[Assam] Piece from the Sentinel

[Chan Mahanta]

Ram:

>So, the question still remains - if all this is transitory (from a 
>waffling >GOI, say), how does it help the 'cause'. Is this struggle 
>a transitory solution >to a long term problem?


*** I am not sure I understand your question.

The short-attention-span plagued GoI seems unable to stay on the job: 
Of achieving a political solution to the Assam conflict thru a 
dialogue with ULFA. Its various arms are continually sending out 
conflicting statements or are unaware of each others' activities and 
positions.

It seems to become aware of the continuing problem only after violence erupts.

The Sentinel piece acknowledged that--something I found surprising. 
But I commend them for being able to.

Do you disagree, or are you unaware of it?



>What net results are we talking about? In a democracy, even sops 
>are >negotiated. Every state does it. In the case of Assam, it may 
>be sops to curb >violence. So, why have other states (who think they 
>have not got their due from >the center) not taken to violence 
>(following Assam's example)? Have they all >perished?


*** First off Ram, you make a profound mistake in implying that Assam 
has to or ought to do what other parts of India do or should do. 
Assam is Assam, and is not Bihar, is not Tamil Nadu, isn't Kashmir.

Just like you are you and not me :-).

Assam's circumstances, needs, history and identity are wholly and 
inalienably different from those OTHERS you like to lump Assam with. 
Never mind the common threads that might exist, like religious, 
certain cultural items, some language, so on and so forth.

*** The NET effect I was talking about is not about 'sops'. Sops are 
fine as long as those get to the PEOPLE. India's dysfunctional state 
machinery, its governance, is UNABLE or UNWILLING or both, to ensure 
that what is doled out by Dilli ( something inherently WRONG in my 
book) gets to where it is destined for. It ends up in the pockets of 
a privileged few, some in Assam and many OUTSIDE Assam.

Dilli takes Assam's resources -- what belongs to ALL the people of 
Assam, then repackages it, sends back a portion of it, as if it is 
Dilli's GIFT, to a select group of beneficiaries. It is therefore 
classic REVERSE ROBIN-HOODISM. Steal from the many to enrich a few.

Do you disagree?


>And, what is this right thing, you talk about? If you mean 
>'independence', the >GOI cannot and will never do that. Whats next?

*** Looks like you already know the answer to the question. Why waste 
precious bandwidth  asking it :-)?

The right thing I spoke of is a NEGOTIATED POLITICAL SETTLEMENT of 
the conflict. Something India declares it wants to do, no doubt to 
look good to the world, except is unable or unwilling to undertake 
the measure to accomplish it. In this case the inability or 
unwillingness to follow thru on what transpired in the meetings with 
the PCG.

>Obviously, when people keep doing the same things and expect 
>different results >- that is insanity. So, why is the ULFA doing the 
>same things decade after >decade, yet returning with the same 
>results.


*** This is where you are grossly mistaken. ULFA declared it WANTS to 
NEGOTIATE.

That is pursuing a different policy -- different from attempting to 
win a military victory. Unlike GoI, which continues on the INSANE 
pursuit of military victory.

India won't release those who will negotiate on behalf of ULFA and it 
goes hunting ULFA cadres while it waves around peace offerings, while 
anti-Assam Indians and its apologists go on taunting ULFA, suggesting 
it wants to negotiate because it is on the verge of capitulation. Not 
a day goes by without the Sentinel, the AT, the Statesman, The 
Telegraph -- you name it, publishing 'ANALYST's pieces proclaiming 
how ULFA is a spent force,how it has lost its support base and is 
about to keel over. Just like it has been doing for decades.


>If it was the abject failure of democracy, then all of India would 
>have been >ablaze with insurgents running lose all over.

*** If I am not mistaken , it was MM Singh, the PM, which told the 
nation that fully one third of India's districts now have some form 
or other of violent insurgency movements, mostly Naxals.

What does that tell you? Does it fly the flag of desi-demokrasy's 
problem solving skills or its failures?



>You are of course basing this on the notion that all of Assam is 
>struggling for >independence from India. While, most will agree that 
>its only a few who are.

*** I am sure you know more than I do. I am perfectly willing to 
accept your proposition. But I like to see some proof. However, you 
are one of hose who are terrified of a referendum which could 
validate what you like to assert.

That is not very persuasive Ram :-).

c-da






At 12:59 PM -0500 8/16/06, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>C'da,
>
>  >Only when violence begins the government wakes up--but only transitorily.
>
>So, the question still remains - if all this is transitory (from a 
>waffling GOI, say), how does it help the 'cause'. Is this struggle a 
>transitory solution to a long term problem?
>
>  >can you dispute the net effect, the ultimate result?
>What net results are we talking about? In a democracy, even sops are 
>negotiated. Every state does it. In the case of Assam, it may be 
>sops to curb violence. So, why have other states (who think they 
>have not got their due from the center) not taken to violence 
>(following Assam's example)? Have they all perished?
>
>  > instead of attempting to do the right thing by Assam;
>
>And, what is this right thing, you talk about? If you mean 
>'independence', the GOI cannot and will never do that. Whats next?
>
>  >*** Easier than what Ram? Bribery? Corruption? Play the game 
>according to the >rules set by the oppressors?
>
>Well, those are not the only choices. Corruption and bribery exist 
>NOT just in Assam, but elsewhere too. But there are people in Assam 
>and elsewhere who are NOT violent, and yet they happen to lead lives 
>without corruption and bribery.
>
>  >Is it not 'insanity' ? Expecting different outcomes while pursuing the same
>  >policies?
>
>Obviously, when people keep doing the same things and expect 
>different results - that is insanity. So, why is the ULFA doing the 
>same things decade after decade, yet returning with the same 
>results. According to your own arguments, the ULFA (being more 
>pristine than the GOI) ought to know better. They still dealing with 
>the same old GOI with all its trappings of ineficiencies, corruption 
>etc, and yet their decades long struggle has managed to produce a 
>lot od dead people, and little else. Is that insanity?
>
>  >***" Violence and mayhem" however is a product of a failure of a 
>'democratic' and political >process. ULFA was a RESULT, a PRODUCT, 
>of desi-democrasy's abject failures
>
>If it was the abject failure of democracy, then all of India would 
>have been ablaze with insurgents running lose all over.  No, C'da, 
>you will have to agree that insurgents made the wrong call here. 
>Violence only begets violence and the blame game can keep on going.
>
>  >No different in the case of Assam vs. India. ......-- than Assam 
>has produced in its quest for >freedom
>
>You are of course basing this on the notion that all of Assam is 
>struggling for independence from India. While, most will agree that 
>its only a few who are. If all of Assam was behind the ULFA, Assam 
>would have been independent a long time ago. :-) :-)
>
>--Ram
>
>
>
>
>On 8/16/06, Chan Mahanta 
><<mailto:cmahanta at charter.net>cmahanta at charter.net> wrote:
>
>Ram:
>
>
>  >If the GOI is so inept and the right hand doesn't know what the 
>left is doing, >why are so sure that only blowing up things will 
>actually catch the GOI's >attentions?
>
>
>*** For the simple reason of decades of observation. India's myriads of armed
>uprisings are a direct result of the  blindness and deafness of its 
>governing powers. Only when violence begins the government wakes 
>up--but only transitoryily
>
>
>Just look at how Assam came to be known to India. First it was the 
>Andwlon that put it in the map, and ULFA brought it out to the 
>forefront. Many of the Indian handouts to Assam since that time was 
>a direct fall-out of ULFA's actions, NOT necessarily out of 
>fairness, NOT to empower Assamese society, but more as a 
>countermeasure to ULFA, in the spirit of that quintessentially 
>Indian virtue: BRIBERY! And predictably the largesse ends up with a 
>select group of beneficiaries. And these beneficiaries, fine human 
>beings they are, sing the praises of their benefactors. Even if you 
>and others argue that my view is much too cynical, and even if there 
>could be an element of truth in it, can you
>dispute the net effect, the ultimate result?
>
>
>
>
>  >But, all that DOES not solves ULFA's or Assam's interest. Low 
>intensity >violence by insurgents may at times cause some politician 
>to pay attention, but >these do not provide long-term solutions.
>
>
>*** If that is true, and if that is what India believes, then how 
>come GoI, for all these decades, have had  spouted only excuses and 
>propaganda, instead of attempting to do the right thing by Assam; by 
>taking the lead in finding a negotiated political solution to the 
>stalemate, knowing full well that India
>cannot achieve an outright military victory?
>
>
>What is the rationale here Ram?
>
>
>Is it not 'insanity' ? Expecting different outcomes while pursuing the same
>policies? If you were in charge would YOU continue to do the same 
>thing that has not produced any results?
>
>And if not, would you not be inclined to ask: Helllloooo, anyone 
>home at Indraprastha? Would you not want those vicious watchdogs of 
>desi-demokrasy -- the fearless press, to ask the same question?
>
>
>  >Violence is widespread because there are insurgent groups that 
>find it easier >to get away with impunity.
>
>
>*** Easier than what Ram? Bribery? Corruption? Play the game 
>according to the rules set by the oppressors?
>
>
>
>
>  >I seriously doubt, if the GOI has some grandiose plan for Assam's 
>real estate - >I doubt if they have a plan at all.
>
>
>*** You may be right, you maybe wrong and regardless, you and I are 
>NOT effected directly. But those whose lives are impacted by it 
>every day, could take it a differently, couldn't  they?.
>
>
>
>
>  >If Assam is to be become independent from India only thru violence 
>and mayhem, >one wonders what kind of liberation these insurgents 
>have in store for the >common person.
>
>
>***" Violence and mayhem" however is a product of a failure of a 
>'democratic' and political process. ULFA was a RESULT, a PRODUCT, of 
>desi-democrasy's abject failures. It is not the END GOAL. Throughout 
>history freedom movements produced exactly such violence. Why? 
>Because the oppressors were not about to give in. No different in 
>the case of Assam vs. India. Gandhi was an exception, even though 
>Indian freedom movement saw far more violence -- even proportionally 
>-- than Assam has produced in its quest for freedom. In fact the 
>Hindu-Muslim pogroms probably were unprecedented in human history. 
>And it too was on account of a quest of freedom.
>
>
>
>
>  >Lastly, C'da, I will leave you with a portion of the editorial 
>from today's >Sentinel: (Highlights mine)
>
>
>
>
>*** So what else is new Ram? Did you see anything new here? It is 
>the same old blather that we have seen decades on end. But has it 
>produced any result? If not is it not an exercise in that 'insanity'?
>
>
>c-da
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>At 2:11 PM -0500 8/15/06, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>
>>C'da,
>>
>
>
>  >But it does not change the fact that ULFA had to go blow things 
>up >again to remind GoI that talking about holding direct 
>negotiations is >not enough, that doing something about is necessary.
>
>
>
>If the GOI is so inept and the right hand doesn't know what the left 
>is doing, why are so sure that only blowing up things will actually 
>catch the GOI's attentions? For all one knows, it could be the 
>reverse, where some politician or general in the GOI takes a more 
>drastic and adamant stance - whereby ULFA's blowing up things may 
>actaully be responded in kind.
>
>
>
>  >*** Why is it surprising Ram?IF GoI represents the people, it has 
>the responsibility to serve the >people's desire, doesn't it?
>
>
>
>It is surprising because violence has to be condemned all round - 
>not just the times when ULFA cadres are killed. For all we know, the 
>GOI may be responding to violence by the ULFA.
>
>Yes, there are times when Govt. soldiers go berserk and kill 
>unnecessarily and without reason - but normally, they only react to 
>violent situations.
>
>
>
>But, all that DOES not solves ULFA's or Assam's interest. Low 
>intensity violence by insurgents may at times cause some politician 
>to pay attention, but these do not provide long-term solutions.
>
>
>
>  >Why is it becoming more and more widespread instead of >becoming 
>lesser and lesser?
>
>
>
>Violence is widespread because there are insurgent groups that find 
>it easier to get away with impunity. Often it is even a great career 
>path for the leaders of such organizations. And of course, I agree 
>with you that many in the GOI really don't seem to care one way or 
>the other. But you are wrong if you think it is only Assam (the old 
>step-motherly treatment)  or the real-estate stuff. This is the way 
>the GOI treats many states. Luckily for many of those states, they 
>don't have an ULFA to pull them down further.
>
>
>
>I seriously doubt, if the GOI has some grandiose plan for Assam's 
>real estate - I doubt if they have a plan at all.
>
>
>
>If Assam is to be become independent from India only thru violence 
>and mayhem, one wonders what kind of liberation these insurgents 
>have in store for the common person.
>
>
>
>Lastly, C'da, I will leave you with a portion of the editorial from 
>today's Sentinel: (Highlights mine) -- Ram
>
>
>
>Organizations like the United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) that 
>have totally lost direction and have no compunction whatsoever in 
>targeting innocent civilians , should finally realize that they 
>stand no chance whatsoever against a system which, despite its many 
>shortcomings and pitfalls, ultimately depends on the democratic 
>sanction of the masses . The strength of Indian democracy lies in 
>the fact that it has succeeded in evolving a structure which has 
>made free and fair elections possible. This is no mean achievement 
>when compared with experiments with representative democracy 
>elsewhere. Therefore, the challenges to our polity must be met not 
>through fundamentalist exclusivity of a different type, but by 
>strengthening those very values and precepts that have given our 
>democracy a pride of place among the comity of nations . Let the 
>national tricolour be unfurled at every place today, saluting the 
>spirit of India, its essence and its unique experiment with 
>democracy.
>
>
>On 8/15/06, Chan Mahanta 
><<mailto:cmahanta at charter.net>cmahanta at charter.net> wrote:
>
>Ram:
>
>
>
>
>  >Could it not be within the realm of possibilities that the ULFA 
>did send out >'feelers' to the GOI?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>*** I was not commenting on that. There could be substance to that. 
>But it does not change the fact that ULFA had to go blow things up 
>again to remind GoI that talking about holding direct negotiations 
>is not enough, that doing something about is necessary. GoI sat on 
>its haunches after the PCG meetings, with its many arms pronouncing 
>conflicting and contradictory statements, sounding like its right 
>hand never knowing what the left is doing, as always.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  >That the Sentinel is (also) trying to put the onus of breaking the 
>peace >initiatives on the GOI is surprising
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>*** Why is it surprising Ram? IF GoI represents the people, it has 
>the responsibility to serve the people's desire, doesn't it? People 
>of Assam have been clamoring for a negotiated settlement for 
>decades. But has the 'people's govt.' responded ? Does it really 
>care about what the people of Assam has been seeking all these years?
>
>
>
>
>IF, the GoI is made up of sincere and able people attempting to 
>respond to their  constituents' needs and desires, holding the reins 
>of powers and wearing that halo of legitimacy; should it continue 
>to,decade after decade, find excuses about why it cannot take the 
>lead in finding a political solution to the
>
>conflict?
>
>
>
>
>  >If violence is bad, then it has to be bad when either the ULFA or 
>the GOI >commits it. It can't be glossed over for one while the 
>other is held >responsible.
>
>
>
>
>*** Surely. But WHY has violence steadily become the preferred 
>method for disaffected peoples of India to get resolution of their 
>grievances Ram? Can you answer that? Why is it becoming more and 
>more widespread instead of becoming lesser and lesser? There is a 
>pattern to it. And it is unmistakable to those who are willing and 
>able to see and hear.
>
>
>
>
>Furthermore, if violence is the weapon of them BAD guys only, why is 
>it that the good guys, with far more capability of destruction, act 
>just like the BAD GUYS ? Are they incapable of thinking more 
>creatively? Or are they tone deaf? Or they just don't care what 
>happens to Assam, as long as the real-estate remains with India, 
>damn the people?
>
>
>
>
>Take your pick Ram :-).
>
>
>
>
>c-da
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>At 12:38 PM -0500 8/15/06, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>
>>C'da,
>>
>
>
>  >I saw that too Ram. But it means little.
>
>
>
>I am naive, C'da but am still wondering why the AT report would mean 
>little, while the Sentinel's would mean a lot.  Could it not be 
>within the realm of possibilities that the ULFA did send out 
>'feelers' to the GOI?
>
>
>
>That the Sentinel is (also) trying to put the onus of breaking the 
>peace initiatives on the GOI is surprising as it seems to have 
>forgotten numerous assaults on civis and security personnel by the 
>ULFA.
>
>
>
>If violence is bad, then it has to be bad when either the ULFA or 
>the GOI commits it. It can't be glossed over for one while the other 
>is held responsible.
>
>
>
>--Ram
>
>
>
>
>
>On 8/15/06, Chan Mahanta 
><<mailto:cmahanta at charter.net>cmahanta at charter.net> wrote:
>
>I saw that too Ram. But it means little.
>
>
>
>
>The highlighted part below merely reaffirms the *insanity that is 
>Indian ( and Assam) Govt. policies ( or more precisely an absence of 
>any) and a section of Assam establishment's expectations.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>c-da
>
>
>
>
>* "The definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing and 
>expecting a different result" ( Seymour M. Hersh)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>At 10:32 AM -0500 8/15/06, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>
>>C'da,
>>
>
>
>Below from the Assam Tribune (today). Also, from the Sentinel piece, 
>just wanted to highlight this from what you sent.
>
>
>
>"If the ULFA, even after such positive gestures from New Delhi, 
>dithers on holding talks, it would be suicidal for the rebels as the 
>commoners in Asom, who are craving for peace, would never forgive 
>the outfit."
>
>
>
>There definitely are a lot behind-the-scenes stuff going around. 
>Reading both from the Sentinel and the AT, we don't know if the GOI 
>was trying to pull a fast one here or the ULFA sent out 'feelers'.
>
>
>Wonder what those feelers are?
>
>
>
>--Ram
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.assamnet.org/pipermail/assam-assamnet.org/attachments/20060817/4801a05d/attachment.htm>