by Kishalay Bhattacharjee
“Public memory is short” is a bit of a cliché. As is “the media
suffers from selective amnesia”. But clichés don’t necessarily mean they
are irrelevant or incorrect. Each year, the Mumbai blasts anniversary
is covered with rants from Mumbaikars and Bollywood celebrities. The
Uphaar theatre tragedy is remembered every year. Rightly so. Each of
these tragedies should be remembered till there is a sense of justice
for the victims. But I have never been able to comprehend, leave alone
explain, the methodology used to select the “horrific” events.
Let me try and explain where I am coming from? It has been exactly a
year since the violence in Assam in which more than 100 people were
killed and over 2.5 lakh people were displaced. Some put the figure at
five lakh. The violence went on as late as October. Given the skewed
coverage of Assam otherwise, it was more than adequately covered by
national and international media. But a year later not one publication
or television channel I have read or watched, recalls what happened in
Kokrajhar and adjoining districts. 3500 people are still living in
refugee camps. Three persons are still reported missing. An undocumented
but significant number of students were forced to drop out and have
failed to get readmission.
The violence erupted on July 19, 2012 – but the simmering tension
between the Bengali-speaking Muslims and Bodo tribals was palpable for a
long time. Historically, land has been at the heart of this conflict
and some of the country’s worst ethnic cleansing riots have been staged
in these plains. 2012, however, was different. Social media fuelled by
other factors took the tension far beyond the geography of Lower Assam
into cities in “mainland” India. Thousands of people studying or working
in cities like Pune and Bangalore and Mumbai who looked anything
remotely like tribals of northeast India had to flee in fear of a
backlash. Doctored videos of torture of Rohingiya Muslims went viral and
violent protests were held even in cities like Mumbai. National
leaders claiming to represent Muslims started pouring in, countered
equally by self-styled “Hindu nationalists”. The Prime Minister was also
there. So was Rahul Gandhi (who allegedly sulked after the pilot of the
chopper he was travelling in refused to fly him back due to bad
weather).
Analytically the conflict may have been because of assimilation,
identity, language, territory and autonomy but the core problem has been
and continues to be the denial of justice to victims and a flawed
policy of the Indian government regarding surrender of armed militants.
The availability of weapons and blanket amnesty to people who have
murdered hundreds have allowed a culture of lawlessness in which even
law enforcing agencies find it difficult to operate. In one year this
stretch of land has witnessed more tension than reconciliation. One of
the armed underground leaders was released from jail like several of his
colleagues, one of whom was responsible for the worst terrorist attack
in Assam which killed 100 people and injured 700 in one day. This attack
was just 20 days before Mumbai was attacked in 2008.
While more actors have been added to the narrative, mistrust has only
deepened and the undercurrent of discontent runs strong. But for most
of the media this is a non-story which doesn’t merit coverage. In
postscript I am reminded of a prophetic dispatch by journalist M S
Prabhakara in 1974 in The Economic and Political Weekly where he
said that “suspension of agitation by Bodo Sahitya Sabha in November
1974 relaxed some tension but this may not mean an end to the continuing
assertion of sub regional nationalisms in Assam”. Such a dispatch would
fail to meet the standards set by today’s news requirements.
