Re: [Assam] Historical Background of Nagaland

[Barua25]

 Dear Bhubanda: Thanks for your enlightenment. I agree with your forecast and logic specially for ULFA who is rather a new kid on the street without any support from the Assamese mainstream who never wanted an independent country for Assam. Mainram Dewan was the last non-Ahom upper class Assamese Hindu who tried to regain the lost independence for Assam. After that the caste Hindu upper class Assamese never, even for a single moment, tried or thought for a separate Assam outside India.  In fact Assamese leadership were very much pleased to receive the favor from their big brother India to be included into India as a state.   It is this more than anything else which undermine everything that ULFA stand for.  If Assamese would have joinde the Nagas all along, things might have been different. But that is hind sight....   But the case for the Nagas are different and I have great sysmpathy for them. I am genuinely interested to know where and how the Nagas failed in their fight for independence. From day one they had been telling that they donot want to stay with India. Accord has been signed that after ten years of independence, they can choose what they want. And they choose 'independence'.    In this,  only thing I can see is that Indian superior intelligence might have diluted the case and ultimately destroyed it. What was Phizo's fault? He did not have a strategy for independence which seem to be a sure shot for them?   Frankly speaking could you write a brief  essay on the whole thing highlighting the main events.? Rajen ----- Original Message -----   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Assam@assamnet.org Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2006 11:36 AM Subject: Re: [Assam] Historical Background of Nagaland Dear Baruah Saheb   You’ve asked my views about the Naga problem. I do have them coupled with the fact that my political forecasts had always been proved wrong in the long run. I console myself with the fact that political solutions are seldom predictable. An example of this is the grant of separate Statehood to the hill districts of former Assam. The Indian press as well as the economists  and other statesmen who stated these States were not viable because of lack of revenue etc were against the idea. But it appears without any known consultation with the public including the Assam State Legislature and the Parliament itself,  the then Prime Minister of India suddenly announced, it was a coup the grace, that the Khasi Hills, the Garo Hills and the Lushai Hill districts would form the new State of Meghalaya. The rest is history.   I come to the point.   Sovereignty for the Nagas is a dead issue. It died the day late Mr A Z Phizo fled the country. When I told Phizo that Government of India no longer took him seriously, he tried to prove to me that he was not a spent force as it appeared.   Today, I think the parleys with the Issac-Muivah et al are nothing but an eye-wash. I am sorry to say that in case of ULFA also it is so because the Government has become experienced in the art of dealing with insurgents. Kashmir taught them. Unfortunately for the Government of India which is not a dictatorship, the show has to go on because of a great many people who have enjoyed or are enjoying or hope to enjoy power for all the time. It is why they are afraid  of  applying the laws of the country to maintain law and order which the Indian Army is capable of doing. A mere suggestion of it by the outgoing Governor of Assam, an ex-army officer, earned him public censure.   The Government of India is having the last laugh. The mutineers are clearly divided. And their strategy also appears to be not fool-proof.  In other words they are confused and confounded. For example, the rebels demand for all Naga-inhabited areas to be included in Nagalim. I say where are the dimachas? Can’t they not evict  the  encroachers?   Bhuban

_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org