An essay by Prajnalankar Bhikkhu titled ‘Empowering the Jumma Indigenous people within the framework of the CHT Accord’ is the latest in a series of articles and conference papers sponsored by India’s foreign intelligence agency RAW to disseminate views on the CHT that is designed to undermine the territorial integrity of Bangladesh. My opinion concerning the involvement of RAW in this particular instance is primarily based on the repetitive use of technical terms and factual errors that appear as a common feature in all such writings.

In an effort to add credence to the perspective advanced by Bhikkhu we are afforded a short academic lecture on the meaning of the word ‘empowerment’ in its several variant uses related to politics, economics and sociological development. In some inexplicable way this is meant to convince the reader of the inherent goodness of the CHT Accord in bringing peace to the region and its inhabitants. According to Bhikkhu these inhabitants are the Jumma or indigenous peoples of the area but what he fails to mention is that both these terms are controversial and suspect and subject to challenge. Mr. Zainul Abedin in his several books on the CHT has shown that both these terms are contentious and inaccurate. In my recent book, ‘The India Doctrine’ I have provided a painstaking analysis of the genesis of these words in relation to the CHT and how they have become the vehicle of RAW’s policy to sow dissension within the CHT and to misinform foreign agencies about the actual ground realties and historical background to the conflict.

My research has shown that the word indigenous and Jumma that have been applied to all the 11 ethnic communities without discrimination is a historical fabrication with all these communities in fact being relative newcomers to the region. The original settlements in the CHT started with the Muslim traders of Arabic origin starting sometime in the 10^th century and then by Bengali settlers under the Bengal Sultanate and the Mughal Emperors from the 12^th – 18^th centuries. It was these Muslim inhabitants that predominated in the region and it was through the tolerant policies of their governments that the 11 ethnic communities found sanctuary and safety from oppressive authorities in their places of origin starting from the 17^th century onwards.

It was with the arrival of the British that a policy of discrimination against the Bengali Muslims was initiated with the introduction of the 1900 Regulations. During the 1970’s this policy became one of ethnic cleansing with the armed insurgency of the Chakma community supported by the Indian military and intelligence to forcibly remove the Bengali inhabitants from the area so that the CHT may eventually be annexed to India. It was due to this aggression against the Bengali inhabitants that the Bangladesh military occupied the area under President Ziaur Rahman and which continues to this day. Once it had been perceived in India that the insurgency had lost steam a peace accord was proposed to the then Awami League government to achieve Indian objectives by other means.

Bhikkhu claims that the CHT Accord was intended to empower the Jumma indigenous peoples and "non-indigenous permanent residents" through a decentralization of power but its unstated purpose has been to undermine Bangladesh sovereignty and control of the area. It is because the successor government in Bangladesh understood the adverse implications of the accord and respected the principle of the unity of the state enshrined in the country’s constitution (as well as in democracy and the rule of law) that it had been reluctant to implement all the provisions of the Accord. It is irrelevant to contend, as Bhikkhu does, that this is some concerted Islamization policy since the region has been under Muslim control and suzerainty for the greater part of 800 years.

The most disturbing element of Bhikkhu’s essay is his attempt to dehumanize the Muslim Bengali inhabitants of the CHT which is clearly a product of a mindset found prevalent within India’s governing elite, military, intelligence and security agencies and apparatus. This same policy has been adopted consistently in regard to India’s own Muslim minorities in Kashmir and Gujarat as well as with their scheduled castes and is similar in context to Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians and South Africa’s treatment of the native blacks under the former apartheid regimes. The victims in Bhikkhu’s story is more accurately, therefore, not the so-called indigenous communities but the majority Muslim Bengalis who have had to face discrimination and violence from the Chakma insurgents who have been aided by the Indian government and military in order that the region should secede and join with the Indian Union. It is through Bhikkhu’s disingenuous arguments that we may presume this is also his intention and aim when he makes the following spurious and opinionated comment,

“[The] policy thought out by the first Prime Minister of Bangladesh Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in the early 1970s and consistently executed by his two successive military regimes respectively headed by Major General Ziaur Rahman (1975-1981) and Lt. General Hussein Mohammad Ershad (1982-1990) seeks to integrate the indigenous peoples and their lands and resources with the mono-cultural Islamic State [9], Bangladesh, with force and other illegal means, such as forcible land confiscation and settlement of ethnic Bengali settlers from plain districts in the CHT, militarization and atrocities like rape, murder and religious persecution, and imposition of Islam and Bengali cultural values on the indigenous peoples.”

That the CHT has been integrated into East Pakistan/Bangladesh for the last 50 years and that the majority of acts of rape, murder and religious persecutions have been committed by the two opposing groups of the PCJSS and the UPDF against the members of the communities that they claim to represent. As for Bhikkhu’s later contentions of sponsored settlements by successive Bangladesh governments this may be viewed as a redress of the iniquities perpetrated under the 1900 Regulations which saw a sharp drop in Bengali inhabitants in the CHT. This policy would also be consistent with the constitution of Bangladesh which provides for freedom of movement within the territory of Bangladesh and as the CHT has been an integral part of the nation for several centuries (which was also recognized by the British during the partition talks of 1947) it is within the sovereignty of the nation to promote such settlements.

It is my contention that the 11 communities have lived peaceably under Muslim rule for at least 3 centuries and would have continued to do so had the Indian government and military not interfered in the region and fomented insurgent tendencies. If the CHT Accord is a solution to the CHT conflict then the Indian government should implement similar agreements with the almost 120 insurgent groups operating in the North East Indian States (i.e. the Seven Sisters) which have been subject to an insipid Indian imperialism since their amalgamation into the Indian Union as well as to human rights violations that far exceeds anything that has happened in the CHT. India should further remove all its military and intelligence personnel from these areas and repeal the half dozen or so draconian laws that have transformed the entire region into an ‘occupied territory’ under near martial law conditions.

LINKS –

The New Nation

News From Bangladesh

Beacon Forum