INFILTRATION

Sanjoy Hazarika on Immigration in Assam and Other N.E.

The Congress is unwilling or unable to take a position (on infiltration) because of fear of hurting its vote bank of its "secular" image. But why blame the Congress? Few parties, apart from the Asom Gana Parishad at the regional level and the Bharatiya Janata Party at the national level, are prepared to tackle this question head-on. Of course, one has very strong reservations about the exaggerated figures relating to the size of the migration from both these parties as well as their emphasis on "Muslim infiltrators" as against "Hindu refugees".

Let us briefly examine the recent roots of alienation and conflict in Assam and the region.

First of all, it was a head court in 1979 not the census but an electoral check that laid the basis for the fear in the Assam Valley that the indigenous people were being swamped by an unregulated influx of foreigners.

The All-Assam Students Union, the traditional torch- bearer of agitations in the Assam Valley, allied with other organizations to launch a movement against settlers. The consequences of that agitation are still being felt: it threw the region into turbulence, created dep divides among the communities and led to conflicts and wounds that have not healed but are being opened again.

We are familiar with the events that followed the student agitation: first a series of strikes leading to the boycott of the 1980 elections and gheraoing of candidates that forced cancellation of balloting in 8 of 14 Parliamentary constituencies. Then followed a sustained campaign, despite crackdowns by police and paramilitary forces, that crippled the state administration and the economy. Several rounds of negotiations between Indira Gandhi and the agitators failed. The Prime Minister called for an election to force the issue and settle the political instability in the state.

The 1983 February elections to the State assembly and to fill the vacant Lok Sabha seats were an unmitigated disaster. The students launched not just a boycott but active resistance. The election brought a Congress Party Government to power under Hiteswar Saikia, but is widely regarded as one of the most unfair elections to be held in the history of independent India. The death toll has not been matched by any election: the figures vary between 3,000 and 5,000 dead.

The anti-foreigner movement turned slowly into an anti-Saikia agitation, as the agitation lost momentum. But it retained enough clout to enable its leadership to sign an agreement in August 1985 with the Central Government (with) Rajiv Gandhi Rajiv Gandhi (as) Prime Minister. Under the terms of the accord, Saikia demitted office, the state legislature was dissolved and new elections were held that brought the agitators to power. The Centre pledged to deport illegal immigrants who had come after 1971, promised to set up a third oil refinery, reopen a sick paper mill, establish an Indian Institute of Technology. and a Central University in the State.

But on the core issues of identifying and deporting aliens, the agitators compromised: they sought the disenfranchisement of immigrants who had come between 1961-71 (large number of them were Bengali Hindus from East Pakistan) but permitted them to vote. in the very elections that brought them to power in 1985.

By agreeing to 1971 as the cut off year, the agitators accepted the very formula that Mrs. Gandhi, had offered as far back as 1980 and which they had spurned.

In 1985, the students came to power under the banner of the Asom Gana Parishad. But they failed to redeem their pledges of deportation and detection. Only about 900 illegal migrants were ousted during their tenure and they lost credibility. In the process, an armed insurrection grew in the State under the leadership of the United Liberation Front of Asom. Its activities were curbed by two major army operations that followed the dismissal of the Asom Gana Parishad Government and new elections that brought Congress and Saikia back to power. But in recent months, its activities have been on the upsurge, especially in collaboration with two other underground groups, the powerful National Socialist Council of Nagaland and the Bodo Security Force.

What must be pointed out here is that a series of elections and confrontations has not resolved the crisis before Assam. Prime Minister Narasimha Rao recognised the legitimacy of the student grievances - much to the dismay of his party followers at a public rally in Guwahati in July 1992. The Prime Minister surprised Assam by declaring according to one newspaper account, that the Centre was prepared to consider amending the Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act of Assam (IMDTA). But little has happened on that front

Rao understood the deep-seated feeling of alienation and anger of the youth of Assam which he identified as having been born out of the influx of foreigners to the state. This was a remarkable stand by the chief of the ruling party, in a State where the Congress is identified with establishing vote banks and acidly if not overtly encouraging immigration.

Surely, nearly four years after that statement, it is time to ask if the ruling party or any other party baring the BJP has a view on immigration and foreign. nationals settling in India?

(Source: The Hindustan Times, 8 July, 1996)