events; they were of doubtful legality, given that the constitutional
provision for the dismissal of state governments should not in the first
place have applied to Kashmir. But this, effectively, set a precedent from
which the special status of Kashmir within the Indian Union never
recovered. Over the next few years, he wrote sympathetic and philosoph-
ical letters to Abdullah in jail, where he was held without trial; one could
have imagined such letters being written to Nehru himself by a
sympathetic British imperial official, lamenting the impersonal forces
of politics that had brought about the situation.THE INDIAN STATE: THE END OF A BEGINNING?
If we were to let ‘tribals’ illustrate the potential problems with definitions
of nationhood and the explicit and implicit exclusions that were still at
work – ‘castes’ and ‘women’ would also be good illustrative examples
of this problem – we might provide a foreshadowing of some of the
problems that would be carried into what we might call the ‘mature’ stage
of Nehru’s prime ministership; for the period from formal independence
to circa1955 was what we might well regard as a formative period in
state-building. It was easier to get the stateto function than to produce a
viable version of the necessary myth of the nationwith an identifiable
positivecontent, especially as its stronger, negative form, expressed as anti-
colonialism, waned with the loss of its explicit counter-image, British
imperialism. It should be pointed out that there is no state that has
produced a version of nationalism perfectly congruent with its boundaries,
linguistic, ethnic or historical character; this is an impossible demand.
But as Nehru himself might have put it, mature states can afford not to
take their national myths too seriously; the need for a cementing idea of
India was still strong.
Nevertheless, the future looked bright. Nehru was at the peak of his
powers; the stabilisation of the Indian state had been achieved; the
sectarian forces had been held at bay largely due to Nehru’s efforts; and
he had succeeded in gaining if not decisive control over his party and
government, at least effective control on most issues, and the authority to
present his own positions as the standards of public legitimacy. The great
developmental project was underway; India, as a model for colonial nations
struggling for independence, and as a country willing to stand up to the
superpowers, had acquired an international role and standing; Nehru212 CONSOLIDATING THE STATE, c. 1947–55