Chapter Review: Parag Das the ideologue

Chapter Review: Parag Das the ideologue

Name of the Book: Confronting the State ULFA’s quest for Sovereignty  
Author: Prof. Nani Gopal Mahanta

Chapter Range: 110-140
Publisher: SAGE Publications India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi
Published in: 2013 

About the Author: Nani Gopal Mahanta is a Professor in the Department of Political Science and Director, Centre for South East Asian Studies at Gauhati University, Assam, India. A former Rotary World Peace Fellow at the University of California, Berkeley (2002–04), he has published widely and has been a Visiting Fellow at the Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO), Norway. Currently, Mahanta is the President of North East India Political Science Association (NEIPSA). Mahanta is a regular contributor to various national and regional newspapers and journals on the contemporary conflict issues in India’s North East. They include Economic and Political Weekly, Socialist Perspective, India Today, The Hindustan Times, The Telegraph, The Assam Tribune, Amar Asom and Dainik Pratidin. He is also one of the most popular television commentators in the region.

About the Book and Chapter Selection: “Confronting the State ULFA’s quest for sovereignty” is published by SAGE Publications in 2013. The book is based on ULFA’s demand on Swadhin Assam. The Author has discussed various topics related to ULFA and behavior of State Mechanism towards ULFA. The Author has critically presented ULFA as a secessionist organization, who is an outcome of Intra and Cross Border migration to Assam from ‘Mainstream India’ as well as Bangladesh.

          However, the aforesaid chapter has discussed about the ideological base of ULFA, made by Parag Kumar Das, deceased journalist who is known as the ideologue of ULFA. The chapter has demanded a serious discussion to quest ULFA’s demand on Sovereign Assam.

About the Chapter:

Parag Das had played a significant role to assemble the various demands of ULFA as the author has said: “Parag Das provided a distinct ideological character to ULFA—without him, the understanding of the organization would remain incomplete.” (P: 110) Parag Das was a passionate supporter of the concept of liberty Assam from Delhism, which turned into the spirit of Secessionism. The Author has signified Parag Kumar Das as the champion writer of Assam about the topic of Swadhin Assam. By mentioning Parag’s scattered writings from Boodhbar (An weekly, edited by Parag himself) to Swadhin  Assamor Orthoniti, the author has categorized Parag’s writings into seven categories: Right to self-determination and right to secession, International Law and Right to Self-determination, Internal Colonialism and Resource Control, ULFA as the custodian of an Independent Assam, Limitations of ULFA activists, The Congress rulers as the lackey of Indian Imperialism, Human Rights Violation by the Security Forces etc.

          The Author has observed that Parag Das had accepted ULFA as a progressive Nationalistic organization, who has a basic difference from Emotional Nationalism. Parag Das in his book Rastradruhir Dinlipi has mentioned that the Vaxa Movement (Language Agitation) and the Assam Agitation (Assam Andulon) had played a negative effect to the Assamese Nationalism, from which situation only ULFA can relief the Nation-building process. (P: 112-114)

          Establishing MASS (Manab Adhikar Sangram Samiti) as a strategic initiative to support his ideas was strategically vigorous decision. Though MASS was a human rights Organization, but the author has observed that many people considered MASS as a Pro-ULFA overground linkage organization. (P: 113) Parag Das and his colleagues had decided to fight for the Human and Civil rights as well as to internationalize the situation of Assam.

          The author has manifested the reactions of state mechanism towards Parag Das and his stand. Assam Government behaved Parag Kumar Das as an ULFA activist as well as an ideologue. (P: 114) Assam Police lodges nine accusations against Parag Kumar Das including his linkages with ULFA, his pro-ULFA propagates etc.  Some other reporters of the then time have raised questions against Parag Das and his stand towards the State Mechanism. They made a clear allegation to glorify ULFA on Parag Das. Simultaneously, Parag Das had claimed himself as a subjective journalist, whose stand was in the fever of common masses.

          The author has observed that Parag Das were aware that the support to such an independent Assam will be limited. But although he kept a hopeful anticipation that someday the civil society would realize the truth character of the Indian State and jump into a spontaneous struggle against the Indian State. (Ibid, P: 119)

          The author has also observed that Parag Das were aware of International laws to legalize his claims of independent Assam. He has mentioned about the Montevideo Convention of 1933 as well as the Article 1 (2) and Article 55 of the UN Charter. Article 1 (2) and 55 of the UN Charter has recognized the Right to Self-Determination and the Socio-Economic-Cultural Rights of all nationalities. Again by the Resolution-225 (XXV) on 24^th October of 1970, the General Council of UN has accepted the Rights of Self-Determination. Parag Das had argued that the Indian State Mechanism has been trying to bulldoze all such aspirations by a more brutal army rule and operations. (Ibid, P: 122) Parag Das had argued that Assamese Self-Determination movement, i.e. ULFA can be legalized under the international laws due to its geopolitical distinct location from the mainstream India.

          The author has manifested, that Parag Das was not a blind supporter or apologetic follower of ULFA. Parag Das had criticized ULFA on the basis of its theoretical and organization level weakness. Theoretically Parag Das had mentioned that the ULFA is failing to understand the dynamic characteristics of Indian State Mechanism due to its ideological backwardness. ULFA had failed to understand the diplomacy of Indian state as well as its techniques. The author has mentioned that Parag Das advised Assamese masses to utilize the democratic rights, including the Right to participate in elections also! According to Parag Das, due to ideological backwardness ULFA had turned themselves to an Arm-Centric and Money-Centric organization.

Parag’s greatest contribution for ULFA would be that he tried to make it a representative organization of all the groups and nationalities of Assam. After the abrupt end of this highly talented, honest and dedicated man of Assam, ULFA was directionless and soon became stooge to the international terror network. Parag’s greatest failure was that he failed to understand the pulse of the people with whom he wanted to liberate Assam from India. Thus, the name of Parag would remain in the history as the one who loved Assam desperately and who was in a hurry to facilitate Assam’s sovereignty. (Ibid, P: 139)

          Hence it becomes very clear that the author has manifested different dimensions of Parag Das, from Supporter of ULFA to a critique of ULFA. However, the author has remarked Parag Kr. Das as a pro-ULFA activist, who want to liberate Assam from the colonial oppression of Indian State mechanism.