By Ibu Sanjeeb Garg
Beating the Rhetoric
In the fractured socio-political narrative of North East India, Tripura has always been seen as an island of peace. Such notions often belie the truth, or at least do not seek to set the historical record straight. While compared to Nagaland or Manipur, Tripura had a relatively peaceful record since independence; yet it does not take away the fact that in the 1980’s and 1990’s a large number of Bengalis lost their lives. In fact it makes for interesting reading that the first insurrection against the Indian government post independence was in Tripura rather than in Nagaland. The Communist led tribal party representing the indigenous interests of the local population were up in arms against partition and subsequent influx of a large number of Hindu Bengali immigrants into the state. The movement came to a premature end when the Communist Party in India decided to join parliamentary politics.
The 1971 Indo- Bangladesh war brought another huge influx of Hindu Bengalis in Tripura. This further added to the resentment amongst the local indigenous population. They mainly spoke the Kokborok language which is closely related to the Dimasa language spoken by the Dimasa people in neighbouring Assam. They however began to witness a systematic displacement of the Kokborok language and the emergence of Bengali as the lingua franca of Tripura. A large scale demographic change was witnessed too. Between 1911 and 1981, the percentage population of tribals fell from 52.89% in 1911 to 28.44% in 1981. The Twiprasa, the indigenous inhabitants were a little over 16% of the total population of the state. While the influx of Bengali immigrants dates back to the 14th century but it was after independence that demography underwent such a tectonic shift. This led to different stages of conflict.
The TUJS(Tripura Upajati Juba Samiti) was one of the first political formations that began to speak of the rights of the indigenous people in the early 1970’s. Simultaneously a few frustrated individuals also went ahead and formed an underground guerrilla organisation, the Tripura National Volunteers (TNV). The TNV had an anti-national and an anti-non-tribal agenda. As a response to this, Amara Bengali was set up and a vicious cycle of violence ensued. This culminated into 1300 deaths during a bloody carnage in 1980 where 3,77,048 were left homeless (60 % non-tribals and 40% tribals) and 1,89,918 people were displaced. Subsequently the mantle of “indigenous rights” fell to Bijoy Kumar Hrangkhwal, leader of the Indigenous Nationalist Party of Twipra (INPT). Earlier he led the TNV which was responsible for the campaign of ethnic cleansing in rural Tripura. With the surrender of Hrangkhawl peace finally returned to Tripura.
However, this peace which has been operational warrants a deeper look. The Indigenous People’s Front of Twipra (IPFT) has been involved in struggle towards securing greater rights for the tribal population of the state. At the centre of their demand is the plea to carve out the Tripura Tribal Areas Autonomous District Council (TTAADC), in tribal dominated areas which constitute one-third of the state population and occupies two-thirds of the state territory to form the new state. And it is with this demand in the forefront that the IPFT took out a march on August 23 this year in Agartala. Soon the protest march turned into a violent conflict that left many injured. Since the protests, a large number of indigenous people have left Agartala despite requests from all political quarters to return home. This protest also blew the myth that all is well in the “island of peace” that is Tripura.
Northeast India has often been a laboratory of contested homelands. Since independence, each of these states has witnessed troubles nuanced towards greater autonomy and demand for ethnic homelands. However, they have more often than not degenerated to the fundamental question of “insider/outsider.” The large scale demographic transformation of Tripura since Independence has also been a moot point for other ethno nationalists in other parts of NorthEast. With the argument of Tripura, they have often contested claims of homeland as well as the broader narrative of ethnicity bound by territorial ambitions. Hence it is of no surprise that the question of ethnic homelands has reared its head in Tripura once more.
Governments in question have always sought to solve the ethnic issues in NorthEast through territorial adjustments permitted by the Constitution of India (e.g. Sixth Schedule, Seventh Schedule) or through bringing the contesting parties into mainstream parliamentary system through a democratic process( e.g. All Assam Students Union (AASU). MNF of Laldenga, TNV of Hrangkhawl. Yet in such adjustments, there is often a chance of another group emerging that wants a more radical solution, compared to the others. Thus, while governments try to address one contesting claim and bringing the contesting party to the table, another emerges to take its place; far, more radical in its narrative. And it is no surprise that the IPFT has raised the ante to a separate Twipra land. This goes beyond the accepted principle till now, of protecting the tribal interests. Now the tribal interests warrant a firm separate geographical existence, if IPTF is to be believed.
Yet the Tripura experience is also a testimony to the fact that a state can be pulled back from a cycle of violence. In the past two decades, Tripura has achieved peace and lessened animosity between the tribals and non- tribals. A large part of the success must be attributed to the innovative way in which insurgency was handled. Counter insurgency operations were handled by state and central police forces which had a large number of tribals as well. Counter insurgency operations were always followed by psychological elements and confidence building measures aimed at the tribals. As soon as security forces dominated an area, the government lost no time in reaching with governance- roads, schools, drinking water and sanitation facilities. Each of these steps went a long way in exposing the uselessness and well as the malaise of insurgency. At the same time it demonstrated genuine intentions towards protecting the rights of the people. Hence Tripura, with innovative and well thought-out measures, was able to contain insurgency.
The recent spark of violence has its roots in a conflict that cannot be denied. The Twiprasas are undoubtedly victims of a demographic change. However in no way can it be termed as the demise of the peace that has been achieved. Today Kokborok is recognised as a state language in Tripura along with Bengali. Tripura stands in the cusp of history. It can act as the lynchpin in relations with Bangladesh and thus a vanguard to India’s crucial Act East Policy. It has its issues in terms of demographic conflicts. But as its own chequered history would show us, peace is achievable with the right imaginative solutions.
(The author is a keen follower of NorthEast India. He has a special interest in ethnic contentions and its multifarious dimensions)