The colourful face of Assam presents a picture of fragmentation. The ULFA began with a demand for the state’s secession from India. Simultaneously, there was a demand for the creation of a separate Bodoland state. The Centre could never agree to it. But it was necessary to spell out its position once again. At a recent meeting with a faction of the National Democratic Front of Boroland (NDFB) and some other groups, it was clarified that the demand for a Bodoland state had no takers in the Centre or the Assam government. It is possible that the NDFB has been reiterating the demand to bargain on other issues. The demand for statehood has been assertive in many parts of the country. The results can be dangerous. Identity politics can stifle the democratic aspirations of people in different areas. Whereas the emphasis should be on unity, it will foment divisive forces.
There is already an autonomous council for Bodo majority areas. It may be that the council is unable to fulfill the aspirations of the Bodos much as the Darjeeling Gorkha Hill Council. However, the solution does not lie in creating a separate state but in toning up the efficiency of the council. The Bodos and some other ethnic groups living in the council’s area are extremely poor. The Bodo groups should impress upon the Centre the need for urgent economic development. The Union Home Ministry is bent upon resolving the disputes in the Northeast as early as possible. Persistence of divisive forces will retard economic development and social progress. The stress should be laid on education and healthcare. The Bodo leaders have to persuade their activists to surrender arms and pave the way for peace. It is only then that the Bodos can get a better life. A separate state cannot offer that.