[Assam] Letters to the Editors

[Ram Sarangapani]

I think a good response is warranted to our own version "Hippias Major 1".

In the original version, Socrates is said to be his own inferior, and his
own superior, refutes, and gets refuted (by himself).

In our Kharkhowa version, Socrates (and his other self) seem to be superior,
they refute everything others say, and no quarters are yielded.... and so
forth :-)

Well, I hope I can respond adequately... we will have to see... :-)

In the mean time..

Here are two letters to the editors (one from Today's AT, and the other from
yesterday's Sentinel). One of the letters is from KJD.
Both letters are great examples of the sentiment and aspirations expressed
by a lot of common folks in Assam

It seems there are only on the fringe, who will somehow refuse to see the
light.

--Ram



*(From The Assam Tribune, today)*

* *

*Give up sovereignty demand*



Sir, – Today everything is wrong with Assam and her neighbouring States. A
few misguided youths have taken up arms in their bid to give shape to their
pipe dream. Sovereignty is an absurd dream. Since independence we are
attached to the Indian



Constitution that guarantees freedom of speech, right to education, freedom
to practise one’s own religion, and freedom

to work anywhere. What else are they aspiring for? The common people are not
interested in sovereignty or independence,

they want an economically sound and prosperous State. The Assamese, Bodos,
Manipuris and Nagas are all peace loving people.



Everybody wants to live peacefully. Thousands of men, women and children
have been killed by various outfits for their unjust

political demands. The Dhemaji massacre, the Bhimajuli killing, and bombing
of Ganeshguri are a few examples to remind us how cruel these people are.
They have already created mistrust among different communities living
peacefully for years together.

By now they should have realised that sovereignty or independent State
outside India is an absurd dream. For example, LTTE’s separate homeland for
Tamils and Khalistan for Punjabis did not materialise. It is better to
abjure violence and to solve all

problems through negotiations with the Centre. Problems of any magnitude can
be solved through dialogue with a give and take policy. – yours

etc, DWIPEN TALUKDAR,

Usha Nagar, Tezpur.



(From The Sentinel - yesterday)

*ULFA’s Demands: What are they?*

I concur with the opinion expressed by Shibdas Bhattacharjee in his article
‘‘Don’t Sabotage the Peace Process’’ (The Sentinel, June 10, 2010) in which
he has rightly said that ‘‘some intellectuals are trying to redefine the
term ‘sovereignty’ as per their convenience to make it fit in the context of
Assam’’. It sure makes my hackles rise to see a tiny group of individuals in
Assam who cling to the belief that the Centre, in view of the changing
concept of sovereignty, must not hum and haw to initiate peace process with
the ULFA on the issue of Assam’s sovereignty. Additionally, the same group
proposes that the Constitution can be amended at any time since it was not
written by an invisible divine power. However, the inescapable truth is that
whether the definition of  ‘‘sovereignty’’ has changed or not is a matter
that is purely academic. We obey only the Indian Constitution which does not
have an enabling provision that allows an elected government official to
discuss on the issue in point. Further, the Constitution cannot be amended
at someone’s whim, will and fancy. Simply stated, it cannot be bent or
twisted according to one’s convenience. Therefore, to expect the Centre to
cave in to the ULFA’s overweening demand of ‘‘sovereignty’’ with an eye to
usher in peace to the region will be, in my view, a total
Alice-in-Wonderland.

It is equally nettlesome to watch a few intellectuals trying to exhort the
government to rope in ULFA to the dialogue process with the purpose of
having a discourse on its ‘‘various demands’’ in order to clinch a peace
pact. But the question that stares in our face is: Could anyone, save ULFA,
identify the charter that has listed out the so-called various demands as
expounded by those intellectuals? I am almost certain that the people of
Assam, at large, are not cognizant of ULFA’s ‘‘various demands’’ with the
exception of its extravagant demand of  ‘‘sovereignty’’ vis-a-vis Assam’s
independence. The ULFA may have a trick up its sleeve, but in a
representative democracy, the people, whose wishes and aspirations they
claim to represent, have the fundamental right to be aware of it.

Now come to those who stand firm on the theory of the ‘‘root causes’’ of
terrorism – that terrorism is a result of deprivation and injustice, that it
expresses the frustration and rage of an oppressed people, and that these
are fundamentally political questions and not a law-and-order problem. This
assumption is flawed for one reason. Are we to understand that crimes other
than terrorism arise without ‘‘root causes’’? Most — if not all — crimes of
violence are committed in subjectively justifiable states of rage, distress
and alienation. It certainly does not mean that until an utopian world is
created where there are no injustices, and where all the ‘‘root causes’’ are
eliminated, such crimes should go unpunished.

Kamaljit Deka,

Sugarland, Texas, USA.