[Assam] Layman as a victim

[Dilip/Dil Deka]

Who is a layman here? Someone not in the army or the ULFA? 
=========================================================
 
EDITORIAL » »
Last updated : WEDNESDAY 14TH JUNE 2006

A Layman’s Appeal
T his is a layman speaking, struck by terror all 
around. At a time when the rest of the world has woken up to the need of peace and progress, we in Asom continue to be mired in crises of our own making. Of these crises, the one that has crippled us is violence — both by militant groups and the state. It is as if we are to accept violence as a natural way of life; as if violence would liberate us; and as if, following that, violence would revolutionize the stagnant order of the day. That perhaps describes the political philosophy of our militant groups. As for state violence, we are used to the atrocities inflicted on innocent youths in the name of counter-insurgency operations. The Kakopather incident is fresh in our mind, provoked by the killing of an innocent Ajit Mahanta by the army. What is rather baffling is whether one should call the army operations anti-insurgency or counter-insurgency! None has bothered to explain that. 
Fine, be that as it may, what is unfortunate is the continued hostility between the state and the rebels that has trapped innocent people in the vortex of violence. Remember, it is not an open war between the state and the ULFA. It is not even any guerrilla war. What it has been all along the gory course of the State is violence against the State’s infrastructure and innocent people. It is the man on the street who suffers, whose kiths and kins lie injured or dead, and who himself bears all the brunt. Whose fault is this? What does armed rebellion mean for him? What does the ULFA-coined ‘‘sovereignty’’ mean for him? Nothing except the fact that it is he who loses his sense of security, his sense of civilized living and his sense of belonging to a world in stride. 
Well, we understand the complexities involved and the technicalities therein. But is it not the ULFA that showed eagerness for peace and reconciliation by handpicking a select group to form the much-hyped People’s Consultative Group (PCG)? Is it not a fact that the PCG has held parleys with the Government of India and already done the necessary groundwork? Or do the rebels want an overnight miracle? Does not patience have any place in resolving a tangle as the ULFA’s? This is a layman’s logic, and refreshingly simple one at that: since there does exist a body like the PCG to work out the modalities before direct talks are held between the Government of India and the ULFA, and since the genesis of the PCG has everything to do with the possibility of peace in the State, the ULFA must have the courage to renounce violence. Yes, it takes courage to contribute to the making of peace! 
But how does one define courage by killing innocent vegetable vendors and buyers in a busy market, as it happened at Machkhowa in Guwahati last week? On the one hand, you talk about peace or the possibility of peace — that is why you constituted the PCG. And on the other hand, you give the impression that violence remains intrinsic to your struggle. Well, we understand your dilemma — but of your own making. It is that you realize that you cannot defeat the state because, after all, violence is futile. Yet, you seem to be compelled by your genesis to indulge in senseless violence. You also realize well the futility of sovereignty for Asom. And yet, thanks to your genesis, you continue to harp on it. But where does it take you all to, except making us suffer for absolutely no fault of ours? Or are we to believe that is how ordinary masses are liberated? Just stop this madness, and let the state too be a bit more sincere and wise as to have us live in peace.
 
...and Our Theory
W hen a layman makes a fervent appeal to militants 
and the state for peace so that he may derive the best out of the democratic space, it would prompt one to ponder as to whether revolution could mean anything truly radical. Given the undeterred march of science and technology, and given the global village that the world has become, any revolution for that matter remains revolutionary as long as it frees us from the confines of our past conditionings. This means there is no use cherishing the hangover of our ‘‘sovereign’’ past: the practical sense of history is that though it cannot be undone, one can add to it something new and beneficial, thus scripting a better history for generations to emulate and redefine. The emerging concepts of transnationalism attuned to the needs of market dynamics have made nations interdependent entities where social, political and economic theories overlap. The concern is not the past — that is dead in the economic sense, which in turn affects the social and political matrix. It is
 the future that beckons, and the future belongs to those who can compete and excel. The tool is technology, and the pursuit is for a knowledge society where creation of knowledge is as important as its dissemination. In the light of this, the hangover called ‘‘sovereignty’’ for Asom, free of an Indian ‘‘occupation’’ force — as militants would say — is all hogwash. And violence to achieve that mirage is the easiest way out to destroy what sensible, globalized Asomiyas would like to create. So, join the mainstream, enjoy democracy and surge ahead. That will create a xonar Asom.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.assamnet.org/pipermail/assam-assamnet.org/attachments/20060613/156a076f/attachment.htm>