Assamese, By Definition

An exercise to define who is a native can open a Pandora’s Box in a state inimical to ‘immigrants’

- Sadiq Naqvi

LAST month, Assam minister Himanta Biswa Sarma set the cat among the pigeons when he quoted the Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind as claiming that the original inhabitants of the state were Dravidians who were driven out of the state by “Tibeto-Burman people and Mongolian tribes”. The Jamiat’s claim implies that the Ahoms and the Bodo-Kacharis—among the earliest settlers in the Brahmaputra Valley—were “migrants”. In a state where “identity” dominates the political discourse and the long-running indigenous-vs-migrant battle rages on, the theory is outrageous for most people of Assam; the claim strikes at the very root of Assamese identity, shaped primarily by 600 years of Ahom rule.

Yet, the question remains: Who is an Assamese? Or an Oxomiya, as the Assamese word goes. A panel appointed by the home ministry is likely to give an answer when it submits its recommendations to the Centre by mid-February. Defining an “Assamese” will also set the stage for implementing a vital clause of the 1985 Assam Accord—one that will grant constitutional safeguards for Assamese language and culture, but more importantly, ensure land rights for those identified as natives of the state.