[Assam] Stalinist mind set of keeping Georgia, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia under feet with brutal force by the USSR is being reflected here. India, it is time to learn from history that the mighty Mughals had to bow down to the Sovereign Assam; repeatedly.

[Bartta Bistar]

Ulfa dilemma: to talk or not
http://www.asiantribune.com/index.php?q=node/1940

Wed, 2006-09-13 01:37

By Vinod Vedi - Syndicate Features

With the Assam Government, with the concurrence of the Centre, stating
categorically that the proposed dialogue on all issues with the banned
outfit United Liberation Front for Asom (ULFA) would be "within the ambit of
the Constitution of India" it leaves little doubt that the promised release
from jail of the five members of its executive committee will depend on a
written communication to Delhi indicating its willingness to hold direct
talks.

The Government of India thus put paid to any ambitions nurtured by ULFA or
any other insurgent group that sovereignty of its constituent components is
negotiable. If Assam (or Asom as ULFA prefers to spell it) is to remain
within the Union of India then what option does ULFA but to fight to the
bitter end?

Having removed any possibility of ambiguity about the status of the proposed
direct negotiations, the Government clearly feels confident that it would be
able to handle any possible backlash that ULFA may decide to perpetrate. To
that end, the Ministry of Defence has been credited with the instructions to
the armed forces to continue its counter-insurgency operations within the
north-east region where the many insurgent groups have interlinkages to
sustain their respective political goals.

ULFA is nevertheless in no position to dictate terms. The release of its
five leaders is an acceptable proposition given that their presence at any
conclave that endorses ULFA-Government direct talks would lend legitimacy to
the proceedings. Delhi has expressed its willingness to release them inspite
of fears expressed by the security forces that they would either go
underground or flee to Bangladesh where some of those who had managed to
escape the Bhutan crackdown are living. This prospect would tend to prolong
the conflict. Yet it was a risk that the Government was willing to take
provided ULFA agrees to direct talks and says so in writing.

Hitherto, contact between ULFA and the Government was through an 11-member
People's Consultative Group (PCG) led by Ms Indira Goswami, Jnanpith Award
winner. At one stage of these 'facilitation rounds' it appeared that the
logjam had been broken by the assurance of Home Minister Shivraj Patil on
the release of the five ULFA leaders and thus the stage was set for direct
talks with ULFA. Chief Minister Tarun Gogoi later clarified that the moment
it received a direct communication it would release the five leaders and
also announce a ceasefire.

However, the unequivocal reiteration of the supremacy of the Constitution of
India has been described by the PCG as a violation of the spirit of the
decisions taken at the third round in June where the steps required to
create a congenial atmosphere for direct talks were discussed. In the first
week of August the PCG said that it would place its "sense of the situation"
report before the people of the State.

The spirit referred to was with reference to the release of the five leaders
from jail but there was clear contention on the other two ULFA demands that
India give in writing that the future negotiations would revolve around the
issue of sovereignty; and that India would help resolve the fate of those
who were missing after the crackdown by the Royal Bhutan Army on ULFA bases
and sanctuaries in southern Bhutan.

For one thing it should have been apparent to any insurgent group that no
political party in the saddle on the Raisina Hills could ever agree
negotiating the sovereignty of the Union of India. It was wishful thinking
on the part of ULFA and the crackdown by the Government of Bhutan only
tended to nail down the coffin of ULFA ambitions. Its military strength has
whittled down to just several hundred; so it is amply clear that ULFA would
never be able to achieve its goal of independence for 'Asom'. The only
option that is left is to negotiate the amount of autonomy that could
devolve in the proposed dispensation.

On the issue of the missing ULFA cadres it would be very difficult for
either the Government of India or that of Bhutan to be able to draw up a
list of casualties during the crackdown in territory that is covered with
thick jungles of the Himalayan foothills. Also the fact that many managed to
escape the dragnet and flee to Bangladesh has put them in limbo because of
the policy of denial of the Government of Khaleda Zia that terrorist groups
are using its territory for attacks on India. If the Government of
Bangladesh continues to deny the existence of ULFA cadres it will not be
possible to ascertain the fate of the missing persons.

Yet efforts can be made through formal and informal contacts and through
international bodies like the Red Cross but that will happen only if direct
talks take place. Vice-chairman of ULFA Pradip Gogoi, one of those who is in
jail, has stated categorically that sovereignty is a core issue (for ULFA).
In what the Assam Government feels is an attempt to assert its strength ULFA
has resorted to several bombings across the state inviting retaliatory
action by security forces. To the dismay of the underground, the army and
paramilitary forces have since managed to kill a few more ULFA leaders.

There is a standoff in the sense that both sides have not abjured the use of
violence and even as the Army is continuing its crackdown the ULFA is trying
to make its presence felt by sporadic acts of violence. In this it has the
support of the Pakistan Army Inter-Services Intelligence which sees in the
many insurgencies in the north-east an opportunity to avenge the creation of
Bangladesh. The emergence of Islamic fundamentalist forces in Bangladesh is
mainly due to connivance of the ISI and the Government of Bangladesh to deny
the existence of terrorists on its soil secure in the belief that there is
not going to be any hot pursuit by the Indian Army.

However, the Government of India's two-track policy of expressing a
willingness to hold direct talks with ULFA within the Indian Constitution
and at the same time continue with the cordon and search operations against
it will tend to attrition further the strength of the fighters still
available with the militant organization. There does not appear to be much
possibility of the ULFA being able to recruit many new faces given that it
has been bested by the Royal Bhutan Army. Notwithstanding the support of the
Pakistan ISI and the Bangladesh government led by Mrs Khaleda Zia, ULFA's
existence over time is tenuous at best.

If there is a change of Government in Dhaka then that will mark the death
knell of several insurgent groups currently being harboured in Bangladesh
because the next likely incumbent, Sheikh Hasina, would prefer better
relations with India. And ULFA could be caught between a rock and a hard
place.

- Syndicate Features

<http://www.asiantribune.com/index.php?q=node/1940>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/assam_assamnet.org/attachments/20060913/9fc4945c/attachment.htm