POST-COLONIAL STATES IN SOUTH ASIA

The post-colonial state is a unique entity shaped by its historical context. While it is designed to serve the needs of a newly independent nation, it often retains significant features of its colonial past. This paradox—where a state, formed during the colonial era, is expected to function in the post-colonial period—has led to the development of three prominent theoretical frameworks: the ‘Soft State’, the ‘Overdeveloped State’, and the ‘Enchantment of the State’.

The ‘Soft State’ concept was introduced by Swedish economist Gunnar Myrdal in his influential work Asian Drama: An Inquiry into the Poverty of Nations (1968), which spans more than 2,000 pages. The ‘Overdeveloped State’ theory was proposed by Pakistani sociologist Hamza Alavi, focusing on the experiences of Pakistan and Bangladesh in his 1972 article. The third theory, ‘Enchantment of the State’, comes from political theorist Sudipta Kaviraj, who explores the allure the state has created in India.

These three frameworks are deeply rooted in South Asia’s historical experiences and contrast with the development of the modern state in Europe

‘Soft’ versus ‘Hard’ States

• Gunnar Myrdal contrasted the ‘soft’ state of South Asia with the ‘hard’ state of Europe, emphasizing their differing capacities for social transformation. By ‘soft state,’ Myrdal referred to a state's inability to implement large-scale societal changes, such as comprehensive land reforms.
• A close associate of India’s first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, Myrdal observed that Nehru’s government failed to dismantle the rural elite’s dominance. This control was left intact and later solidified, particularly after Nehru’s death and the advent of the Green Revolution, which gave rise to the phenomenon of “bullock capitalists.”
• The concept of the soft state also reflected its failure to foster modern values like bureaucratic rationality. Instead, such states often became entangled with regressive elements of traditional society.
• According to Myrdal, this led to a lack of control, where societal resistance and disobedience, stemming partly from anti-colonial movements, made it difficult for the state to enforce laws or extend its authority effectively to remote regions. Corruption further exacerbated these challenges, undermining the state’s transformative potential.
• In contrast, Myrdal argued that Europe’s ‘hard’ states successfully disseminated modern values throughout their societies. This was partly due to the absolutist foundations of the modern European state, which allowed it to assert control and instill order more effectively

Over-Developed State: Links Between Colonial and Indigenous Bourgeoisie

• In contrast to Gunnar Myrdal’s depiction of the post-colonial state as ‘soft,’ Hamza Alavi proposed the concept of the ‘over-developed’ state. This state actively intervenes in and reshapes society, particularly its internal and indigenous structures. Its over-developed nature stems from its historical connection to the metropolitan colonial power that originally established it.
• After its creation, the over-developed state takes on the role of dominating the native elements of society, particularly the indigenous bourgeoisie.
• According to Alavi, the unique dynamic of this state lies in its relationship with two bourgeoisie classes: the external metropolitan bourgeoisie from whom it became independent, and the indigenous bourgeoisie, which remains too weak to exert meaningful control. As a result, the latter becomes easily subordinated to the state.
• Alavi expanded on the concept of the over-developed state in a pivotal 1972 essay published in the New Left Review. His analysis was deeply rooted in the specific historical contexts of Pakistan and Bangladesh, a period marked by the recent independence of Bangladesh (formerly East Pakistan) following its secession