[Mahendra Chakma]
On 16 April, 2024, it was a pleasant surprise to receive a call from Prof Nani Bath, stating that he was organising a book launch-cum-seminar on finding a solution to the long-pending Chakma-Hajong issue, and asking me whether I would like to participate in that seminar. After a brief exchange of views on the objective, venue and date and a few other clarifying questions about the seminar, I accepted and confirmed my participation.
Knowing fully well that the issue is both emotive and highly sensitive, I was hopeful and yet apprehensive that the seminar might be targeted by a few who felt left out or have vested interests deeply entrenched at stake.
Universities as centres of learning have always played a very important role in solving complex societal problem – be it in the field of science, technology, medicine, or polity. The Oxford University working with the Serum Institute of India to develop Covishield vaccine is a recent example. It was only befitting that Rajiv Gandhi University, led by Prof Bath, took up the cudgels to search for a democratic solution to end the Chakma-Hajong imbroglio.
Social activist and founder chairperson of the Arunachal Pradesh State Commission for Women Jarjum Ete, and AP State Human Rights Commission member Bamang Tago are well-respected and have fan following not only in the state but across the country. For me, to be with them in a panel would have been an honour for us Chakmas and Hajongs and a very humbling experience personally. To be able to present our pain and suffering as a speaker would have been an amazing opportunity.
Prof Bath stands at a vantage position, from where he has both an outsider and insider view of the Chakma-Hajong problem and as an organic intellectual who has already been an AAPSU member and later an adviser to the student body. He understands both the nativist side of the story as well as those of the Chakmas and Hajongs. He has thoroughly researched, travelled far and wide in the remotest corners of Chakma habitats and lived with them like an anthropologist gaining invaluable firsthand knowledge and experience of their culture and society.
Going beyond the superficial surface, Prof Bath’s book provides a comprehensive view of the Chakma and Hajong population, providing facts and figures from reliable sources and chronicling the journey of the Chakma refugees from camp to camp, based on a diary maintained by one Pradeep Kumar Chakma, providing deep insights hitherto unknown. The fact that the Chakmas were escorted by the security personnel during their transit, for example, was a revelation to many.
Deploying meticulous academic research methods and a compassionate narrative, Prof Bath unveils the harrowing journey of the Chakmas and Hajongs, whose quest for refuge and sanctuary in India was met with initial euphoria and acceptance but later met with resistance, hostility and neglect. No wonder, a cursory reading of the book shows the breadth and depth of his research – well balanced, objective and data-based that addresses various dimensions of the issue from both sides of the spectrum.
If I recall correctly, Chief Minister Pema Khandu had likened the Chakma-Hajong issue to cancer in October 2017, signifying that the issue, if not nipped in the bud, has the potential to have disastrous consequences and could engulf the entire state. Coming from the chief of the state, this must have come after fully analysing the failed official initiatives in the past through the Setong Sena Committee, the joint high-power committee, et al. Nor were there any takers to the limited citizenship concept floated by the government.
The presence of the Chakma and Hajong people in Arunachal Pradesh dates back to the 1960s, when they were settled and rehabilitated in the erstwhile NEFA region by the government of India. Since then, their integration into the social fabric of the state has been fraught with challenges, marked by initial euphoria, which was short-lived and later met with resistance, suspicion, and a sense of displacement among certain sections of the indigenous population tacitly supported by the state. This has given rise to a protracted legal battle and a deep-seated animosity that continues to fester to this day.
Yet, despite the complexities and the scars of the past, we must not lose sight of our shared humanity. We must recognise that at the heart of this issue lies the fundamental rights and dignity of the Chakma and Hajong communities – rights that are enshrined in the very fabric of our democratic ethos. To deny them these rights is to betray the very principles that define us as a society.
We cannot turn a blind eye to the injustices faced by these communities – the denial of full-fledged fundamental rights, the lack of access to basic amenities, MGNREGA and the perpetual cycle of discrimination they face in the name of citizenship. Their suffering is not just a historical footnote; it is a living reality that demands our attention and empathy.
In our quest for a solution, we must be guided by a spirit of inclusivity, empathy, and pragmatism. We must acknowledge the grievances and concerns of all stakeholders, while also upholding the principles of justice and equality. To this end, I propose that we explore a range of options, each with its own merits and challenges.
One such option is cultural assimilation and integration with the local communities by fostering meaningful interactions, promoting cross-cultural understanding, and facilitating social integration. I am told that in Papum Pare alone we have close to 39 cases of such inter-tribe marriages, thus forging further bonding between the Chakmas and the Nyishi tribe. This approach recognises the richness of our diversity and seeks to build solidarity based on shared values and experiences. It encourages us to see beyond the superficial differences that divide us and embrace the common humanity that unites us all. Looking back in time, I doubt if adequate measures were taken by the state to allow for assimilation of the translocated refugees with the host communities. It takes some time for two individuals to mingle, and that is truer when you have communities transplanted from one place to another. This can happen only if the state government remains impartial and treats everyone equally and political leaders refrain from making unwarranted statements.
I honestly don’t blame the innocent indigenous people and the AAPSU members who raise their voices for the rights of the indigenous people. But the notion that Chakmas and Hajongs are a threat to Arunachal is misconceived. Inflated population figures, misleading political statements, rumour mongering, stereotyping and judicial cacophony driven by selfish, corrupt, political or financial motives are the root causes and real threat to Arunachal. With the advent of social media and instant messaging apps, the threat to genuine and noble initiatives like the one at RGU has multiplied manifold as the fringe elements tend to take centrestage and dominate the social space with disinformation, innuendos and mis-propaganda to stall the event.
In our pursuit of a just and equitable resolution to the Chakma-Hajong issue in Arunachal, it is imperative that we address the genuine demand for political recognition and scheduled tribe (ST) status for these communities – a demand rooted in principles of fairness, equality, and social justice.
The Chakma and Hajong communities, while facing discrimination and marginalisation in Arunachal, are recognised as STs in Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Tripura and West Bengal. This recognition is not arbitrary; it is based on historical, cultural, and socioeconomic factors that distinguish these communities from mainstream society. As scheduled tribes, they are entitled to certain constitutional safeguards and affirmative action measures aimed at uplifting their socioeconomic status and preserving their distinct identity and way of life.
However, the denial of ST status to the Chakma and Hajong communities in Arunachal represents a glaring inconsistency – a denial of their rightful place within the framework of constitutional protections afforded to indigenous and marginalised communities. It perpetuates a system of inequality and injustice that undermines the very principles of democracy and inclusivity that we strive to uphold.
Moreover, extending ST status to the Chakma and Hajong communities in Arunachal is consistent with the spirit of inclusivity and social cohesion that lies at the heart of our constitutional values. It sends a powerful message of solidarity and acceptance – a message that says that we are committed to building a society where all individuals, regardless of their background or ethnicity, have equal rights and opportunities to thrive.
Furthermore, it is important to recognise that the demand for ST status for the Chakma and Hajong communities is not a zero-sum game. Inclusion of a separate plain tribe category for Chakmas and Hajongs proportionate to their population or such arrangement will not diminish the rights or privileges of other indigenous communities in Arunachal. Rather, it will be an acknowledgement of the unique historical and socio-cultural context of these communities and a step towards rectifying historical injustices and inequalities perpetrated during the last 60 years.
Therefore, granting ST status to the Chakma and Hajong communities in Arunachal is not only a matter of legal recognition; it is a matter of moral imperative. It is about affirming the principles of justice, equality, and dignity for all members of our society. It is about building a future where every individual, regardless of their background or ethnicity, can live with pride, dignity, and respect.
Another option worth considering is the establishment of a separate territorial Chakma Hajong Council within the framework of the Indian Constitution. This would provide the Chakma and Hajong communities with a platform for self-governance, and autonomy over their affairs, while also ensuring their continued participation in the larger Indian state. Such a council could be empowered to make decisions on issues relevant to the Chakma-Hajong people, including land rights, education, healthcare, and economic development. This approach respects the unique identity and aspirations of the Chakma-Hajong communities, while also safeguarding the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Arunachal.
Additionally, we must recognise the need for targeted interventions to address the socioeconomic disparities that have aggravated tensions between the Chakma-Hajong communities and the indigenous population. This includes investing in education, healthcare, infrastructure, and livelihood opportunities in areas with significant Chakma-Hajong populations. By addressing the root causes of marginalisation and inequality, we can help foster a more inclusive and equitable society for all.
Furthermore, we must prioritise dialogue and reconciliation as the cornerstone of our approach to resolving this issue. We must create platforms for constructive engagement and meaningful dialogue between the Chakma-Hajong communities, the indigenous population, civil society organisations, and government authorities. Through dialogue we can build trust, foster understanding, and identify common ground for collaboration and peaceful coexistence.
However, it is essential to acknowledge that there are no easy solutions to the Chakma-Hajong issue. It is a complex and multifaceted challenge that requires patience, perseverance, and a willingness to confront difficult truths. There are groups with vested interests also, operating on both sides, who are there to thwart any positive initiative taken by intellectuals like Prof Bath. But it is also an opportunity – a chance for us to demonstrate our commitment to justice, equality, and the rule of law. It is an opportunity for us to reaffirm our values as a society and to build a future where all the 100+ tribes/sub-tribes and other residents of Arunachal can live in peace and harmony, regardless of their ethnic or cultural background.
I am of the firm belief that there’s no problem in the world that cannot be solved amicably through mutual understanding, dialogue, and discussion. But for that to happen, we need to keep an open mind, be honest with ourselves and sit across the table to discuss outstanding issues, howsoever uncomfortable or bitter.
In conclusion, let us bury the past and reaffirm our hope for the future and move forward unfazed. I see Prof Nani Bath’s book as the guiding light in search of that elusive solution. All right thinking, liberal and progressive minds must use this authoritative text as a reference and recognise its potential to inspire action and ignite change. India to India: Chakmas and Hajongs of Arunachal Pradesh is more than just a book; it’s a call to conscience – a reminder that our collective humanity is measured by how we treat the most vulnerable among us. Let us heed this call and work towards a future where the rights and dignity of all, including the indigenous population, are upheld.
Let us take this moment to transcend the divisions that have plagued us for too long. Let us come together as constituent members of one Arunachal community, as a state, and as a nation to find common ground and forge a path forward with an open and honest mind – a path defined by compassion, understanding, and a shared commitment to a better future for all. (The writer is the president of the Chakma Rights and Development Organisation, and was invited as a panel speaker. Views expressed are personal.)
