1,035 79,987 5% 120,000 (1984)4 Qatar 2,000 51,500 Bahrain 5,500 48,050 Yemen 14,000 less than 1% Lebanon 15,000 " Iran 1,000 6,300 Jordan 4,509  Other 319 Total Middle 45,041 1,317,141 East Country / 1969 1969 1987 1987 Notes Years Size in Relative Size in Relative 1000 Size 1000 Size   CARIBBEAN / SOUTH AMERICA Trinidad 360,000 430,000 40%3   Guyana 357,000 51 % 300,350 50%3 Suriname 101,715 140,000 35%3 Jamaica 27,951 33,600  Guadeloup 23,000 7.8 % Martinique 10,000 3.0%  St Vincent 3,703 6,000 less than 1 %  Grenada 9,500 4,000 " St Lucia 3,840 " Panama 2,100 " Others 4,440 "   Total 859,869 957,330 Caribbean / South America 32,000 500,000 less than 1% USA CANADA 20,000 228,500 less than 1 %  PACIFIC Fiji 241,000 839,340 49% 300,700 (1984)4  Australia 3,108 99,200 less than 1 %   Mew Zealand 6,100 15,000 "  Other 569 " Total Pacific 299,208 954,109 TOTAL 5548,517 12770,336 Sources for the Table: 1 1969 data Tinker (1975) 1987 data Clarke, Peach and Vertovec (1990) Tinker Duraiswamy, Ghai et al (1987) Tandon and Raphael (1984) Lemon (1980) Van Hear (1991) 2. PATTERNS OF EMIGRATION Three types of movements can be differentiated for the Indian emigration : voluntary emigration (a), compulsory emigration ( b) and emigration in stages (c). ( a) Country of Origin   \ India In model ( a), Indians /1 l emigrated from India as — Voluntary Emigration indentured labourers or Repatriation as passage (free travellers ) to various ,. destinations , such as V East Africa, the Country of Caribbean and South East Destination Asia and either remained and settled down or voluntarily repatriated . East Africa •— — — - (b) Country of Origin —\ India In model ( b) the emigration j is voluntary but repatriation is Emigration involuntary as in the N case of repatriation to . ^ Country of Burma or the expulsion Destination from Uganda. L - - - Burma — Expulsion ( C) Country of Origin India In model ( c) emigration in stages, emigrants do not return to their -^ United Emigration country of origin but Kingdom choose to emigrate, after years in South second first country and East Africa to destination , of destination the USA, UK, Australia ' and Western Europe. — — — — - Uganda) Emigration 10 The migration process of the Indians began in the 19 th century as indentured migration but was supplemented in later stages by "free passage" emigration for purposes of education , employment or business . Most of the emigration was voluntary but there were many incidents of forced or involuntary movement of Indian communities . In this section the Indian emigration movements will be discussed under three headings ; Building Empire - the Colonial context of Indian emigration ; Disintegrating empires and decolonization ; and Indian economic emigration . A) Building the British Empire - Colonization and Indian Emigration Although travellers and traders from South Asia have travelled and penetrated most of Asia and East Africa for almost 1000 years, no sizeable South Asian communities were established until the 19 th century when large numbers of South Asians were transported to various British colonial territories around the world . It is not a mere coincidence that about half of the 70 countries where Indian communities are found today are former British or 3 French colonies and most are still members of the British Commonwealth . In the 19 th century imperial Britain ' s capitalist system was expanding in the Caribbean and South America in East Africa and South and South East Asia. White , settlers in these territories needed labour for their sugar, 11 cocoa, tea, rubber and other tropical plantations after slavery was abolished in 1834 by the Act of Emancipation . The first movement of indentured Indians to British colonies took place in Mauritius in 1834 and to British Guyana in 1838. Table 2 presents details of Indian indentured workers to British and French colonies. Table 2 Indian Indentured Emigration 1834 and 1917 Colony Period Number of Economic Indian Notes Indian Activities of Population Immigrants Migrants in mid 1980s  Mauritius 1834-1912 453,063 Sugar Plantations 700,712 British col. British Guiana 1838-1917 238,909 Sugar Plantations British col. Natal 1860-1911 152,184 Sugar, 956,000 British (S.Africa ) Agriculture col. Trinidad 1845-1917 143,939 Non Agric, (coal) 430,000 British ^  Sugar col. Reunion 1829-1924 118,000 Sugar 65,000 French col. Fiji 1879-1916 60,969 Agriculture , 839,340 British Sugar  col. Guadeloup 1854-1885 42,326 Sugar 23,000 French col . East Africa 1895-1901 39,771 Railways, white 110 ,000 British collar col . Jamaica 1854-1885 36,420 Sugar 33,600 British col. Dutch Guiana 1873-1916 34,000 Sugar 140,000 Dutch col.    Suriname, 1854-1889 25,509 Sugar 10,000 French Martinique  col.  Seychelles 1899-1916 6,319 Sugar 5,200 St Lucia 1858-1895 4,350 Sugar 3,840 British col. Grenada 1856-1885 3,200 Sugar 4,000 British .  col St Vincent 1861-1880 2,472 Sugar 6,000 British col. TEftJ>Gti Sources for the table: Tanon and Raphael 1984; Twaddle 1975; Tinker 1975; Peach and Vertovec 1990. Altogether 1. 5 million Indians emigrated to the colonies under the indenture system. The conditions of the indenture were generally similar : the Indians served under contract for three years which was subsequently raised to five years ; after the expiry of the five year contract they could work as free labourers in various occupations . During their indenture, labourers received , in addition to pay , accommodation , food rations and medical treatment and, in some colonies also free or partly paid return passage to India. Most of the indentured labour was contracted to work in British colonies but the Caribbean French colonies and some Dutch colonies such as Dutch Guiana followed suit (Tin| $er et al 1987; Lemon, 1980). Table 2 points to the fact that the descendants of the Indian indentured workers trebled during the years as less than one third of the workers either in the Caribbean or Africa repatriated back to India (Laurence 1971; CLarke , Peach and Vertovec 1990). Asecond type of South Asian contracted labour emigration took place in Sri Lanka (Ceylon) and South East Asia. This involved a network of middlemen and debt relationship : the Mistry system used to recruit workers for the plantations in Burma and the Kangani system which acquired labourers for the rubber plantations in Malaysia and tea plantations in Ceylon. Between 1852 and 1937 some 2.5 million Indians went to work in Burma, 2 million to Malaysia and 1. 5 million to Ceylon. However , the majority of workers under these schemes tended to repatriate - unlike the indentured workers . ( The "push" forces for the Indian emigration did not change much during the last 170 years: poverty , lack of land, lack of employment and rapid population growth in the countries of origin . The "pull" forces also did not change much over the years: opportunity for betterment , for permanent or temporary employment and perhaps ownership of land - an extremely desired goal among many Indian migrants . In addition to the indentured and contracted workers who were transported to the colonies, another minor flow of "passage emigrants " followed . These were merchants , traders , businessmen and professional people who travelled to the colonies as entrepreneurs , seeking economic opportunities . About 10% of the settlers to South Africa were Muslim Indian traders who came as passenger emigrants . The British imperial impact on Indian emigration and settlement can be summarised as follows: 1) Initiation , organisation and administration of the transportation of labourers from the Indian sub-continent to the colonies. In some colonial territories the emigration was regulated according to the specific needs of the plantations . Thus, emigration to South Africa ( Natal ) was interrupted between 1866 and 1876 partly due to trade depression following the American Civil War (Union of South Africa, 1953). When needed, British colonial Governments subsided shipping of Indian workers to their destinations and even repatriation 15 when needed (Union of South Africa, 1953). Another example is the subsidized shipping of Indian labourers to South East Asian colonies . The British colonial Governments were responsible for importation of Indian soldiers , administrators , technicians , clerical workers and professionals to their colonies , especially to fill various roles in the colonial government of the colonies . Examples are the Tamils from Ceylon who were brought to Malaya and Burma by the British authorities to fulfil clerical , technical and medical posts ( Tinker, 1990). Indians were also brought to build and work in the railways of East Africa ( Tandon and Raphael 1984) and Burma (Tinker, 1990) . 2) Land settlement of Indian migrants : perhaps the single most important factor imposing ethnic pluralism on so many excolonial territories was the British policy of settlement . At the end of their contract , indentured Indians were offered three choices : to renew their original indenture, to return to India at the colonial government ' s expense or to accept a piece of Crown land equal in value to the cost of the return passage to India. Many chose land ( Union of South Africa, 1953). However , in South Africa ( Natal ), the settlement of Indians as free men was not welcome and anti Indian agitation by white settlers began as early as 1887 accompanied by a series of acts and laws aimed at restricting Indian settlement . Settlement of Indian peasants was encouraged in K[ Tanganyika (1921-1931) ( Hollingsworth , 1960). Settlement was widely supported in Mauritius , Reunion and the Caribbean Islands ( Lemon 1980). 3) British Empire Class System: perhaps one of the most destructive of all the British legacies is their impact on the formation of economic and social stratification of the races and ethnic groups living in a certain territory . Their policies of "benevolent apartheid " (Lal, 1990), created three major classes : (1) the upper class of white settlers and British administrators , ( 2) the Asian middle class of administrators , skilled and semi skilled workers , and traders who were often powerless but made supreme efforts to become the equals of the whites , thus being resented and repulsed by both the whites and the indigenous population ; and (3) at the bottom of the pile , the indigenous blacks , Amerindians , Burmese or Malays who resented and finally rebelled against the special status of Indians in their countries - a fact which became very harmful for Indian communities in the decolonization era of the 1950s and 1960s. B) Decolonization and Waves of Indian Forced Migration Decolonization and the emergence of independent states in Africa and Asia triggered a massive Indian exodus as an outcome of policies aimed at "Africanisation " , "Burmaisation " or more recently , "Arabisation " of the administration and economies of the respective countries. 11 In Malaysia , government policy after the termination of colonial rule in 1957, favoured raising the status of the Malay community and thousands of Indians lost their jobs ( Tinker, 1990). In Burma, Indians who belonged to the economic and professional elite were expelled from the country in 1962 and those who remained survived by becoming invisible, viz assuming Burmese names and dress and speaking Burmese ( Tinker, 1990; Lemon, 1980). In East Africa the rising nationalism drove out many Indians who had lived in those countries for generations . There was a drop of 44% in the number of Asians in Kenya between 1962 and 1964, many of them choosing to emigrate to Great Britain and other European and North American countries and not returning to India ( Tandon and Raphael, 1984). In Uganda, Idi Amin expelled some 50,000 Asians in 1972. More than half arrived in Britain , 4000 emigrated to India, 6000 to Canada and the remainder to the USA, Pakistan and Western Europe. In Fiji, systematic institutionalised discrimination against the Indian community and the 1987 Coup, intended at curtailing legitimate Indian political power , forced many Indians out of the country ( Tinker et al, 1987). Finally a policy of "Arabisation " of the civil service in the Gulf States replaced many Asians by Arab workers (1980s) (Owen, 1985). The British government ' s response to the nationalism of her ex-colonies and the expulsion of Indians was highly criticized . The British tried to shake off the Asian minorities in East Africa by persuading the East and Central African countries during the negotiations 18 of independence to take the Indians as their responsibility . Britain also adopted a "closed doors" policy and an intervention from the Government of India was needed to change British policies (1962, 1968). This policy was pursued in the 1960s and 1970s although most of the Indians in the colonies had legal status of citizens of the UK under the British Nationality Act of 1948. Great Britain ' s fear that an independent and nationalistic India would attempt to mobilize all the communities of Indian origin throughout the British Colonial territories as a sort of "fifth column" was a very real factor in urging the conferring of British citizenship as counter attraction on the colonial Indians ( Tinker, 1975). British policies changed dramatically in the 1960s and 1970s - severe restrictions on Indian immigration to the UK were imposed. Indian emigrants used to tear up their passports and travel documents on arrival at British airports in order to gain access to the country and prevent their repatriation to their country of origin . C) Economic Emigration of Indians All the emigration waves of Indians were basically mobilized by economic motivations . However , in this section / a more recent emigration of South Asians is discussed : the emigration of labour to work in foreign countries . Foreign labour mostly from the developing world is employed in large numbers in Western Europe and in the Middle Eastern countries . Coloured li labour is cheaper, less unionized and more easily disciplined than local labour, which makes it enormously attractive . The importation of South Asian labourers into the Gulf States is also a reflection of the law of unequal development , by which the peripheral sections of weaker societies become the labour pool for more developed countries . The major difference , however , in this recent wave of emigration is that very few of the emigrants settle in their destinations . Most of them are obliged by their work contracts to return to their countries upon completion of their contracts . The emigration of South Asian labour in large numbers started in the mid 1970s and was shaped by the oil boom of the Persian Gulf region . By 1975 there were some 154,418 Indian migrant workers in the Middle East and their number grew to 599,500 in 1981 with the largest concentrations in UAE, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Oman. In addition to the Indian workers , in 1981 there were between 1. 7 and 2. 3 million Pakistani and 178,000 Bengali migrant labourers in the Gulf States, (Nair 1986). The South Asians were employed mostly in the construction industry but also as clerks , merchants , and businessmen etc. As a rule, the desire of the host countries was to reduce dependence on the South Asians whenever possible while protecting the interests of the local population . Particular attention was paid to posts in sensitive parts of the public service (Owen, 1985). The money which South Asians earn plays an extremely important role in the economies of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh . As a result of labour migration and 20 the consequent remittances , the Pakistani economy grew at a » rate of 5% a year throughout the 1970s rather than 2% which it would have done without the remittances (Owen, 1985). By the early 1980s when some 800,000 Indians worked in the Gulf countries they sent home $2,293,000 million ; 1.7-2.3 million Pakistani labourers sent home $2,580,000 million and the 178,000 Bangladeshis transferred $329 million (Owen 1985). Total remittances to Bangladesh in 1987 reached $583 million and to Pakistan $1,444 million . India received $1,442 million in 1985. The crucial importance of remittances can be seen also from the outcome of the Iraqi ' s invasion of Kuwait which forced some 180-200,000 Indians to return home from Kuwait, thus losing $666.8 million in remittances . Bangladeshi workers (64-90,000) lost some £312.8 million and Pakistani labourers $305. 5 million (Van Hear, 1991; ILO, Bangkok , 1990). All the South Asian countries of origin had provisions for regulating and supervising the recruitment of their labour and were also active in trying to establish minimum standards for workers going overseas , not always successfully . The migrant labourers were broadly restricted by their contracts to a single employer without the right to change their job. Only some of the workers were allowed to bring their families with them and they do not enjoy rights of political participation or citizenship . They could not own property , and there were widespread complaints among Indians about mistreatment , underpayment , discrimination , and contempt by host country 21 nationals ( Nair, 1986). The South Asian labour migrants are highly transient , their number substantially decreased during the 1980s when the economic situation in the Gulf States deteriorated . In 1990 as a result of the Iraq invasion of Kuwait, nearly 1.8 million people fled from the two countries , giving a devastating blow to their economies ( Battistella , 1991). As there is very little chance for work at home, emigration of labour from South Asia will, no doubt, continue. 3. THE ROLE OF INDIAN COMMUNITIES IN HOST SOCIETIES; SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL FACTORS One of the more crucial questions raised in connection with diasporas is related to the place various migrant or exile groups occupy in their host societies . Diaspora communities may become fully assimilated and integrated sectors within their host countries or may become separate and segregated entities . Very often diasporas occupy an intermediate place in their country of residence : they are fully participating members in some aspects of the country ' s life, such as the economy or politics but they are socially and culturally distinct and separate from other groups of society . The explanations suggested for the specific situations of diasporas in their host countries are complex and varied and there is not an explanation which can be applied for the status of all or most of the diasporas in their country of residence . 22 This paper examines one hypothesis concerning the role that Indian communities occupy in their host countries . It is suggested that the role played by Indian communities in the economy , politics and society of their respective host countries will depend on their absolute and relative size and on the ethnic composition of their societies . It is suggested that the position of the Indian communities will vary with the ethnic-cultural structure of society along the following lines: Indian communities will occupy a better position in the economy , politics and society of countries in which they are a) the majority , b) one element amongst many in a plural society . Indian diasporas will occupy an inferior status in societies in which they constitute relative and absolute minorities or in polarized , split societies (Fiji). The status of the Indian communities will be examined in three main groups: plural societies , majority societies and polarized societies . In each society the role of the Indian community will be evaluated in three basic respects . a) Policies of Institutional Racism Non-Institutional Institutional / Discrimination Racism Policy of Expulsion integration^ ' 21 The first and perhaps the most important criterion for testing the role of Indian communities in society is whether there are formal mechanisms and policies expressed by laws, acts and government resolutions to exclude Indian communities from certain or all aspects of politics and economy in the host countries . It is possible to define a continuum which starts by no measures of discrimination ; non-official discrimination , official institutional discrimination and even expulsion of Indians from their host countries . Indian Alliances / Parties and \ b) Non Non Ethnic Participatory Coalition / Participation governments We differentiate four levels of participation - beginning with non participatory Indian community, through patterns of participation conditioned by ethnic parties to full non-ethnic participation in political life. Finally the position of the Indian communities is also examined in the economic and geographical spheres. The basic differentiation as continuum 'c'suggests, is between societies in which the Indian communities engage in separate occupations and separate or segregated geographical locations , to societies in which Indians are found distributed equally among all classes and locations of their host societies . 24 C) Participation in Economy Separate / Partial Economic Full occupations and Incorporation and location ' Territorial 7 Concentrations The position of the Indian communities will be examined first in Plural societies and then in majority societies . Plural Societies There are four countries in which Indians constitute one ethnic component of among many to form a plural or multiethnic society . Table 3 points to the fortunes and misfortunes of the Indian communities in the four plural countries : Trinidad , Guyana, Suriname and Malaysia . TABLE 3 Indian Communities Position in Plural Societies Country/ Ethnic Composition Policies of Participation Participation Role c Features Racism in Politic s in Bconomy Group  Trinidad Indians 40.31% No legal Most of the Mainly rural Power Negroes 41.0% di scrimination , parties are sharir. Mixed 16.55% Job polarized with Others 3.14% discrimination along ethnic Mixing in other but ethnic lines, rural and ethnic animosities Presently urban areas groups between Indians Trade Unions and blacks influential  Guyana Indians 51% No legal Indian Mainly rural Some Negroes 31% discrimination , parties occupations power Mixed 11% Hostility failed to and sharin; Amerindians 4% between ethnic gain office residences but Others 3% groups, despite Indian Job numerical Some ethnic power . : discrimination strength mixing in under PNC Creole rural areas represand Indian and in towns ented support Suriname Indians 37% No Alliances and Full economic A syste Creoles 30.8% institutionalis coalition incorporation of powe Indonesians 18.3% ed Racism governments sharinc Bush Negroes 10.2% (consociation geographical Amerindians 2.6% al Democracy) concentration  Others 4.0% Malaysia Chinese 32% Institutional Alliance Geographical Subord - Indians 8.0% discrimination party concentration inate Malay 47% (especially in (Rubber minorit Others 13 .0% land ownership) estates) Sources for the Table: compiled by the author . Examination of the position of Indians in Guyana, Trinidad , Suriname and Malaysia shows the difference in the relative size of the communities ; Indians comprise the largest ethnic group in Guyana and Suriname, are similar in size to the black group in Trinidad and from the smallest group in Malaysia. Indians were introduced as indentured labour to Guyana (1818), Trinidad (1845) and Suriname (1873) and as contract workers (Kangani) in Malaysia (1870s), but Malaysia also expanded due to passage Indians , most of them merchants. J26 In Trinidad where the Indian population reached 40% of the total in 1970, the community was characterized by physical ( rural) isolation from the other communities . East Indian and Creole rural areas are clearly differentiated . Indian concentrations are tied to the sugar estates and to rice growing areas . East Indians have remained predominantly rural in their distribution . There is some ethnic mixing in towns. The physical isolation permitted Indians to return to their separate identity and cultural consciousness . Recent friction between Indians and Creoles in Trinidad resulted from the increased frequency of contract between the two communities . There are no major differences between Creoles and Indians in regard to occupations , but Indians are under-represented in the police and civil service and perhaps in teaching . Indian attempts to organize themselves politically revealed inherent weaknesses , suffering from lissiparous tendencies , especially when one major group appeared dominant . Thus the People' s Democratic Party ( later to become the Democratic Labour Party ) appeared Hindu - dominated in the 1950s and so alienated Muslims and Presbyterians , and the People' s National Movement was organised on an essentially Creole basis and so won elections . In the mid 1970s the ULF, a party which unites Negro oilfield workers and Indian sugar workers , was gaining power , and continued to be influential in a number of coalition governments in recent years . In Suriname, Indians are concentrated in Southern districts and are economically successful as independent market gardeners , in retail and 27 . marketing businesses and in transportation firms. Political polarization between the ethnic groups was avoided by a form of consociational democracy , namely an alliance among leaders of the various communities . The Indians are represented in coalition governments in Suriname. In Guiana, Indians comprised 51% of the population by 1970. Indian communities lived in rural areas and there were even some mixed villages before the ethnic riots of the early 1960s in which Indian and Creole minorities collided . East Indians remained rural in their distribution , but there is some ethnic mixing in the towns. In recent years, Indians were still employed in agriculture , traditionally in sugar plantations and in areas of wet-rice cultivation . Indians are upwardly mobile and more of them have white collar jobs. The All-Indian Party had very short term victories in Guyana' s political life, and were excluded from power by Creole controlled parties which were able to gain some support from the Indian communities . In Malaysia , no specific party emerged to represent the Indian community, though Indian interests have been represented in the Alliance Party since 1955, thus enjoying some share in power until the Alliance sustained its electoral setback in 1969 and the riots in that year, in which Chinese and Indians were attacked , brought an end to multiracial cooperation ; the current government is nationalist Malay in its nature . Economically , many Indians lost their land when the 28 "Bumiputra" policy was adopted, calling for Malay ownership of the land. Many lost their jobs in the rubber estates and their number among the unemployed has increased , forming a new urban underclass. In conclusion, in none of the ethnically plural societies do Indians constitute an economically and politically powerful group. At best, they have some share in political power, but economically and socially they are often discriminated against or occupy the poorer echelon of societies . Majority Societies There is only one state other than India itself where Indians comprise the majority: Mauritius . (Table 4) TABLE 4 INDIAN COMMUNITIES IN COUNTRIES WHERE THEY FORM THE MAJORITY OF THE POPULATION Country / Ethnic Policies of Participation Participation Role of   Features Composition Racism in Politics in Economy Group Mauritius Indians 70% Policies in Indian Partial Dominant Creoles 17.9% integration Parties and Economic and majority - Chinese 2.1% coalitions Territorial Challenged led by concentration Indians  South Africans 70% Institution - Participation Mostly rural Subordinate Africa Europeans 16.2% alized in Natal and minority Coloureds 10.6% racism and cooperation Transval South discrimina - with the Growing no in Asians 3.2% tion black towns majority Territorial restrictions   ' ( changing ) Kenya Blacks Institution - No Indian Middle class subordinate Indians ali zed Parties urban minority  racism population Singapore Chinese 76% Policies of No Indian Full Power Malays 14% Integration separate participation sharing and Indians 6% Parties, in economy equality Others 4% Full Indian with other Participation ethnic in politics groups Sources for the Table: compiled by the author . 29 In other typical majority countries Indians often constitute a very small minority ( East Africa, Caribbean ) or range between 3-6% of the population as in Singapore, Sri Lanka, Burma, South Africa, Kenya, the USA and Great Britain . Indians were introduced to East Africa, South Africa and Mauritius as indentured labour and as passage or contract migrants to Sri Lanka, Singapore and Burma. In Mauritius , where Indians form the majority of the population , political activity began on multi-racial lines when the labour party was founded in 1936, and basically had Indian support. Until the 1970s the Indian majority wanted an independent Mauritius whereas the Franco Mauritian and Creole minority preferred Mauritius to continue as a colony. Whilst Indians retain the dominant role in government , current political alignments partially conceal the ethnic divisions which continue to prevail . There are ethnic animosities and racial fears in the towns where Indian Moslems and Chinese traders compete with each other. However , most of the Indians remain essentially rural in their distribution , and make their living from farming. The position of the Indian community in Mauritius is doubtless better than in many of the other countries in which they live. In other majority societies the Indians were less fortunate . Indians were officially discriminated against, their property expropriated and they were expelled from Burma and Uganda. South Asians left all the East and Central African States in large numbers as adopted policies of Africanisation under which many South Asians felt discriminated against. Kenya and South Africa represent just two examples of extreme institutionalized 30 discrimination (South African Apartheid ) and African favouritism which restricted Indian land ownership ( Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania ). Since 1983, Indians in South Africa have had a separate legislature in the tricameral parliament Omf and control over "their we» ^ affairs", though the Indians are allied to the black Africans in their struggle against the white rule. The Indian communities in Kenya are highly urbanized and comprise the wealthy middle classes in Nairobi and Mombasa . About 84% of the Indians in South Africa are urbanized . Indians are employed in farming, manufacturing , business and the professions . The future fortune of this community lies with Black majority rule. Indian communities were more fortunate in other areas of their settlement - even where they constitute a minority . The most conspicuous examples are Jamaica and the French colonies of Guadeloup, Martinique and Reunion, and in Singapore where they are fully incorporated into society and partly assimilated with the other ethnic groups. Singapore Indians have received fair treatment and some Indian leaders remained close to Mr Lee, the leader of Singapore . Some 30% of the Indians are now middle class and well integrated into Singapore ' s society . The Tamil language is recognized as one of the four official languages of Singapore, - a sign of the high status of the Indian community in the island. 11 Dual Minority System - Fill Fiji probably represents one of the more disappointing cases of Indian fortunes . The Indian community , though equal in its size to the Fijian community is not allowed to own land and since 1987 is not allowed to rule the country , although partly F-iji' ^n led by a fl t ^ Inda^n who won the legitimate elections . Fijian fears of "Indian dominance" is reflected also in the exclusion of Indians from the public services and from the army and police . In the words of Lal, "the final picture that emerges of Fiji Indians in the 1980s is that of 9 community which is destined to rebuild its life within the Fijian version of apartheid " ( Lal, 1990). CONCLUSIONS The Indian diaspora is dispersed among more than 70 states , but only in a dozen states do Indians constitute a large minority or a majority . In many of their countries of residence the Indian communities are exposed to institutionali zed and non-institutionalized discrimination and from a total lack or under-representation in the power structure. This has led to a secondary Indian emigration from their country of settlement . The few Indian communities which are well incorporated into their host societies constitute a majority only in one country - Mauritius , whilst in other countries they comprise only a minority group. Based on their present situation , it is expected that Indian communities will continue to emigrate in their search for a safe haven. 32 REFERENCES Battistella , Graziano (1991), "Gulf Returnees : Profile of Crisis", Asian Migrant, vol IV, No 2, January/March, 25 29. - Clarke , Colin , Peach, Ceri and Vertovec , Steven (eds) (1990), South Asians Overseas ,Cambridge University Press. Cato, A C (1955), "Fijians and Fiji Indians, a Culture Conflict Problem in the South Pacific", Oceanic ,vol XXVI, September , 14-34. Ghai, Dharam (ed) (1965), Portrait of a Minority Asian in East Africa ,Nairobi : Oxford University Press . Gorbi, Arshile (1988), "Diasporas in Comparative Perspective ", Armenian Affairs , No 1, January, p 11. Gupta, Anirudha (1975), "India and the Asians in East Africa", in M Twaddle ( ed) Expulsion of a Minority , London: University of London, pp 125-139. Hollingsmith , L W (1960), The Asians of East Africa , London: Macmillan and Co. Laws on, Stephanie (1991) The Failure of Democratic Politics in Fjlj,Oxford: Clarendon Press. Lemon, A (1980) "Asian Overseas Settlement in the 19 th and 20 th Century", in A Lemon and N Pollock ( eds) Studies in Overseas Settlement ,London, pp 103-125. Lemon, A and Pollock , N (1980) ( eds). Studies in Overseas Settlement and Population , London: Longman. Lemon, A (1980) "The Indian Communities of East Africa and the Caribbean ", in A Lemon and N Pollock ( eds) Studies in Overseas Settlement ,London, pp 225-241. 33 Nair , Gopinathan , R R (1986) "India" in Godfrey Gunatillebe (ed) Migration of Asian Workers to the Arab World , Tokyo : the United Nations University , pp 66-106, London: Minority Rights Group. Owen, Roger (1985) Migrant Workers in the Gulf,London: the Minority Group. Tinker, Hugh (1975) "Indians Abroad : Emigration Restriction and Rejection ", in M Twaddle (ed) Expulsion of a Minority , London, pp 15 - 29. Sen, Sirdar D K (1950) The Position of Indians in South Africa, Calcutta: Indian Law Review . Tribe, M A (1975) "Economic Aspects of Expulsion of Asians from Uganda", in M Twaddle (ed) Expulsion of a Minority: Essays on Ugandan Asians,London: University of London, pp 140-176. Twaddle , Michael (1975) Expulsion of a Minority: Essays on Ugandan Asians,London: University of London, Institute of Commonwealth Studies . Twaddle , Michael (1975) "Was the Expulsion Irreversible ", in M Twaddle (ed) Expulsion of a Minority,London: University of London, pp 1-14. Van Hear, Nicholas (1992) "Migrant workers in the Gulf", Minority Rights Group International Update Union of South Africa (1975) The Indian South African , Pretoria : Department of Information . Union of South Africa (1953) Treatment of Indians in the Union of South Africa, Discussions and Proceedings at the UN, September to November 1953, Pretoria . Union of South Africa (1942) Report of Indian Penetration Commission ,Pretoria : Government Printer . United Nations (1990) The Iraq/Kuwait Crisis International Assistance to Displaced People ,August-November 1990, New York : UNDRO.