Ever since India achieved independence in 1947, scholars of Indian politics have tried to understand how exactly this incredibly diverse country, with its sprawling collection of distinct linguistic, religious, and caste groups, has survived as one nation. A common answer has been India's ethnofederalism: in 1956 the government reorganized states on the basis of language. But ethnolinguistic conflict continues unabated in India today, and—more perplexingly—sometimes the center accommodates these demands and at other times it represses them. What explains these patterns of interaction? Bethany Lacina's Rival Claims seeks to answer these questions with a novel theory: “the electoral relationship between these opponents of autonomy [i.e., in the periphery] and the prime minister dictates whether the center represses or accommodates ethnoterritorial demands” (p. ix).
Lacina's theory hinges on the real debate not being between center and periphery, but “Center versus Periphery versus Periphery” (p. 23). She correctly notes that the periphery...
