The question of Bangladeshi infiltration and citizenship in Assam has been the biggest socio -political issue for decades. Recently, Syeda Hameed, a social worker and member of the former Planning Commission, made a statement that “Bangladeshi is also a human being, they can live here.” This statement has once again scrapped the old wound. Let us tell you that his statement has not only brought political earthquake in the state but also tapped out a new debate in the cultural identity, population balance and historical struggles of Assam.
Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma directly attacked Syeda Hameed and described his statement as “trying to realize Jinnah’s dream”. Sarma said that this type of thinking is a direct threat to Assam’s identity and population structure. He reminded of the struggle of Lachit Barfukan and said that Assam is ready at all costs to protect its land and culture. At the same time, Assam Ethnic Council (AJP) and All Assam Students Union (AASU) also termed Syeda Hameed’s remarks as unacceptable and pointed to the sacrifices made during the Assam movement. According to him, this statement is neglected by the historical sensations of the state.
Also read this: Amit Shah Assam Visit | Home Minister Amit Shah will come to Assam on a two -day visit, take stock of BJP organization preparations
On the other hand, Congress leader Debrat Saikia connected the dispute with the policy failure of the central and state governments. He said that if the Prime Minister had taken concrete action to send Bangladeshis back as promised in 2014, Assam would not have been facing this crisis today. Meanwhile, the Organizing Committee Assam Citizen Conference (Ans) clarified that Syeda Hameed’s views were personal and the organization believes in the “sanctity of the Assam agreement”. He reiterated the demand for the identity and exile of all Bangladeshi migrants who came after 25 March 1971.
If we look at the historical background of the Assam Agreement, it comes to the fore that the issue of Bangladeshi migration in the state is deeply related to the 1971 war and subsequent situation. Let us remind you that the Assam movement (1979–1985) emerged on the same issue and eventually turned into the 1985 Assam Agreement. The agreement considered the date of 24 March 1971 to be the last limit of citizenship. But its implementation remained incomplete, due to which the dispute is still alive. Let us tell you that demographic changes, encroachments on land and erosion of cultural identity keep the Assamese society constantly restless.
If seen, Syeda Hameed’s argument seems to be inspired by the human view that every human has the right to live. But in the context of Assam, this idea collides with sensitive historical memories. Let us tell you that the Assamese society has fought to protect its existence and identity for decades. Along with this, the arrival of millions of refugees and illegal migrants has affected the population balance. This is the reason why the local public sees the statement like “to let Bangladeshis stay here” as an injury to their existence.
Let us also tell you that Syeda Hameed, giving another controversial statement, has described Assam as the land of demons and said that Muslims are being oppressed here. Syeda Hameed said that earlier in Assam used to say ‘Mian’ in a good sense, but now ‘Mian’ is like a abuse. Syeda Hameed said, “Assam was never so. Assam has become like a Frankstein, like a demon. It has become a dangerous place. I can just say that there is vengeance against Muslims. They used to say ‘Mian’ in a good sense but now ‘Mian’ is like a abuse.” Let us tell you that Syeda Hameed recently visited Assam with a delegation. The delegation included Harsha Mandar, Vajahat Habibulla, Fayaz Shaheen, Prashant Bhushan and Jawahar Sarkar. These people visited the Muslim areas vacated by the state government. Meanwhile, Syeda Hameed, while talking to the media, openly took the side of the Bangladeshis and asked, “What is wrong to be Bangladeshi? Bangladeshi is also a human being. Allah has created such a big earth. Bangladeshi can also live here. Bangladeshi is not snatching anyone’s rights. The government is saying that he is snatching the rights of others. It is harmful to others. Not for a person living somewhere, then why should he be brutally removed. “
However, the whole controversy shows that the issue of Bangladeshi migration in Assam is not just a question of citizenship or displacement, but it is a question of identity, security and political existence. On the one hand there are human rights and human sensations. On the other hand, there is a resolve to protect the historical agreement, population balance and regional identity. It is clear that any comment made on this subject has to be understood not only from emotional or humanitarian point of view, but with the political-cultural reality of Assam.