MULTIETHNICITY AND EMERGING CHALLENGES – SOME ISSUES OF
NORTH EAST INDIA
By:
Somenath Bhattacharjee[1]
and Nijora Sharma[2]
Abstract: Since India’s independence Northeastern region
of India has been witnessing episodes of secessionist and insurgency related violence
and conflict. The problem has become more complex, as the region is inhabited
by people belonging to different racial stock, speak different languages and
have varied socio-cultural tradition. Census data of our country is reflecting
their increase of population and better accessibility of livelihood amenities
but on the other hand they are fighting for the same geographical space to
protect and preserve their identity and culture. Illegal immigration from
neighbouring countries, has aggravated the problem as it has reduced the number
of indigenous people to minority in some parts of the region. Though the Sixth
Schedule of the Constitution of India has become an important tool to provide
special protection to indigenous people in Northeastern states, the problem
lies in the fact that many of these ethnic groups do not live in distinct areas
and their demand for ethnic homeland often overlap with other groups. As a
result their demand for ethnic homelands has led to conflict and in turn
internal displacement and to some extent has become a major social problem in
the said region.
Key words: Conflict, Displacement,
Indigenous community.
[I]
ETHNIC
CONFLICTS IN NORTH EAST INDIA
Northeast India refers to the easternmost region of
India comprising of states of Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Nagaland,
Manipur, Mizoram, Tripura and new inclusion is Sikkim. The region shares
international border with countries like China, Tibet, Bhutan, Burma and
Bangladesh and is connected to the rest of India by a narrow passage. Northeast
India is the homeland of large number of ethnic groups who came to the region
from different directions at different historical times. These groups belong to
the different racial stocks, speak different languages, and have varied socio
cultural tradition. As a result the region has become the epicenter of numerous
ethnic nationalities. Especially the society in the hills of Northeast region
reflect high degree of diversity as each community living therein has its
distinct characteristics.
According to the ‘People of India’ project sponsored by
Anthropological Survey of India out of 5,633 communities living in India 635
are categorized as tribals, of which 231 are residing in India. The project had
listed 325 languages of which 175 belonging to the Tibeto-Burman group and
Mon-Khmer group are spoken in Northeast India. (Bhaumik S , 2005).
For the past several decades the Northeast has
received a continuous flow of economic migrants from neighbouring countries and
as as a result of that in the states like Tripura and Assam demographic
imbalance has been tilting against indigenous population. The waves of refugees
and migrants besides causing demographic change also causing displacement of
indigenous population from their ancestral land. In such cases displacement
generally takes place quietly without direct conflict. Only when indigenous
people realizes the danger to their existence, they begin to express their
grievances through mass protest and social movement and only then the displacement
drew public attention (Dutta, 2008). This had happened in the states of Assam,
Arunachal Pradesh, Tripura and Meghalaya.
1. Causes
of internal displacement in Northeast India
Considering the magnitude of the problem of internal
displacement in Northeastern region, it is difficult to outline all the causes
of internal displacement. However some of the prominent causes of displacement
in the region are listed below.
Due to
natural disasters like earthquake, flood, erosion, draught and climate change;
Due to
violence—ethnic, religion and language conflict, wars and revolutions;
Due to
development driven reasons and governmental policies;
Due to take over of land by migrating communities.
Conflicts have regularly caused considerable internal
displacement of population in most of the northeastern states. Displacement of
population is caused by violent conflict between security forces and insurgent
groups, different dissident armed groups and counter-insurgency operations of
security forces. The Northeast India accounts for almost half of India’s
conflict induced internally displaced persons.(Bhaumik, 2005). The region has
witnessed a number of major causes of conflict-induced displacement in recent
years.
Displacement of Bengali Hindus and Muslims from and within Assam;
Displacement of Adivasis and Bodos within and from western Assam
Displacement of Bengalis from Meghalaya, particularly from Shillong, the
capital city of Meghalaya;
Displacement of the Bengalis from and within Tripura;
Displacement of Nagas, Kukis and Paites in Manipur;
Displacement of Reangs from Mizoram;
Displacement of Chakmas from Arunachal Pradesh and
Mizoram (Bhaumik, 2005).
2. Conflict and
displacement in Assam
Violent conflict that has been witnessed to-day in Assam
is the result of number of socio-economic factors operating right from the
advent of British rule. Human migration is an ongoing phenomenon in the
Brhmaputra valley for centuries. Various immigrant groupsbelonging to Mongoloid
group had entered Assam from neighbouring South-East Asian countries. When the
British took over the administration of Assam in the year 1826, it changed the
traditional social culture of Assam. After taking over of Assam, British
established tea and oil industry in Assam and brought educated Bengali Hindus
to work in important positions in the colonial administration and other
important professions like teachers, doctors, lawyers and magistrates. The
local people were reluctant to work in tea gardens which results in lack of
labour force in colonial Assam. As a result the colonial rulers encouraged
migration of tribal people from Jharkhand and Orissa in order to meet the
demand of cheap labour in British owned tea gardens. In search of better living
the poverty ridden tribal people of those areas migrated to Assam. The
situation opened the floodgates of migration of people during British regime.
Thus the British owned tea gardens had remarkably grown but failed to
accommodate emerging Assamese middle class in jobs. This had eventually led to
an anti Bengali feeling amongst Assamese middle class who failed to understand
the colonial limitation. The British also ignored the demand for replacement of
Assamese as language in schools and courts. The linguistic conflict between
migrant Bengalis and native population generated socio cultural conflict
between the two groups.
The immigration of people from erstwhile East Pakistan
took a dangerous turn during post independence period but the Government of
India did have no definite policy to tackle the problem. On the contrary
Nehru-Liaquat Pact facilitated and accelerated infiltration during post
independence era by providing for restoration of rights of immigrants over
their properties, if they choose to return not later than 31st Dec. 1950 (Pact,
1950). The agreement was against the spirit of Immigrants (Expulsion from
Assam) Act, 1950 enacted by Parliament that provided for expulsion of certain
immigrants from Assam (2, 1950). In early sixties, the Govt. of Assam armed
itself with Prevention of Infiltration from Pakistan (PIP) Plan, 1964 launched
an aggressive campaign to flush out immigrants, who settled in Assam since
January 1951. Bimala Prasad Chaliha then Chief Minister of Assam even disregarded
the then Prime Minister’s plea to go slow on the deportation. Chaliha even went
on to say that the problem was so critical that Assam’s demography and culture
would be permanently damaged (Hazarika, 2000).Chaliha’s campaign pressed a
panic button among the Muslim immigrants. Ultimately Chaliha’s Plan was put in
cold storage and those who were deported earlier gradually returned and again
settled in Assam.
It has to be noted here that the Assamese members of the
Constituent Assembly advocated for giving much wider power to the States. The
proposals include the right to legislate on immigration; inclusion of
citizenship matter in the concurrent list; giving residual powers to the
states; limitation of central power over subjects in the central list; not to
give power to the Union Government to unilaterally redraw state boundaries; to
make state Governorship an elected office and to give a much larger share of
the exercise and export duties on tea and petroleum to the producing stats
(Baruah, 2005).
During the post Bangladesh era, the All Assam Student’s
Union (AASU) started a movement called Bideshi Khedao Movement which is also
known as Assam Movement. The movement was actually triggered by the discovery
of sudden rise of registered voters in the electoral rolls. In 1070s. Taking
advantage of the deep rooted sentiments and discontentment of Assamese people,
AASU successfully translated the agitation into widespread popular movement.
Tens of thousands of Bengalis—both Hindus and Muslims were displaced all over
Assam in violence unleashed during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, particularly
during six years of anti foreigners agitation. However, the agitation leaders
when came to power and ruled the state since1985 to 1996 failed to detect and
deport the illegal immigrants.
According to the noted security analyst and former
Army Lt. General (Retd.) D,B,Shekhatkar, the efforts made by some political
parties to create vote bank of illegal migrants changed the demographic pattern
in Assam especially in BTAD areas and in the process, the land belonging to the
tribal groups including Bodos, are being occupied by the suspected migrants
(Chaudhury, 2012, Sept. 6).
2.1.
Conflict and displacement in Bodo areas
Like other sub-nationalists and ethnic movements the
Bodo movement in Assam has been associated with ideas of autonomy, liberation
and revolution. The violent conflict in Bodo areas started with the Bodo
movement in 1987. The Bodos who are the largest plains tribe in Assam alleged
that there has been long socio cultural alienation, discrimination,
de-culturalisation and anti-tribal policies of the government to deal with
them. Moreover, two other factors have contributed in the alienation of Bodo
people from the Assamese people. First reorganization of states particularly
Assam on the basis of language and second their perception of Assamese
hegemony. The Assam Movement that resulted in Assam Accord mainly aimed at
preserving and protecting Assamese identity and culture. The Bodos objected the
clause 6 of the Assam Accord (1995), which promised to safeguards the culture
and identity of Assamese people. The All Bodo Students Union (ABSU) along with
Bodo Sahitya Sabha launched the Bodo Movement demanding a Bodo state for
protecting and preserving their identity. In initial years the movement was
quite peaceful and democratic but later on the movement turned violent because
of emergence of insurgent groups targeting the non-Bodo population. To
establish peace the state government and ABSU signed an accord making provision
for setting up of Bodoland Territorial Council (BAC). However, BAC failed to
meet the aspirations of Bodo people (Deka, 2012). The BAC area is not
contiguous and in some areas under the BAC there were more than fifty per cent
non-Bodo population. This dissimilarity stalled the process of demarcation of
boundaries of BAC. Many people argued that with a view to have complete hold
over the territory Bodos started ethnic cleansing with large scale attack on
Muslims of Bengali descent in October1993. Violent clash between Bodos and
immigrant Muslim settlers displaced 3568 families consisting of 18,000 people
in Kokrajhar and Bomgaigaon district. Again in May-June 1996 massive attack was
launched against Adivasi Santhals. The conflict has resulted in displacement of
42,214 families consisting of about 22,62682 persons throughout western Assam.
After this initial outbreak, conflict between the two ethnic groups became a
regular feature in western Assam (Phanjaubam, 2007).
In 1998, clash between Bodos and immigrant Muslims
displaced 48,556 families and within a span of two years, nearly 5.5 lakh
people were living in camps at some point and about 44,000 of them are
children. Again in August 2008 communal violence took place between the two
groups in Udalguri, Darang, Chirang and Sonitpur districts killing 55 and
displacing 2,12000 persons. During the conflict 54 villages were directly
affected and residents of 150 villages fled from their homes for fear of being
attacked though there was no attack in their villages. More recently in July
2012 conflict between the two communities displaced 400,000 people from about
400 villages (2012 Assam Violence, 2012). In 2004 Bodo Santhal conflict
resurfaced again leaving 37,000 people displaced.
The enmity between immigrant Muslim settlers and tribal
communities have increased over the years in Assam as the migrants encroaching
upon the areas previously dominated by tribal communities. Both groups are
fighting over the same natural resources and geographical space.
Over the years, it has been found that majority of the
protected class of persons are so backward both economically and socially that
they could not protect themselves against more advanced immigrant farmers.
Further Government’s failure to protect tribal belts and blocks leads to vast
tracts of land belonging to tribal people were illegally transferred to various
non-tribal and immigrant settlers. As a result tribal people are being
displaced from forest as well non-forest areas.
Due to the non-implementation of the accord two
insurgent groups the Bodo Liberation Tiger
(BLT) and National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB)
came into existence making a fresh demand for separate state for Bodos. However
the state and central government selectively engaged in peace talks with BLT
and a new peace accord was signed February 10, 2003. The accord created the
Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC) under Sixth Schedule of the Constitution of
India. The new accord tried to meet the deficiencies of the earlier BAC accord.
However, the government did not negotiate with the NDFB while signing the BTC
accord and thus the group’s demand for a sovereign Bodoland continued to
persist (Deka, 2012).
2.2. Conflict in North Cachar (NC) Hills and Karbi
Anglong
The two hill districts of Assam NC Hills and Karbi
Anglong are mostly inhabited by indigenous tribes like Karbi, Dimasa, Kuki,
Khasi, Jaintia, Hmar, Bodo, Tiwa and Zeme Naga. These two districts are
continued to be plagued by unprecedented ethnic conflicts in recent years. Root
causes of the conflicts are control over land resources and establishment of
homeland based on ethnicity. A number of insurgent groups representing
different tribal groups emerged demanding independent tribal homelands.
Karbi-Kuki, Karbi- Dimasa, Dimasa-hmar, Dimasa-Zeme Naga groups fighting with
each other leading to killing and displacement of people in large numbers.
Dimasa insurgent group Dima Halam Daoga was formed in1995 with the objective of
establishing a Dimasa homeland comprising of Dimasa inhabited areas of North
Cachar Hills and KarbiAnglong and also parts of Nowgaon district. However
internal dissentions have led to bifurcation of two outfits. Another most
domination insurgent group in Karbi Anglong is United Peoples Democratic
Solidarity (UPDS). Formed in 1999 UPDS is fighting for separate Karbi homeland outside
the state of Assam. According to report by the Asian Centre for Human Rights,
as a result of ongoing conflict 44,016 Karbis and Dimasas have been displaced
till October 2005 in Karbi Anglong, North Cachar Hills and Hojai sub-division
of Nowgaon district (Laskar, Insurgencies in NC Hills and Karbi Anglong, 2008).
3. Naga Insurgency and displacement in Manipur
Naga people’s struggle for independence is one of the
oldest struggle for self determination in India. In pursuant of their declared
national decision, the Naga people launched Civil Disobedient Movement and
successfully boycotted the general election of the free India. In 1963, when
Nagaland was formed as a separate state within the Indian Union militants were
not satisfied and continued their freedom struggle. In 1975, a section of rebel
leaders came out and signed Shillong Accord. Under the accord the militants
were asked to accept without condition, the Constitution of India. It irritated
leaders like Issac Swu and T. Muivah, who openly denounced the accord and
decided to continue their struggle. By aligning with S.S.Khaplang a leader of
Kanyak Nagas the two radical leaders formed the National Council of
Nagaland(NSCN) in 1980. But NSCN suffered a jolt in 1988 when the organization
was split into two factions one led by Swu and Muivah and the other by
Khaplang.
In the year 1997, when Government of India concluded a
ceasefire agreement with Muivah faction of NSCN to extend ceasefire agreement to
all Naga areas in the Northeast, it was met with violent protest in Manipur,
Assam and Arunachal Pradesh. The ceasefire agreement was seen as a step towards
the establishment of a greater Naga state, which could infringe on the
territory of the neighbouring states. Some 5,000 Nagas, fearing revenge attack
fled the Imphal valley in Manipur to Naga dominated districts in Manipur and
Nagaland (IDMC, 2006). The riot forced the Indian Government to reverse its
decision, and limit the ceasefire to Nagaland only.
In the middle of 1992, conflict between Nagas and Kukis
resulted in wanton killing, kidnapping, and burning and destruction of houses.
Conflict had forced the common people to flee from their original place
settlement. A large number of people affected by ethnic clashes moved to
villages and towns where there is some sense of security and more economic
opportunities leading to significant change in demography in the hills
districts of the state. As a result of that, population in the state’s least
populated district of Chandel, that had only 71,014 as per 1991 census jumped
to 1,18327, in 2001 census (Thongbam, 2006).
Naga-Kuki clash was followed by Meities and Pangal
clash in 1993. The last in the series was the Paite- Kuki clash in
Churachandpur district of the state. A number of factors are responsible for
the outbreak of the clash. There was an disagreement between Kukis and Paites
over the acceptance of the term to be used as the common nomenclature to
describe all the Kuki-Chin-Mizo group of tribes in the state. Another important
factor which contribute to the Kuki-Paite clash was the fact that the Kukis and
Zomis including Paites are at loggerhead over the issue of Kuki homeland taxes
and fees. The third reason was that the Paites always wanted to rename
Churachandpur as Lamka, which was opposed by Kukis. The Paites killed 210 Kukis
in clashes and lost 298 of their own tribesmen. Three thousand houses in 47
villages were destroyed and 22,000 Kukis and Paites displaced (Phanjaubam,
2007).
4.
Displacement in Tripura
After independence of India, the plains of Tripura i.e.
Chakla Roshanabad which generated surplus revenue, was taken away from Tirpura
and annexed with Pakistan. As a result a large number of Hindu Bengali entered
into Tripura from Chakla Roshanabad. This migrant population put sudden
pressure in the state. The influx of large number of people over a long period
of time brought about demographic changes in Tripura. The indigenous people in
the state, who accounted for 95 per cent of the population of Tripura in the
1931 census, had been reduced to just 31 per cent at the time of the 1991
census. This had resulted serious discontent among tribals, who have become
minority in their own land (SATP). The demographic explosion which reduced the tribals
to minority created fear phychosis in the minds of the tribal people and paved
the way for ethnic conflict.
The continuous influx of Bengali people from Bangladesh
intensified the progressive alienation of tribal lands and traditional forest
rights. As the Bengali migrants practiced relatively advanced pattern of
wet-rice cultivation compared to the age-old jhum cultivation. There were large
scale transfer of cultivable land of the tribal people to the Bengali migrants.
Almost all writers on Tripura insurgency have identified land alienation
amongst the tribal people as the major cause that had fuelled the violent
insurgency in the state (Bhaumik S. , 2005). In settled agricultural areas like
Khowai and Sadar, between twenty to forty per cent of the tribal lands have
been alienated by the end of seventies, when tribal insurgency gathered
momentum. In some parts of south Tripura district, as much as sixty per cent of
the tribal lands were sold in distress conditions as sequel to an unequal
economic completion with the Bengali settlers (Bhaumik S., 2005).
As a consequence of influx of large number of
migrants, a growing number of ethno-centric tribal parties mushroomed. The
Debar Commission and Hanumanthiya Commission which looked into the development
of the Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs) suggested a tribal
compact area to fulfill the aspirations of development of tribal people. In the
mean time the government enacted Tripura land Refoms and Restoration Act in
1960 to restore alienated tribal land. The Act was amended in 1964. But all
these had failed to prevent the alienation of tribal land to other non-tribal
groups, creating a feeling of mistrust and betrayal amongst the tribals. This
led to the formation of Tripura Upajati Juba Samity (TUJS) in 1967 (Ali, S.
2011). In 1967, when as a direct fall out of large scale alienation the
Sengkrak Movement started, the ruling Congrss government backed the forcible
occupation of tribal in the Deo valley by the Swasti Samity—an organization of
Bengali settlers (Ali S. , 2011). The Sengkrak movement was subsequently
outlawed by the state. The state witnessed serious ethnic conflicts between
tribals and non-tribals since 1980 till March 2002 and during the conflict
about 2000 Bengalis displaced in the state (Phanjaubam, 2007).
In an attempt to tribal insurgency, the state
government enacted Tripura Tribal Autonomous District Council under the Sixth
Schedule of the Constitution of India with a view to empowering indigenous
people to bring all round developments so as to protect and preserve their
culture, customs and traditions. The problems of indigenous people of Tripura
has been continuously ignored by the successive governments. As a result,
instead of exercising control over their land these people have found
themselves politically displaced.
5.
Displacement in Mizoram
5,1.
Reang (Bru) displacement
Tension stared in 1997 between Mizos and Reang community
presently known as Bru which is the second largest tribal group of Mizoram,
because they demanded autonomy within Mizoram. Mizos consider it as an attempt
to fragment the Mizo state and became very emotional. To counter such demands
of minority tribal groups Mizos branded them as outsiders. All sorts of
attempts were made to nullify their claims like deleting their names from the
voter’s list, questioning the census report. According to Bru leaders, their
cultural practices were obstructed and they are forced to adopt Mizo language.
Despite their having native language Kokborok they are forced to accept Mizo
language as medium of instruction. Bru leaders also alleged that the names of
about 20,000 Reangs were deleted from the electoral rolls (Ali S. S., The
Reangs of Northeast India: A tireless battle of existence, 2005).
In 1997 Mizos had reportedly unleashed a wave of
terror against the minority Reangs. As many as 35,000 to 50,000 people
belonging to Reang tribe crossed over from Mizoram to Tripura following
atrocities committed against them allegedly by Mizo tribes (Ali S. S., The
Reang Refugees, 1998). The Reang women were raped and men were beaten up and
killed. The Reang militant group, which calls itself the Bru National Front
(BNLF) started attacking Mizoram police and that further provoked the Mizos to
commit atrocities on Reangs. The Tripura Government says that 30.690 Reangs
belonging to 6,859 families have fled into Tripura during the period of three
years. But the Mizoram Government refuges to accept them. According to Mizoram
government Tripura government has not given details of residence of 10,435
people belonging to 2,075 families. Therefore, their claim to be residents of
Mizoram is untenable (Bhaumik S. , 2005).
5.2.
Insurgency in Mizoram
There are various causes of growth of insurgency in
Mizoram. Exploitation by chiefs, poverty, economic imbalance, poor
communication, lack of contact between government and people , long history of
neglect, corruption, nepotism and non-participation in the process of
development alienated the people from the ruling elites. Further differences in
culture, language, religion, habit etc. also contributed towards the growth of
insurgency (R.K.Satpathy).
Immediately after the outbreak of insurgency in
Mizoram, the Government of India launched a counter insurgency operation both
by land and air. During the operation houses were burnt and demolished, men
were arrested and tortured. As a result, many Mizos had to leave Mizoram and
taken shelter in neighbouring states like Manipur and Meghalaya. Magnitude of
internal displacement during the period of insurgency was so much that at one
time Aizawl, the capital of Mizoram was almost empty. But this was not for a
long period. Majority of Mizo families who fled to Manipur and Meghalaya came
back to Mizoram after staying there for some years. But some of them did not go
back to Mizoram and staying there till today (Lianzela, 2002).
6. Displaement in Meghalaya
One of the unique feature of the state of Meghalaya is
that majority of tribal population follows matriarchal system where linage and
heritage traced through women. The non-tribal communities in Meghalaya made up
of migrants from other parts of India and recent migrants from neighbouring
countries particularly Nepal and Bangladesh. The Khasi and Garo hills fall
under the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution of India that provides for
establishment of autonomous district council to enforce customary law, use of
land as well as reservation in Parliament, educational institutions and
government employment. There are mainly two militant organizations operating in
the state. Hynniewtreps Achick Liberation Council (HNLC), Achik National
Volunteer Council (ANVC) are the two most prominent militant groups in the
state. The HNLC aims to transform Meghalaya into a state exclusively for the
Khasi tribe, which it claims long been dominated by Garos. On the other hand
ANVC founded in 1995 demands ‘Achik Land’ in the areas of Garo hills comprising
the present districts of Garo hills in Meghalaya and large chunk of Kamrup and
Goalpara districts of Assam. Other political groups such as Hills State
People’s Democratic Party (HSPDP) fight for the self-governance of the Khasi
Pnar and Garo people. The Garo National Council (GNC) is an independent
separatist organization, which demands a Garo state comprising of three
districts of Garo hills in the state (Sahni).
It has to be noted here that unlike some of the states
in the Northeast which have been passing through violent insurgencies,
Meghalaya has not yet experienced a full blown insurgency but large scale
exodus of Bengali and Nepali people had taken place on several occasions.
Since late eighties numerous cycles of ethnic cleansing
rocked the state and people belonging to Nepali, Bengali, Bihari and Marwari
communities became the target of the attack. In the 1990s Bengalis remained the
prime target of the ethnic violence. The pattern was repeated at regular
intervals mostly before or during the main Bengali Hindu festival of ‘Durga
Puja’. Unlike Tripura or Assam, only about 50 people had died in these attacks,
but that was scary enough to trigger a Bengali exodus. Since the early 1980s,
an estimated 25,000-35,000 Bengalis have left Meghalaya to other parts of India
especially to West Bengal. In 1981, there were 119,571 Bengalis in
Meghalaya—8.13 per cent of the state’s population. Ten years later in 1991 it
stood at 5.97 per cent of population (UNHCR).
Ethnic conflict between Rabha and Garo communities in December 2010 and January 2011 displaced tens of thousands of people in Assam’s Goalpara district and adjoining East Garo Hills district of Meghalaya. During the conflict ten people had been killed and more than 50,000 persons displaced from both communities. Conflict between the two groups took place because of tension between the two communities over the legislative and executive status of the Rabha dominated Rabha Hajong Autonomous Council.
GENERAL OBSERVATION
Ethnic tension in Northeastern region
in most cases is a by product of land alienation owing to demographic change as
the people are fighting for natural resources in the same geographical space. Therefore,
it is obvious that peace can be restored in the region by land restoration,
poverty alleviation, education and development especially in rural areas.
Problems of indigenous people of the region have been continuously ignored by
successive governments. Instead of exercising control over their land these
indigenous people have found themselves politically displaced. Further there is
dearth of strong and dedicated leadership in the region because of which human
resources of the region could not be utilized in an effective and productive
way. According to the census yeas although the population is increasing as well
as new civic amenities are developing but ethnic conflicts are a major
challenge to overall social development. This social problem can only be solved
by socially where inter cultural tolerance and the process of acculturation of
traits may be given an open space of exchange inspite of any local, regional or
political disparity as a whole.
Ali, S. (2011,
January). Migration and Ethnic Violence in Tripura. Retrieved September
4, 2011, from SATP: www.satp.org
Ali, S. S. (1998,
July 18-31). The Reang Refugees. Retrieved September 6, 2011, from Front
Line on net: www.frontlineonnet.com
Ali, S. S. (2005,
August 24). The Reangs of Northeast India: A tireless battle of existence.
Retrieved September 12, 2011, from www.worldpress.org
Baruah, S. (2005). Durable
Disorder:Understanding the Politics of Northeast India. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.
Bhaumik, S. (2005). India's
Northeast Nobody's People in No-man's Land in Internal Displacement in South
Asia. Delhi: Sage Publication.
Bhaumik, S. (2005). Tripura:Decommissioning
of Gumti Hydel Project Crucial for Conflict Resolution in Monirul Hussain's
Coming Out of Violence. New Delhi: Regency Publication.
Census of India,
2001. Government of India, New Delhi.
Census of India,
2011. Government of India, New Delhi.
Chaudhury, R. D.
(2012, Sept. 6). BTAD Violence, Mumbai Clashes, Exodus Interlinked. Guwahati:
Assam Tribune.
Deka, A. K. (2012, September
1). Understanding conflict in BTAD Assam Vol. L No. 37. Retrieved June
29, 2013, from www.mainstreamweekly.net
Dutta, S. K.
(2008). Birth of a Problem in Blisters on their Feet. New Delhi: Sage
Publication.
Hazarika, S. (2000).
Rites of Passage:Border Crossing ,Imagined Homelands,India's East and
Bangladesh. New Delhi: Penguine Books.
IDMC. (2006, February 9). Retrieved August 24, 2011, from India:Tens of
Thousands newly displacedin Northeastern and Central States:
www,internal-displacement.org
Laskar, H. R.
(n.d.). Insurgencies in NC Hills and Karbi Anglong.
Laskar, H. R. (2008,
May 8). Insurgencies in NC Hills and Karbi Anglong. Retrieved June 29,
2013, from Assam Connect: www.assamconnect.blogspot.in
Lianzela. (2002). Internally
Displaced Persons in Mizoram in C,J,Thomas's Dimensions of Displaced Peopele in
North-East India. New Delhi: Regency Publication.
North-East India:
Tens of Thousands Newly Displaced in Assam and Meghalaya. (n.d.). Retrieved September 14, 2011, from UNHCR Refworld: www.unhcr.org
North-East
India:Tens of Thousands Newly Displaced in Assam and Meghalaya. (n.d.). Retrieved September 14, 2011, from UNHCR: www.unhcr.org
Pact, N.-L. (1950,
April 8).
Phanjaubam, M. H.
(2007). AStatus Report on Displacement in Assam and Manipur. Retrieved
September 25, 2011, from MCRG: http://mcrg.ac.in
Phukan, Mridula Dhekial. Ethnicity,
Conflict and Population Displacement in Northeast India, Asian Journal of Humanities and Social
Sciences (AJHSS) Volume 1—Issue 2, August 2013
R.K.Satpathy.
(n.d.). Mediating Peace: The Role of Insider Partials in Conflict Resolution
in Mizoram. Retrieved September 12, 2011, from SATP: www.satp.org
Sahni, A. (n.d.). Survey
of Conflicts and Resolution in India's Northeast. Retrieved September 13,
2011, from SATP: www.satp.org
SATP. (n.d.). Retrieved September 1, 2011, from Tripura Backgrounder:
www.satp.org
Thongbam, I.
(2006, January 25). Forced migration, Immigration, Racism and Xenophobiain
North East India. Retrieved August 28, 2009, from Refugee Watch Online:
www.refugeewatchonline.blogspot.com
[1] Assistant Professor,
Department of Anthropology , Assam University, Diphu Campus, Diphu, Karbi
Anglong, Assam.PIN-782462. Contact:+919401767410, +918011852535(M);
[2] Assistant Director, Directorate of Census Operations, Assam.
781005. email: nijorasharma@rediffmail.com.
Contact: +919435482060.
Comments
Post a Comment