[Assam] Forcing unilateral choice-The Sentinel Editorial

[Chan Mahanta]

A truly mindless piece!

It helps to know who the author is and where it was published.

I would be very disappointed if the author is the same as the one who 
forwarded it to us.











At 7:20 PM -0500 3/21/09, kamal deka wrote:
>      * On Whose Mandate?*    The 69-member pro-talks group of the United
>Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) has submitted its charter of demands to
>Prime Minister Manmohan Singh through Chief Minister Tarun Gogoi, wherein it
>has replaced the ''sovereignty'' demand of the outfit by ''complete
>autonomy'' for the State. The leader of the group, Mrinal Hazarika, has said
>that only a full autonomy can bridge the gap between the people of the State
>and New Delhi. The memorandum submitted to the Prime Minister harps on the
>futility of ''sovereignty'' thus: ''After 29 years of revolutionary
>experience and looking at the political and economic situation, continuous
>threat from neighbouring countries (surrounding Asom), age-old religious and
>cultural ties with the country's people, possible terrorist attacks in Asom
>by anti-Indian religious fundamentalist groups, we believe it (sovereignty
>demand) is not a reality.'' This is a welcome awakening, though very
>belated. After ''29 years of revolutionary experience'', it must have dawned
>upon the likes of Mrinal Hazarika that the ULFA's was not at all a
>revolution to emancipate the masses, but only a cowardly indulgence to
>perpetrate terror on even schoolchildren. Remember Dhemaji, August 15, 2004?
>And at that point of time, today's pro-talks ULFA leaders like Mrinal
>Hazarika and Jiten Dutta were very much part of the ULFA terror fraternity.
>They must have also realized that 'insurgency' was just a pretext for the
>ULFA leadership to set up a vast business empire in Bangladesh in the
>company of jihadi forces and Pakistan's ISI. They must have also realized
>that today the people of Asom identify the ULFA with the ISI alone and not
>with anything Asomiya. They must have also realized that after 29 years of
>loot and murder of innocent people, the ULFA stands totally exposed - as an
>outfit that does not and cannot represent Asom and its people, and whose
>only commitment is to the ISI and other fundamentalist groups based in
>Bangladesh to carry out their orders against the people of Asom. But now
>that the ilk of Mrinal Hazarika and Jiten Dutta seem to have regained
>sanity, let us ask them as to whether ''complete autonomy'' would ever
>salvage this sinking State of ours if its real maladies were to remain
>undiagnosed, such as corruption and the easy money culture that militancy
>itself has helped propagate (think of offshoots like SULFA).
>If there is anything that the ULFA 'insurgency' has achieved, it is its
>orchestrated ruin of the State's economy and potential for development -
>compounded by the architecture of corruption and a vested interest to keep
>that insurgency alive because of its status no less than that of a thriving
>industry that has a whole lot of stakeholders in the mainstream too. The
>State today needs freedom from a set of leaders bent on selling their own
>motherland for cheap electoral gains. It needs freedom from the vicious grip
>of corruption. The State needs a developmentist brand of politics, as
>distinct from the one that the people are presently suffering. The State
>needs an ambience that supports and promotes entrepreneurship. It needs
>leaders who have a vision for a better tomorrow; leaders who lead the people
>and not mislead them by concocting lies like today's class of  rulers. The
>State needs freedom from a bureaucracy that exists only for itself and its
>political masters. Will ''complete autonomy'' work out any such miracle? The
>answer is ''No''. There is another fact of life. What is the guarantee that
>the pro-talks ULFA leaders will not eventually go the monstrous SULFA way?
>There is already a precedence of SULFA men thriving as 'businessmen' by the
>sheer use of force and intimidation of law-abiding citizens. It is the SULFA
>men who are big names in the world of contractors and who have deprived -
>again by force - every single aspiring Asomiya entrepreneur of his due.
>There is also a precedence of the NSCN(IM) taxing none but the Nagas
>themselves despite being in a ceasefire mode with the Government of India.
>So what is the guarantee that the pro-talks ULFA leaders will not follow the
>SULFA and NSCN footsteps? As for ''complete autonomy'', let it be said here
>that the people of Asom are happy with the set-up they have been living in
>since Independence. Only, their tragedy is that they have been looted both
>by the ULFA and its SULFA avatar as well as by some among their own elected
>representatives. Their tragedy is also the rotten bureaucracy in place.
>How do the pro-talks ULFA leaders define ''complete autonomy''? What is
>their expertise in the field? How have they come to believe that in the
>present set-up the Asomiya society cannot grow and prosper, and that only
>''complete autonomy'' can bail it out from the many crises? The crux of the
>matter is that the people are not demanding any autonomy; they would instead
>demand a better and more responsive and responsible leadership. Does the
>''autonomy''-seeking ULFA section have any mandate from the people? Not at
>all. Who then do they represent?
>_______________________________________________
>assam mailing list
>assam at assamnet.org
>http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org