That the Government was dead earnest on a political settlement of the insurgency problem in Assam was made abundantly clear by both Manmohan Singh and Chidambaram. The Prime Minister, quite expectedly, declined to give a time frame for working out a solution, saying the process had just started, but the Government was serious about finding an honourable solution. He exuded confidence when he said: “We are dealing with a difficult problem. I am very happy with what the ULFA leaders told me. The situation in the north-east is getting normalized.” Rajkhowa, on his part, described the talks as “satisfactory”. During the talks, National Security Adviser Shiv Shankar Menon and the Centre’s chief interlocutor P. C. Haldar were present to help the Prime Minister.

One of the main demands of the ULFA in the changed situation now, is the amendment of the Constitution to safeguard the identity of the “indigenous” people. This identity is perceived as being threatened by illegal immigration from Bangladesh and by people from other States of India coming and settling in Assam, bringing about a slow demographic change. If this process continues, they fear, the “indigenous” Assamese people will eventually be outnumbered and become a minority in their own State.

The details of what transpired between Rajkhowa and his colleagues and the central leaders are not known but Chidambaram has reportedly hinted that the Centre was willing to amend the Constitution to give a special status to Assam. At least, that is the impression the ULFA leaders have come back with from Delhi. A seven-member coordination group has been formed to carry on the dialogue. It comprises three representatives from ULFA and two each from the State and Central Governments.

Paresh Baruah, the head of the armed wing (“C-in-C”) of ULFA, has refused to join the peace process. He has disowned Rajkhowa and other leaders of the political wing and declared that their decision to hold talks with the Government is “unauthorized”. Baruah is known to be a frequent visitor to China and is operating from his hideout somewhere in north Myanmar, close to the Chinese border. He still has some – exact number unknown – men in arms who are loyal to him. But with the political leadership of ULFA suing for peace and with the common people of Assam strongly desiring an end to violence and return to normal social life, an organizationally and politically isolated Paresh Baruah is becoming irrelevant in Assam.

The crux of the problem lies elsewhere. When ULFA leaders claim to speak for the “indigenous” people of Assam and demand protection for them from “outsiders”, whom exactly are they speaking for? The “indigenous” people are composed of several linguistically, culturally and ethically distinct segments — the Assamese-speaking Hindus, the Assamese-speaking Muslims, the plains tribals, the hills tribals, the Bengali Hindus and the Bengali Muslims, and the tea-garden population whose forefathers were brought by the British rulers from Bihar, Orissa and Madhya Pradesh in the latter half of the nineteenth century to work in the tea gardens.

The Bodos, the largest plains tribal community, are demanding a separate Bodoland State. They first secured a Bodoland Autonomous Council (BAC). Not satisfied, they forced the Government to widen the Council’s powers and area by forming the Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC). But they are still agitating for a full-fledged Bodoland outside Assam. If the ULFA leaders oppose the Bodoland demand, as they are quite likely to do, they will forfeit the right to represent the Bodos. The tea population nurtures a grievance that they are neglected and discriminated against. The hills tribals of Karbi Anglong and North Cachar Hills districts have been demanding an Autonomous Hill State within Assam under Article 244A of the Constitution.

Now that they are about to join the political mainstream of Assam and expected eventually to take part in elections, can Arabinda Rajkhowa and his colleagues develop the wisdom, the maturity, the flexibility, the imagination and the farsightedness to carry along with them all these diverse groups of the “indigenous” people? Or, will “indigenous” in their lexicon be defined only as the Assamese-speaking people of the Brahmaputra Valley? Once in electoral politics Rajkhowa and his friends will realize that it is easier to negotiate with the Centre than to establish their credentials as the representatives of the entire ‘indigenous” Assamese people.(IPA Service)