Lecture: The Assam Movement, Sanjib Baruah, in Social Movement TK Oommen, 2010
Keywords: Assam Accord 1985, Assam Movement, Ethnic Movement, Festival of Protest, Social Movement, T. K. Oommen
University of Delhi
Bachelor or Arts
Economy and Society
Reading to be covered: Baruah, Sanjib, 2010, “The Assam Movement” in T. K. Oommen (ed.), Social Movements I: Issues of Identity, Delhi: Oxford University Press, pp. 191-208, (first published in 1986)
Course Structure
Important points to be kept in mind while studying the article
Expected Outcome
Introduction
Festival of Protest
Confrontation
Cost of Protest
The Breakdown of Order
Contest Between the State and the Movement
-Caste and Assam Movement
Accommodation
– The provision in Assam Accord 1985
Important Points to Be Kept in Mind While Studying the Article
What was the main reason of the Assam Movement?
How it was started?
What was/is the demand of the Assam Movement?
How ethnic movement is impacting on the socio-political scenario of the state.
Why we have the ethnic movement? What is the main reason for the ethnic movement?
This is also expected that students should be able to relate this article with the current debate about CAA, NRC, NPR, and Detention Centre.
Expected Outcome
Students will understand that how to see that ethnic movement. This is make clarity about Assam Ethnic Movement with current situation, along with cause of origin, nature of the movement, their main demand, and response and role of the state and union governments. In the end, students will be able to understand the current debate of CAA, NRC, NPR, and Detention Centre.
Introduction
The issue of immigration from East Bengal currently Bangladesh had political instability in the Assam from prior to the independence and participation of India in 1947.
Initially, it was against the Bengali immigration irrespective to the Hindu or Muslim. They were against Bengali immigration as a community.
The issues of Assam never become the central political issue in India.
No, any government ever tried to solve this issue honestly.
Because of the immigration, the original habitat of the Assam hurt by their cultural identity
Assam was also unhappy by the imposition of Bengali Language, Administration and Culture.
During 1965 the Assam Movement becomes more vociferous
When the government of India began expelling Pakistani ‘infiltrators’ some group started a protest by saying that Muslim is being targeted.
Major Muslim politicians from Assam such as Fakhrudding Ali Ahmad became President of India and Moinul Haque was a union cabinet minister during 1970s.
The Assam movement began in 1979 after a by-election to the Mangaldaoi parliamentary constituency. This was populated by the East Bengali immigrants, because of the demographic transformation.
On June 8, 1979, All Assam Students’ Union sponsored a 12 hours strike (band).
On August 26, 1979, the Assam Gana Sangram Parisad (AGSP) was formed as an ad hoc coalition to coordinate a sustained state-wide movement.
Between 1980 and 1982 there were 23 negotiating sessions between the movement leaders and the central government happened.
According to the above agreement those who come between 1951-1961 would be given Indian Citizenship, those who come after 1971 would be deported, however, the status of those come between 1961-1971 was unresolved.
Festival of Protest
The first phase of the movement started with the demonstrations and rallies including widespread participation by ethnic Assamese in support of their demands.
The first phase began with festive and mostly peaceful protest actions, but with some reports of ethnic violence.
A report of an investigation committee of the Delhi-based Peoples Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) gives a flavour of the early phase of the Assam movement.
In November 1979 nearly 7,00,000 people in the city of Gauhati and in estimated to million people in the state as a whole courted arrest.
Assam movement got support by the intellectual and cultural groups.
All Assam Students Union (AASU) took Assam movement at the surface level among the school, college students and teachers.
Assam movement was also against the illegal entry of the immigrants into electoral rolls. Because of these illegal entries, they were mage to influence the election result.
Therefore the leaders of the movement called for a boycott of the parliamentary election of December 1979 unless the government agrees to remove the names of foreigners from the rolls.
Owners of printing presses in Assam refused to print the election rolls for the election.
By May 1980 ethnic subgroups directly threatened by the demands of the movement bean to from organization to oppose these demands.
In May 1980 a new organization, the All Assam Minority Students Union (AAMSU) attempted to include both Muslim and Hindi East Bengali immigrants. AAMSU demanded that all immigrants who come before 1971 should be given citizenship.
AAMSU appear to the rival of the AASU.
By September 1980 the immigrant’s organization had become the third force in the negotiation in the Assam movements demand –
For example (1) The government invited AAMSU leaders to Delhi for consultation during the negotiations between the government and the movement leaders.
For example (2) The leaders of the Assam Congress (I), Anwar Taimur, who was elected to the state Assembly from a heavily East Bengal immigrants constituency and was seen as a representative of immigrant interest, was also in Delhi during the negotiation.
Confrontation
The inauguration of a Congress (I) government led by an Assamese Muslim, Anwara Taimur, in December 1980 marked n new phase in the Assam movement. The Taimur government formed as a result of defections to the Congress (I) from other parties, survived for only six months.
After this Assam had president rule and the nest government lead by Keshab Gogoi sustain only one month in January 1982 and again the president rule was imposed.
The decision to end President’s RUle and to form a state government in December 1980 had indicated New Delhi’s decision to challenge the power capability of the movement and to back electoral institution that reflected the demographic realities of the state.
The movement’s power capability lay on the streets since it could mobilize the ethnic Assamese almost to a person, but the same power capability cannot be translated into electoral strengths, because of the state’s ethnic diversity and transformed demographic reality.
The Taimur government took action against ethnic Assamese government officials who were known sympathizers of the movement, including the arrest of one of the topmost police officials of the state.
In order to use coercive measures against the movement, Taimur affectability had to transfer the state bureaucracy.
Taimur government secretariat was reportedly had only Muslim gazetted officers or executives.
These measures create a legitimacy crisis in the state and the native Assamese were fearing the mineralization of the state.
All these led to increasing violence in the state.
Cost of Participation
The Taimur government increased the cost of participation in the movement through the coercive action. Here the meaning of cost of participation means that it becomes hard to participate in the movement.
In January 1982 Gogoi becomes the CM. He reduced the coercive action and released some political prisoners. But his government colleagues in March 1982.
Economic and Political Weekly (EPW) wrote that ethnic Assamese young man was likely to be arrested and beaten up.
Republic Day of 26 January 1983 was boycotted by the Assam.
The Breakdown of Order
The state assembly election of February 1983 marked the breakdown of Assam’s framework of ethnic accommodation and of political order.
The election was the direct challenge of the central government to the Assam movement.
The lection was to be held on the basis of the electoral rolls prepared in 1972, which had precipitated the Assam movement. No efforts was made to revise it. Therefore it was alledged that many immigrants registered themselves as a voter, however, the youndesters who attain the age of 18 was not there. This situation caused further tension in the Assam. It can not be accepted to use the four your old electoral rolls for voting.
Because of these the printing press have boycotted the elections and refuse to print the election materials. Other movement leaders called the bycoppy the election.
However the immigrants from the East Bengal supported the central government efforts for election. Therefore the constituency dominated by the immigrants had the highest percentage of voting.
The electron was full of violence, this violence was called as “Hobbesian war of all against all”.
A journalist Arun Shourie writes that “they testified not so much to; communalism’ as to the total breakdown of governance. …. Each community that was a victim in one place was a predator in another.”
The pattern of violence reflected the total breakdown of order.
Most of the violence occurred as supporters of the election classed with opponents.
The violence took place partly because of inadequate intervention by the police. Even it was forecasted that violence will happen the election.
Arun Shourie’s investigative report reveals that the government estimated that the election could be held safely in 30 out of 125 constituencies despite ethnic Assamese opposition.
In 78 constituencies, polling was expected to be between 30 per cent and 65 per cent, and in the rest between ONE per cent and 30 per cent. These estimates were probably based on calculations of settlement patterns of ethnic subgroups. A prior secret intelligence report had calculated that the ethnic Assamese were a minority in as many as 85 of the states 126 constituencies.
All these led the further severe violence and according to the government official figure 1383 mean, women, and children were killed in the massacres.
The poll boycott was quite effective in the district of the Brahmaputra Valley of Assam’s 126 Assembly constituencies, only Congress (I) candidate contested and won unopposed in four constituencies. In 14 constituencies election had to be cancelled because of the ‘total breakdown of law and administration’. In some strong ethnic Assamese constituencies, the polling was as low as 0.38 per cent (269 voters), 0.40 per cent (360 voters), and 0.68 per cent (440 voters).
Contest Between the State and the Movement
Between support and boycott of the election and violence, the election brought a new Congress (I) Government headed by Hiteshwar Saikia, an ethnic Assamese who is Ahom as chief minister.
Caste and Assam Movement
His selection was appeasing the upper caste of the Assam because the Assam Movement had its strongest support among ethnic Assamese upper caste.
The new government dealt with the Assam Movement wit combined political manoeuvring with the use of coercion.
It also sought support to wean support away from the Assam movement by allocation government patronage to the group that constitute weak links in the Assamese ethnic coalition.
Because of experience of violence in which it was said that Muslim was the victim at large, were in dilemma to further participate in the movement.
By May 1983 there was an indication of a split of the All Assam Students Union (AASU), on the question of ‘definition of a foreigner’ by the Muslim leaders. In simple words we can that the Muslim leaders were unhappy with the AASU.
According to the press, report credit goes to Saikia government for Hindu Muslim rift among ethnic Assumes.
The leadership of AASU found the new challenge to guard the growing division in the movement. The election violence forced the leadership to suspend the movement and concentrate attention on heading the rift in the Assamese.
In January 1984 AASU held a National Convention which was attended by the intellectuals and movement leaders to search for ways and means for ‘regeneration of the Assamese Nationality and to provide a united socio-cultural as well as a political platform.’
In December 1984 AASU had its second convention for discussion of adaptation of ethnic diversity of the Assam. They also formed a committee to compete for the ‘process of the political unification of the various ethnic groups of the Assamese people’. They also discussed to include tea worker, Indian Nepalis, the tribal communities, and ‘already assimilated religious minorities’ and ‘like-minded Indian’ in future protest actions.
Because of the AASU movement, the Saikia government tried to compete for legitimacy with the Assam movement by some measures like removing the name of illegal immigrants from the electoral roll.
Because of these and other action by the government, the movement of AASU become weak. Even they fail to call a big strike like earlier. However, they keep their demand alive by strike, boycott and other political action.
Accommodation
Assam Accord of 15 August 1985between Government of India and Assam Movement Leaders
After 18-month negotiation between the government of India and the movement leaders were initiated once again in April 1984. An accord was signed between Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and leaders of the Assam movement on 15 August 1985. THIS IS POPULARLY KNOWN AS ASSAM ACCORD.
The provision in Assam Accord 1985
– Illegal aliens who entered the state between January 1966 and Mach 1971 will be deported.
– The state assembly elected in 1983 was dissolved and frees election based on revised electoral rolls took place in December 1985.
– Indian citizenship law was amended in the Parliament in November 1985 stipulated that non-citizen who is found to have entered Assam between 1961 to 1971 will enjoy all rights of citizens except the right to vote for 10 years.
PLEASE NOTE: DEAR STUDENTS please don’t between a first and third point above. The first point is applicable for the illegal immigrants and the second one is applicable for those who entered in India legally but did not go back. Means they had entered into India legally but staying beyond the permitted period.
After this agreement, the election officials were increasingly tacking the AASU into their confidence in the process of revisiting the rolls. However, they also made the allegation that a large number of the legal citizen’s name was removed from the electoral rolls.
Two new parties have emerged after this accord, (1) Assom Gana Parishad (AGP), formed by the student’s leaders of the Assam Movement, and (2) the United Minorities Front (UMF), formed by major East Bengal Hindu and Muslim politicians who had been members of the Congress (I).
In the next election, the AGP come to the power on a wave of popular support that was remarkably inclusive: its appeal was not only to the ethnic Assamese but to many other ethnic subgroups. The election results reflect ethnic polarization as well as the new beginning of ethnic accommodation. One of the most significant effects of the Assam movement is that immigration issues have been put firmly on the public agenda. Earlier frameworks of ethnic accommodation attempted to obscure the immigration question.
The ability to evolve a new framework of ethnic accommodation will remain the key to political stability in Assam. In the course of the Assam Movement, the leadership learned that the roads to the cultural survival of the Assamese lie as much in an inclusive definition of Assameseness as in restricting numbers.
Anil Kumar | Student of Life World
Stay Social ~ Stay Connected
Study with Anil
Lecture, Study Material, and More
Keep Visiting ~ Stay Curious
0 Comments