By Bhogtoram Mawroh
The invitation of Himanta Biswa Sarma, Chief Minister of Assam, to the recently concluded Behdeinkhlam festival has left a bad taste in the mouth for five reasons, viz., Thal Shadap, Sik Talang, Chirup Sumer, Tal Nartiang, and Nikhasi Dhar. These are the names of the Khasis who were killed by Assam Police and Assam Forest Guards when they entered Meghalaya and, according to Conrad Sangma, the Chief Minister of the state, “resorted to unprovoked firing.” An inquiry committee was promptly instituted, but to date no one has been prosecuted, and it appears unlikely that anyone will eventually be punished. These names will be added to the list of Khasis killed by Assam security forces who will never get justice, i.e., Columbus Hujon, Charles Lyngkhoi, Dennis Nonsiej, and Ekros Rani from Langpih. The police force in Assam operates under the Department of Home Affairs and is led directly by the Chief Minister. So, final accountability falls on Himanta Biswa Sarma not just because he is the Chief Minister of the state, but because he is directly in charge of the department that committed these killings.
Just a month ago, Khasi farmers in Lapangap were prevented from working in their fields. Both these incidents happened in Jaintia Hills, and Sein Raij is supposed to represent the Khasis in this district, i.e., the Pnar, who have continued to follow the traditional faith. These are Pnars who were harassed and killed. What must the inhabitants of Mukroh and Lapangap be thinking when they see Himanta Biswa Sarma invited and felicitated as a chief guest?
Around the same time, when Himanta Biswa Sarma was the chief guest, his Border Protection and Development Minister, Atul Bora, told the state Assembly that Meghalaya occupies 3,441.86 hectares of Assam land across five districts—Kamrup, Goalpara, Cachar, South Salmara-Mankachar, and West Karbi Anglong. Much of this land is in West Jaintia Hills. So, Assam is making it very clear that it has no intention of recognizing the rightful claim of the Khasis to their ancestral territory, and it is also looking to encroach on more of their land. What kind of message is Sein Raij sending to the people living in these border areas by inviting the head of the state whose government has publicly stated that it will claim more of the Khasis’ ancestral land? Sein Raij might very well claim that this is a cultural festival and that it has nothing to do with politics. But inviting a political leader is a political act, especially when that individual is the Chief Minister of a state currently laying claim to their ancestral lands.
Meanwhile, while Sein Raij is pleased to have invited a highly distinguished guest, Khasis in Assam continue to live under difficult conditions. Recently, a group representing the Khasis from Assam sent a letter to Conrad Sangma asking for his support on issues relating to identity, education, cultural preservation, and socio-economic development. I know this group personally and have met them in the past. The road in their area is non-existent, and it is clear that they have been kept in a state of deprivation for a long time. These Khasis are Pnar speakers, and many of them still practice their indigenous faith. So, if these areas had been under Meghalaya, many of them would be members of Sein Raij and possibly taking part in the Behdeinkhlam festival in Jowai. What must these people be thinking when they see Sein Raij cozying up to the Chief Minister of the state that has kept them deprived for so long?
What exactly is happening in Assam that makes Sein Raij believe that Himanta Biswa Sarma has the best interests of the indigenous peoples? In Karbi Anglong, where much of the border conflict, particularly with the Pnar, is located, the Karbi have been demanding the eviction of illegal settlers from their territory. A Karbi was even killed during the agitation, but those illegal settlers have still not been evicted. In fact, they became so emboldened that they started shouting, “Karbi, go back to China.” Similar slogans were raised against the Assamese in Guwahati, where non-Assamese groups chanted, “Assamese, go back.” So, what was the repercussion for insulting the ‘sons of the soil’?
On 6 July 2026, Hindi was officially introduced as the fourth official language of the Assam Legislative Assembly, alongside Assamese, English, and Bodo. Why was Karbi not accorded official recognition instead, given that the original owners of Guwahati—the very site where the slogans were raised—are the Karbi? This claim was made by Ranoj Pegu, Assam’s Education Minister, during the oath-taking ceremony of the Karbi Welfare Autonomous Council. Ranoj Pegu himself belongs to the Mising (or Miri) community, which played a very important role in the evolution and development of Assamese culture and history.
Srimanta Sankardev was a 15th–16th century Assamese social-religious reformer and a key figure in the cultural and religious history of the Bhakti movement in Assam. He spearheaded the Neo-Vaishnavite movement in Assam, and the Namghars that have become an integral part of Assamese culture were established by him. It was in Majuli, the stronghold of the Mising community, that Sankardev’s movement gained many followers and strength. However, during a conversation at a workshop on Indigenous Peoples’ rights in India, Pranab Doley, a Mising indigenous rights activist and politician, informed me that the community has long been struggling for inclusion under the Sixth Schedule as a means of more effectively protecting its land, territory, and cultural heritage. Doley himself was recently arrested while protesting against the construction of luxury hotels in Kaziranga which would have led to the displacement of indigenous peoples. Other indigenous peoples in Assam also share a similar history of struggle for their rights.
One is well aware of the Bodos’ struggle for a homeland. For a long time, the demand of the All Bodo Students Union (ABSU) was to “Divide Assam 50/50” and carve out a separate state on the northern bank of the Brahmaputra River. The Bodos, as part of the larger Kok-Borok linguistic group, which includes the Bodo, Dimasa, Garo, Tiwa, Hajong, Rabha, Koch, and Tripuri, are the second oldest group in the North East after the Khasi and the oldest in the Brahmaputra Valley. Before the arrival of the Ahoms, they had many kingdoms in the Brahmaputra Valley, including the Kachari Kingdom and the Koch Kingdom, which extended into Bengal. In fact, North Bengal should have been part of Assam, and there are colonial documents about Darjeeling mentioning that the Koch had a powerful kingdom along the Terai belt, i.e., in the foothills
However, the Bodos had to wage a bloody insurgency to secure the Bodo Accord, which set up the Bodoland Territorial Council. One of the most violent episodes was the 2008 bomb blasts in Assam, which killed 88 people and was perpetrated by the National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB). Violence has subsided now, but in 2022 the “Divide Assam 50:50” slogan resurfaced again in the BTAD (Bodoland Territorial Area Districts). The Karbi and the Dimasa have also been demanding the implementation of Article 244(A) to create an “autonomous state” within Assam to protect their territory and identity. The demand was also raised by Tuliram Ronghang, Chief Executive Member (CEM) of the Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council (KAAC), in the Assam Assembly only a month ago. More recently, Daniel Langthasa, the NPP candidate from Haflong, revealed that there have been demands to bifurcate Dima Hasao into two separate districts—one for the Dimasa and another for the non-Dimasa communities. Such a proposal is akin to dividing the areas under the Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council (KHADC) and the Jaintia Hills Autonomous District Council (JHADC) into Khasi and non-Khasi administrative units to be governed separately.
Putting all this into context, and considering what is transpiring along the border, especially in West Jaintia Hills, it is perplexing and frustrating that Sein Raij decided to invite Himanta Biswa Sarma as the chief guest to a very important festival of the Pnar, when the Pnar are the ones who are suffering the most from the conflict. They will claim that it was not about politics and that, as an autonomous body, they have the right to invite anyone they see fit. But the kind of message it has sent to those living along the border and elsewhere in the state is deeply troubling. As an important socio-cultural organization, they needed to do better, and sadly they failed in this.
(The views expressed in the article are those of the author and do not reflect in any way his affiliation to any organisation or institution)
