The recent delimitation issue in Assam has sparked widespread discontent and protests. Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma has been accused of engaging in divisive political tactics – allegedly fuelled by Badruddin Ajmal of AIUDF. In this context, Dr Hiren Gohain, a well-known social scientist and prominent voice in Assam, has been targeted, not only by the CM but also by his Cabinet colleague, Piyush Hazarika. In a recent interview, the CM stated that the people of Assam should not pay attention to Gohain and that when he says white, people should understand it as black.

In an effort to gain a better understanding of the situation, NewsClick spoke to Gohain at his residence in Guwahati and discussed various aspects of the delimitation draft, the position of the All Assam Students’ Union (AASU), the BJP-RSS agenda, and its relation to the Assam Movement. Edited excerpts:

Sandipan Talukdar: After the delimitation draft publication, there were political controversies surrounding the Gogois, followed by Badaruddin Ajmal’s ambiguous comments against the Uniform Civil Code. On the same day, Himanta Biswa Sarma made remarks about the ‘Miya’ community, referring to East Bengal-origin Muslims. Do you think they both are equally communal?

Hiren Gohain: Both of them seem to be engaged in some pre-arranged exchange of repartees and retorts. They are very shrewd politicians and their politics is devoid of any ideology or any serious political concern. This is simply power play in the most naked sense. And therefore, in order to ensure their success in the election, both of them seem to be engaged in such repartees, often [painted] with communal colour.

Sarma seems to be using a kind of murderous rhetoric against the Miyas or immigrant Muslims. On the other hand, Ajmal, while he is not directly attacking the Assamese, has repeatedly insulted the Hindus and also from time to time belittled the Assamese people. So, the idea seems to be to provoke communal sentiments in both camps, though not directly. This seems to be the game they are playing. Their immediate concern is simply to retain political power, nothing else. And these (remarks) are just the froth on the surface.

ST: Congress seems to be reacting more vocally to AIUDF and Ajmal, probably with an eye on the Dhubri Lok Sabha seat (many see Ajaml’s position weakened) hoping to bank on Muslim votes. Also, three FIRs have been lodged as of now—in Nagaon by a minority organisation (Sanghyaloghu Sangram Parishad), by Ajit Bhuyan at Dispur and by CPI(M) at Latasil. Only CPI(M)’s FIR is against Himanta and Ajmal, the other two are only against Himanta. How do you see Congress’s positioning?

HG: I don’t think that Congress has reflected deeply on the implications of their stand. It is possible that they are hopeful of seizing the Dhubri constituency from Ajmal, but they have not given much thought to it. As we already know that the appeal of the Congress among the minority community is still quite strong, though in some pockets Ajmal has a stronger pool. I don’t think Congress has reflected very deeply on the matter, and the same can be said about Ajit Bhuyan and Sankhyalaghu Sangram Parishad (SSP).

It’s not that Bhuyan is not against Ajmal; he has spoken several times against him. And the SSP may be followers of Ajmal or may not be—I don’t really know.  In Nagaon, there are large pockets where Ajmal is not a factor. Because, as you know, one faction of the Jamiat Ulama I Hind (in Assam) is led by Ajmal and the other by Arshad Madani. The general secretary of Jamiat, Qasimi is from Nagaon district, and they are not in agreement with Ajmal at all.

ST: Come to AASU, which led the Assam movement. Its main point is implementation of the Assam Accord. They have always advocated Article 6 of the Accord as a shield to protect the indigenous people. They are clearly supporting BJP, at least on the delimitation draft. Does this indicate the merging of Assamese nationalism with BJP-RSS’s Hindu nationalism?

HG: I would say that by reducing or diminishing the emphasis on the anti-CAA (Citizenship Amendment Act) movement, they (AASU) had already indicated larger support for the BJP government and the RSS’s agenda. Even their long-term advisor, Basanta Deka, is dismayed by this. He has accused AASU’s Samujjal Bhattacharya and his followers of directly implementing the RSS agenda in Assam. So, I don’t think that it is a later thought, it was implicit in their earlier stand also. Now, it has come out into the open.

ST: You witnessed the Assam Movement closely and faced violent attacks due to your critical stance. However, Assamese nationalism is not solely defined by the Assam Movement. The BJP-RSS has attempted to associate it with their form of Hindu nationalism. During the anti-CAA movement, it was mostly Assamese nationalism, rather than anti-immigrant or Muslim sentiment. Do you see Assamese nationalism at crossroads, with AASU on BJP’s side and AGP (Asom Gana Parishad) already in their fold?

HG: I think you have put the matter quite forcefully and with some precision. But I would say that the AASU leadership has entered a charmed circle from which they cannot come out now. It will be very difficult for them to denounce their leaning toward the RSS agenda though they never explicitly said so.

You said that the Assam Movement was not simply based on the immigrant Muslim question, but I would ask you to recall that from the beginning, they were identified as the ‘enemy’ or illegal infiltrators, and so on and so forth. The RSS entered or infiltrated into the Assam movement and gave it a different and damaging turn. The earlier vague idealism now gave way to a very precise and dangerous road, a dangerous shape, and a dangerous form.

We found many people who were sympathetic to the immigrants joining the anti-CAA movement. Yes, it was Assamese nationalism rather than any anti-infiltrator or anti-immigrant sentiment. And it was our hope that the positive elements of the movement can be still put to some use. But AASU has now openly dissociated itself from this larger goal and it is concerned, like RSS and BJP, with only immigrant Muslims. They are showing their true colours now. As I said, even Basanta Deka, the long-term advisor of AASU, a confidante, has spoken out against it.

So, I think that the long journey of the RSS into the Assamese mind is entering a kind of final stage when they can turn Assamese nationalism entirely into a form of Hindu nationalism. And this is the agenda of the BJP-RSS. They want to turn every local conflict into a broad pattern of Hindus versus minorities. I believe this is happening in Manipur also. This is the kind of game they are playing and it’s a strategic game and I think AASU is helplessly embroiled in this.

ST: Do you believe the concept of Assamese nationalism is likely to align with the direction desired by RSS?

HG: No, no. Some other people may still take it up, but AASU has departed from this path, and it is no longer much concerned about Assamese nationalism. From the beginning, AASU has been ignoring the other aspects of national security, like development and so on. They have concentrated wholly on infiltrators and immigrants. That shows their idea of nationalism has a particular character.

ST: Himanta Biswa Sarma and Pijush Hazarika have made comments about you. Sarma said Dr Gohain keeps changing his political position. You were a staunch opponent of the Assam Movement. Yet, during the NRC chapter and CAA, you supported the NRC (National Register of Citizens. Some people claim that Dr Gohain has shifted from his earlier position. Your comments?

HG:  It is a fact that while I was shocked and reacted violently against the barbarities perpetrated by the (Assam) movement, especially by the hidden RSS elements in the movement, I later came into contact with the masses who took part in the movement. And I began to feel that my view has not been complete; in some respects, it was a rather partial view, though not incorrect.

The fascistic barbarity that they committed and the intolerance they showed were simply unacceptable. But the common people were inspired by something else. They had the sentiment that Assam had to be saved; they don’t think very clearly and they have been often misled. But they feel that Assam has received short shrift from the Centre. So, they joined the movement with hope and believed it would open a new chapter in the life of Assam, where driving away the migrant Muslims would be only a part.  

But the people have been betrayed, they did not realise that infiltration was the sole issue as far as the leadership was concerned. Not all the leaders, but some powerful leaders. And it is they who captured power. Even Prafulla Mahanta changed his mind a little, he became dependent on immigrant votes also at some point.

So, considering all these factors, I believe that one should not belittle or demean the patriotic sentiments of the Assamese people but also deplore and work against RSS’s agenda of demonising Muslims and dividing society.

ST: How do you see the delimitation draft?

HG:  I have certain questions regarding it, though I haven’t studied it closely. All over Assam, in almost every locality, there is discontent and protest against delimitation. Why? There must be some reason, and it has come to light that the delimitation appears to be completely mechanical and arbitrary, like ceasing one part here and joining it to another part – changing the entire character of the constituency. Delimitation can’t mean this kind of thing, fixing the constituencies anew, as if they have started the whole thing from the beginning. This is not possible because once certain things take shape, you cannot arbitrarily change them. You can make minor changes, add something here, or drop something there. It is unethical and illegal to go about arbitrarily joining one part to another, creating entirely new constituencies, and sometimes dropping the old ones. So, this appears to be very mechanical and dangerous. It is quite possible, in fact, there is a 99% possibility that the whole thing has been managed, keeping in mind the future success of the BJP.

This is what they mean when they say they are going to defend the indigenous people. By indigenous, they mean Hindus and by Hindus, they mean BJP. So, I think there was some secret understanding of the committee with the government.