This from the Sentinel. The questions it asks are not only serious but also pertinent. However, it is doubtful whether the Sentinel or anyone else will ever get straight answers.
_______________
ULFA'S Response: Some Posers
ULFA chairman Arabinda Rajkhowa has finally said that his organization has not declared a ceasefire but will show restraint in response to the Centre's suspension of operations against the ULFA. He has also appreciated the Centre's decision, and has warned the people about the vile moves of those interested in scuttling the attempts to bring about a final peace to the State. This is no doubt a move which will be welcomed by anyone who wishes the State of Asom well. But since the ULFA chairman has said that his organization's decision to withhold its strikes has been motivated by the respect which it has for the people's desire for peace, one would like to ask him: against whom were the ULFA's operations chiefly launched in recent months? What was the purpose in blowing up schoolchildren a year ago at Dhemaji ? Or targeting vegetable vendors in a city market ? Or killing a mother and a daughter who had just come out of hospital after visiting a sick child? Or throwing a grenade at unwary commuters in market areas or traffic crossings? The list would be virtually endless and would, of course, include all the police and security personnel whose killing the ULFA would glorify as assaults on state power.
The ULFA is quite sensitive about being called a terrorist outfit. But its course of action in the recent past has shown that it can make a suitable claim to be one. For, the purpose of terrorism is to strike terror and fear in the hearts of the civilian population and erode the credibility of the administration by random targeting of innocent and unsuspecting civilians. Was not the ULFA doing just that? Ever since the killings of Raju and Gritschenko, and Kamala Saikia and Sanjoy Ghose, to mention just a few instances, the ULFA has been trying to justify its every move in the name of the people. So, it is not surprising that the ULFA chairman now speaks about his concern for the people of Asom and their desire for peace. While welcoming this concern, one would also have expected a few words of sympathy at least for the families of those innocent civilians who were killed by the militant outfit in random blasts carried out to make its presence felt and bring pressure upon the Centre to initiate a ceasefire. But the impression that is sought to be given by the organization and its supporters is that such deaths are a part of the just struggle that is being waged for liberating Asom from the yoke of Indian colonialism! Even the People's Consultative Group (PCG) has been maintaining an eerie silence over civilian deaths while expressing its righteous anger over state killings of ULFA cadres.
Now that after 27 years of armed struggle that was increasingly taking on terrorist characteristics, the State is moving towards the possibility of a direct dialogue between the Centre and the ULFA, we would like to make the following points clear : (a) that the overwhelming desire for peace on the part of the people of Asom should not be seen as an indication of its support for the programmes and policies of the ULFA; (b) that the PCG does not in any way represent the voice of the civil society of Asom — it has rather established itself as a group with clearly partisan positioning; (c) that the elected government of the State must be involved at some stage in the negotiations between the Centre and the militant outfit; (d) that the question of the sovereignty of India and of Asom as a constituent State of the Indian Union is non-negotiable; (e) that the ULFA make its position clear regarding its equations with the Islamic militant outfits of Bangladesh; and (f) that once the talks begin, the ULFA must commit itself to put an end to extortions and agree to start the process for the surrender of its weapons.
In these 27 years of militancy, thousands have lost their lives in very tragic circumstances. Once the dialogue starts and peace gets a more or less solid footing in the State, the people are bound to ask both the government and the ULFA about the actual circumstances in which so many people lost their lives. Just as the ULFA has a right to know about what happened to its missing cadres during the Bhutan operation as also the manner in which all the fake encounters were carried out by the security forces, similarly the people have a right to know why the outfit carried out its killings and targeted civilians on such a large scale. This is, therefore, not a time to be euphoric about the cessation of hostilities. It is actually a time for introspection, of trying to find out why the killing game took on such frightening proportions in a State known for its civility and warmth. Given the protracted nature of peace negotiations in neighbouring Nagaland, one should never harbour any illusions about a speedy settlement of the ULFA-led 'insurgency' in the State. Talking peace on the part of ULFA may, in all certainty, prove to be much more difficult than waging a protracted armed struggle against the state in which innocent and unsuspecting civilians turn out to be the main targets. As for New Delhi, it must realize that promoting the illusion of a solution outside the parameters of the Constitution could prove to be highly dangerous for the future of the Indian nation.
ULFA chairman Arabinda Rajkhowa has finally said that his organization has not declared a ceasefire but will show restraint in response to the Centre's suspension of operations against the ULFA. He has also appreciated the Centre's decision, and has warned the people about the vile moves of those interested in scuttling the attempts to bring about a final peace to the State. This is no doubt a move which will be welcomed by anyone who wishes the State of Asom well. But since the ULFA chairman has said that his organization's decision to withhold its strikes has been motivated by the respect which it has for the people's desire for peace, one would like to ask him: against whom were the ULFA's operations chiefly launched in recent months? What was the purpose in blowing up schoolchildren a year ago at Dhemaji ? Or targeting vegetable vendors in a city market ? Or killing a mother and a daughter who had just come out of hospital after visiting a sick child? Or throwing a grenade at unwary commuters in market areas or traffic crossings? The list would be virtually endless and would, of course, include all the police and security personnel whose killing the ULFA would glorify as assaults on state power.
The ULFA is quite sensitive about being called a terrorist outfit. But its course of action in the recent past has shown that it can make a suitable claim to be one. For, the purpose of terrorism is to strike terror and fear in the hearts of the civilian population and erode the credibility of the administration by random targeting of innocent and unsuspecting civilians. Was not the ULFA doing just that? Ever since the killings of Raju and Gritschenko, and Kamala Saikia and Sanjoy Ghose, to mention just a few instances, the ULFA has been trying to justify its every move in the name of the people. So, it is not surprising that the ULFA chairman now speaks about his concern for the people of Asom and their desire for peace. While welcoming this concern, one would also have expected a few words of sympathy at least for the families of those innocent civilians who were killed by the militant outfit in random blasts carried out to make its presence felt and bring pressure upon the Centre to initiate a ceasefire. But the impression that is sought to be given by the organization and its supporters is that such deaths are a part of the just struggle that is being waged for liberating Asom from the yoke of Indian colonialism! Even the People's Consultative Group (PCG) has been maintaining an eerie silence over civilian deaths while expressing its righteous anger over state killings of ULFA cadres.
Now that after 27 years of armed struggle that was increasingly taking on terrorist characteristics, the State is moving towards the possibility of a direct dialogue between the Centre and the ULFA, we would like to make the following points clear : (a) that the overwhelming desire for peace on the part of the people of Asom should not be seen as an indication of its support for the programmes and policies of the ULFA; (b) that the PCG does not in any way represent the voice of the civil society of Asom — it has rather established itself as a group with clearly partisan positioning; (c) that the elected government of the State must be involved at some stage in the negotiations between the Centre and the militant outfit; (d) that the question of the sovereignty of India and of Asom as a constituent State of the Indian Union is non-negotiable; (e) that the ULFA make its position clear regarding its equations with the Islamic militant outfits of Bangladesh; and (f) that once the talks begin, the ULFA must commit itself to put an end to extortions and agree to start the process for the surrender of its weapons.
In these 27 years of militancy, thousands have lost their lives in very tragic circumstances. Once the dialogue starts and peace gets a more or less solid footing in the State, the people are bound to ask both the government and the ULFA about the actual circumstances in which so many people lost their lives. Just as the ULFA has a right to know about what happened to its missing cadres during the Bhutan operation as also the manner in which all the fake encounters were carried out by the security forces, similarly the people have a right to know why the outfit carried out its killings and targeted civilians on such a large scale. This is, therefore, not a time to be euphoric about the cessation of hostilities. It is actually a time for introspection, of trying to find out why the killing game took on such frightening proportions in a State known for its civility and warmth. Given the protracted nature of peace negotiations in neighbouring Nagaland, one should never harbour any illusions about a speedy settlement of the ULFA-led 'insurgency' in the State. Talking peace on the part of ULFA may, in all certainty, prove to be much more difficult than waging a protracted armed struggle against the state in which innocent and unsuspecting civilians turn out to be the main targets. As for New Delhi, it must realize that promoting the illusion of a solution outside the parameters of the Constitution could prove to be highly dangerous for the future of the Indian nation.
_______________________________________________ assam mailing list [email protected] http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
