For a while now, negotiations between PCG and GOI for starting a direct dialogue between GOI and ULFA have naturally heightened Assamese expectation for an early end to the more than a quarter century of insurgency initiated by ULFA. How dearly the people of Assam harbor the dream that a new chapter of peace and prosperity will begin soon. Shortly after the announcement of cessation of hostilities by ULFA in return for GOI’s unilateral ceasefire, before August 15, 2006, CM Tarun Gogoi aptly expressed the public sentiment by saying that with peace, a prerequisite for progress and development, a new era will begin in Assam. Everyone in Assam is anxiously holding on, hoping that the long awaited peace will soon return. It would not be an exaggeration to state that what has transpired thus far in the process of discussions is very promising. Hopefully, the temporary cessation of hostilities will be a lasting one. It’s true that the process has now paused with a bickering about the modalities regarding release of five jailed ULFA leaders and one hopes that that too will clear up and real direct talks will begin soon. Even if that materializes, let no one expect a smooth sailing of the process by any means. It may take months, if not years, of complicated negotiations. Notwithstanding the uncertainty due to the unknown details of discussions and the state of collective psychology and stratagem of ULFA and GOI, one hopes and prays for the best at this time.
Without a doubt, both GOI and ULFA have propelled themselves into a very critical juncture of time. Any misstep by either side has the potential of wreaking havoc and reversing the process. Public faith in both GOI and ULFA will erode precipitously. If that happens, the present euphoria will give way to frustration and pessimism. The net effect of all that on Assamese society will be nothing less than disastrous. The imperatives for peace dictate that a cautious, far-sighted, pragmatic, and constructive approach be taken by either side rather than even outwardly arrogant and selfish postures for which there will be temptations on both sides. Especially for ULFA, it is a moment of reckoning. They must realize that they have a historical responsibility of immense gravity. They are perhaps ordained for a role for uplifting the Assamese people for whom they have suffered so long.
Media references to their alleged tactics in the face of a formidable opponent, if true, surely are reprehensible and utterly despicable: generations of extortion culture, piggyback rides on ISI, and personal gains etc.. That has brought it at loggerheads with many a sober intellectual who are not their enemies and forms a direct confront with civility. But one can pass that as an act of irrational defiance in the face of adversity or desperation and an aberration if a genuine effort is made for a early resolution of the conflict.
The fact of the matter is that the ULFA insurgency stemmed from a sense of being shortchanged, ignored, and ill-treated by the Indian state. The demand for sovereignty (that was innate in the Assamese psyche long before ULFA articulated it) followed as a cause. An unrealistic sense of invincibility after thwarting the Mughul attempt to subjugate Assam seventeen times somehow reinforces an Assamese desire for independence.
On a personal note, as former president of the Assam Society of America (ASA), I remember leading an Assamese delegation to Ambassador K.R. Narayanan, who later became president of India, after a demonstration outside the Washington D.C. embassy. This was at the height of the student movement of the early eighties led by Prafulla Mahanta and the Late Bhrigu Phukan. In my still un-faded youthful zeal, I undiplomatically told the Ambassador that we wanted to be independent. When he asked me who was going to help, I promptly replied without much thinking: “China.” He frowned on that. Later, I realized I was too emotional. With this, perhaps I can claim that I was the only one who demanded Assam’s sovereignty on a foreign soil to a representative of GOI! The point here is that a desire for independence is inextricably intertwined with the Assamese mind, but then one has to be realistic. An understanding of history reveals that it inexorably moulds the human society almost in a preordained fashion. To thrive, one must negotiate the twists and turns of history with whatever flexibility and adjustment needed with a pragmatic and beneficial goal. It would not make sense to try to bring back the pre-Yandaboo Chandrakanta Singha’s kingdom in Assam. All that is gone with the wind. The meaning of the word “sovereignty” itself is nebulous. Philosophically, there is no absolute sovereignty in the present day world. The entire wired and wide world is interdependent. Even the hands of the only superpower in the world today, the USA, are tied to the institution of the United Nations and individual nations. It is foolhardy for a sub-nationality of twenty-five million people to dream about a nation on the face of the earth, and survive and make a mark. Mere existence of adequate mineral and other resources is not enough. Any sovereign government of such a nation will only be an exercise in puppetry and a quick trade study with respect to all aspects only leads one to conclude that most can be gained within the umbrella of a revised Indian constitution. Commonality of history, culture, ethos all point to that same conclusion.
It is very difficult to understand the parameters that drive ULFA’s actions. In the post 9-11 world, it is conceivable that they are changing and so will ULFA. But ULFA must not make the mistake of being lulled into a sense of invincibility by association with a foreign power that inherently works against the well-being of the harmonious monolith of the heterogeneous Assamese society that includes all indigenous people irrespective of linguistic , religious, ethnic or tribal denominations. I am sure that in the deepest of their hearts, ULFA leadership understands the predicament of standing up to GOI and at the same time be faithful to their Axomiyatta. They may even feel as if they are riding on a mythical tiger and unable to dismount. It is in this context that GOI must cautiously play its cards right and ease them out of emotional hang-ups by acquiescing to their reasonable demands for the sake of the Assamese people and not be ruthless and dogmatic.
ULFA’s demand for an independent Assam free from constitutional bondage with the rest of India is certainly a very tall order on the existing Indian state of which Assam now happens to be a constitutional part. Those who hold the reins of power under the oath of defending India’s constitution are not expected to put an about face on the constitution to which they have pledged their allegiance. They will not stand for the dissolution of the Indian state. That does not mean that the demand for sovereignty of Assam is totally unjustified or uncalled for. Winston Churchill did not want to preside over the dissolution of His Majesty’s empire by granting India independence. But the history unfolded against that notion and Gandhi’s movement steered India into freedom. So with mass public awakening, it is possible to achieve the righteous goal and become successfully against seemingly impregnable adversities. However, the situation with respect to ULFA is not the same. ULFA’s situation today is similar to that of Chechens. So the point here is that there is need to be pragmatic. The media reports that ULFA is backed in terrorist tactics by a foreign agency who have their own agenda. If that is true, ULFA views an enemy of a perceived enemy as a friend. Nothing can be more shortsighted than that. In that context, it is tempting to see a part of Assam’s history repeating itself. In the last twenty seven years, the world has changed in a dramatic way mainly because of advancements in science and technology, and Assam has been left behind on the way side in the dust bin of history because of it preoccupation with an unsettling sociopolitical environment. If twenty-seven years have not been enough to achieve its goals, how long more will be needed? Certainly ULFA can not demand a millennium of Assam’s history to achieve the results. Waiting indefinitely is not the choice because the Assamese sub-nationality will not be existent if the present state of affairs continues much longer . In twenty-seven years, ULFA has not made any significant headway in the matter of achieving its cherished goal. People are rather disillusioned and rightfully so.
ULFA has two choices: either continue with the path of demanding severing constitutional ties with India and try to declare Assam as an independent sovereign nation ad infinitum, or sit down with GOI for a special deal to redress all the grievances under a possibly amended constitution of India. Whereas it is questionable how much popular support there is for course one, I feel almost everyone will support the second choice.
Lastly, the phenomenon of ULFA is a very unique and significant one in the entire history of Assam. Whatever else, one must admit that ULFA has achieved something that no one else has achieved in post-independent India. It brings into sharp national focus the fact of injustices meted out to Assam by the Indian state. ULFA’s movement has catapulted the Assamese identity and awakening to a level achieved never before. ULFA has already succeeded in their mission. Because that awakening of the people of Assam will remain an asset to proclaim Assam’s preponderance in the greater Indian society in years to come and even long after ULFA is gone. ULFA’s legacy will take a quantum leap if it now comes to terms with reality, sit down with GOI and from their strong position, negotiate as much out of GOI as possible and set the course of an unprecedented renaissance of the Assamese people.
by Umesh C Tahbildar
- Log in to post comments