No Body`s People in No Body`s Land: CHAKMA Refugees from CHITAGANG HILL TRACTS

Indian Holocaust My Father`s Life and Time- One Hundred and NINETEEN

Palash Biswas

Search Results

Refugees Pushed Back

The BDR personnel picked the refugees left and right when they were disembarked from the motor launch. The plight of these Chakma refugees seems to be ...
www.angelfire.com/ab/jumma/refugee/refugeemr.html - Cached - Similar
[PDF]
FROM INTERNAL DISPLACEMENT TO REFUGEES: THE TRAUMA OF CHAKMAS IN ...

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
based The Statesman regularly highlighted the issue of the plight of Chakma refugees, ups and downs in the Indo-Bangladesh relations over the Chakma issue ...
www.idp.ntnu.no/Register/UpLoadFiles/Rajesh_Kharat_idp-ref.pdf - Similar
by RS Kharat - Related articles - All 2 versions
www.outlookindia.com | Alien Rumblings

The Supreme Court had even asked the Chakmas to apply for Indian citizenship, but most of the refugees are yet to get hold of the forms. The plight of the ...
www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?201765 - Cached - Similar
Refugees and Human Rights | Palash Speaks

Violation of human rights of the indigenous people of Chittagong hill tracts and the plight of Chakma refugees/Mrinal Kanti Chakma. 16. ...
blogs.ibibo.com/Baesekolkata/Tags/refugees - Cached - Similar

Global Politician - Chakma-Hajong Refugees and Their Rights

Chakma, Mrinal Kanti (2001), Violation of Human Rights of the Indigenous People of Chittagong Hill Tracts and the Plight of Chakma Refugees, in Roy, ...
www.globalpolitician.com/22651-refugees - Cached - Similar

Amida Trust Chakma News India

PLIGHT OF CHAKMA REFUGEES IN N.E. STATES OF INDIA. As I wrote you I paid a long visit to Arunachal, Tripura and few days in Guwahati. ...
www.amidatrust.com/chakma_i.html - Cached - Similar

Fundamentals of child rights: concepts, issues and challenges - Google Books Result

by Arvind Kumar - 2002 - Law - 593 pages
By the end of August 1994, 5000 Chakma refugees had been repatriated forcibly to ... The same is the plight of the Tamil refugee children who are camping in ...
books.google.co.in/books?isbn=8126110287...

Chiang Mai residents fed up with red-shirt mob - Nationmultimedia.com

Do not forget the plight of Chakma refugees. We have heard about the despair of Rohinghya refugees from Burma, but we must not forget the tragedy of Chakma, ...
www.nationmultimedia.com/search/read.php?newsid... - Cached - Similar

Stateless in South Asia: The Chakmas Between Bangladesh and India ...

While analyzing and emphasizing the current plight of the Chakmas in India as stateless refugees, it raises the concomitant question of what it takes to ...
www.amazon.ca/Stateless-South...Chakmas.../8132102363 - Cached - Similar

umesh bist

Story of the Chakmas - a sensitive rendering of the plight of the Chakma refugees . The programme deals with their traumatic exodus from Bangladesh, ...
umeshbist.tripod.com/ - Cached - Similar

[PDF]

FROM INTERNAL DISPLACEMENT TO REFUGEES: THE TRAUMA OF CHAKMAS IN ...

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
based The Statesman regularly highlighted the issue of the plight of Chakma refugees, ups and downs in the Indo-Bangladesh relations over the Chakma issue ...
www.idp.ntnu.no/Register/UpLoadFiles/Rajesh_Kharat_idp-ref.pdf - Similar
by RS Kharat - Related articles - All 2 versions

article.aspx?201765

Chakma people

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

The Chakmas
Total population


0.7 million
Regions with significant populations
Majority populations in Bangladesh and India In Bangladesh the Chakma's reside in the Chittagong Hill Tracts area. Mostly found in the following Indian states: Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh, Tripura
Languages
Changma or Chakma
Religion
Theravada Buddhism

The Chakmas (চাকমা or Chakma), also known as the Changma (চাংমা), are a community inhabiting the Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh and India. The Chakmas are the largest ethnic group in the Chittagong Hill Tracts, making up more than half the tribal population. A tribal group called Tangchangya (তঞ্চংগ্যা) are also considered to be a branch of the Chakma people. Both tribes speak the same language, have the same customs and culture, and profess the same religion, Theravada Buddhism.

[hide]

[edit] History

Ethnically, the Chakmas are Tibeto-Burman, and are thus closely related to tribes in the foothills of the Himalayas. Their ancestors came from the Magadha Kingdom (now Bihar, India) to settle in Arakan and most of them later moved to Bangladesh, settling in the Cox's Bazar District, the Korpos Mohol area, and areas of the present Mizoram. The Chakmas were historically the rulers of Chittagong Hill Tracts under the control of a king. Today, however, the power of the Chakma king, Raja Debashish Roy, is merely symbolic.

The Arakanese referred to the Chakmas as Saks or Theks. In 1546, when the king of Arakan, Meng Beng, was engaged in a battle with the Burmese, the Sak king appeared from the north and attacked Arakan, and occupied the Ramu of Cox's Bazar.^[1]

Diego de Astor, a Portuguese, drew a map of Bengal, which was published as Descripção do Reino de Bengalla in the book Quarta decada da asia(Fourth decade of Asia) by João de Barros in 1615.^[2] The map shows a place called "Chacomas" on the eastern bank of the river Karnaphuli, suggesting that this is where the Chakmas used to live at that time. The Arakan king Meng Rajagri Salim Shah (1593-1612) conquered this land, and in a 1607 letter to a Portuguese merchant, Philip de Brito Nicote addressed himself as the highest and most powerful king of Arakan, of Chacomas and of Bengal.^[3]

Defeated by the Arakanese, the Chakmas entered the present Chittagong Hill Tracts and made Alekyangdong, present-day Alikadam, their capital. From Alekyangdong they went north and settled in the present-day Rangunia , Rauzan, and Fatikchari upazillas of Chittagong District.

In 1666, Shaista Khan, who was then Mughal Governor of Bengal, defeated the Arakanese, conquered Chittagong, and renamed it Islamabad.^[4] However, in the early days the Mughal supremacy was confined only to the plain areas of chittagong, and the Chakmas remained practically unaffected. After a few years, when a dispute developed between the Mughals and the Chakmas, the Mughals demanded tribute from the Chakmas for trading with Chittagong^[5].

In 1713, peace was established, and soon a stable relationship developed between the Chakmas and the Mughals; the latter never demanded complete subjugation from the former. The Mughals also rewarded the Chakma king Sukdev, who established a new capital in his own name, in an area is still known as Sukbilash . There are still ruins of the royal palace & other establishments. Subsequently the capital was shifted to Rajanagar.

[edit] The East India Company Period

Three years after the Battle of Plassey, Mir Qasim the new Nawab of Murshidabad rewarded the British East India Company with Chittagong, Burdwan and Midnapur. On 5 January 1761 the company representative Harry Verlest took over charges of Chittagong from Subedar Mohammad Reza Khan. But the Chakma king Sher Doulat Khan who was practically independent through nominally paid tribute to the Mughals, didn't accept the hegemony of the Company and their demand of taxes at enhanced rate. A protracted war started and it continued up to 1787. The East India Company launched four offensives against the Chakmas in 1770, 1780, 1782 and 1785. In 1785 the Company started peace negotiations with the then Chakma king Jan Box Khan, son of Sher Doulat Khan. Later in 1787 the king accepted the sovereignity of the Company and agreed to pay 500 maunds of cotton annually. The peace agreement or treaty was signed at Kolkata ^[6].

The main provisions of the treaty between the Governor General Lord Cornwallis and the Chakma king were as following

The East India Company recognised Jan Box Khan as the Raja of the Chakmas
It was agreed that the collection of revenue was the responsibility of the Raja
The British Government would preserve the tribal autonomy and migration from the plains would be restricted
Jan Box Khan was bound by the treaty to maintain peace in his territory.
British troops would remain in the Chakma territory not to terrify the Chakmas but to protect the land from the inroads of the fierce tribes.^[7]

In 1829, Halhed then Commissioner of Chittagong reaffirmed that

The hill tribes were not British subjects but merely tributaries and we recognized no right on our part to interfere with their internal arrangrements. The near neighbourhood of a powerful & stable government naturally brought the Chief by degree under control and every leading chief paid to the Chittagong collector a certain tribute or yearly gifts. These sums were at first fluctuating in amount but gradually were brought to specific and fixed limit, eventually taking the shape not as tribute but as revenue to the state

.^[8]

[edit] Modern time

Like in India, the Chakmas have lived in the modern state of Bangladesh much before it gained its independence. However, recent migrations of ethnic Bengalis into traditionally Chakma regions of Bangladesh have raised tensions in the Chittagong Hill Tracts. Successive governments have dealt forcefully with Chakma uprisings, and finally ended the conflict with The 1997 Peace Treaty. The only seat of political power and identity is the "Chakma Autonomous District Counsil" in India, though it covers only 35% of the Chakmas living in Mizoram State in India.

[edit] Religion

The vast majority of the Chakma are followers of Theravada Buddhism, a religion that they have been practising for centuries. Of late, reports surfaced that several foreign and local missionaries have been trying to convert the Chakmas in to Christianity without success^{[citation needed]}. This created resentment and upset among some Chakmas.^[9]^[10]

[edit] Language

Main Article Chakma language.

Originally speaking a language belonging to the Tibeto-Burman family, some of the Chakmas have been influenced by neighboring Chittagonian, an Eastern Indo-Aryan language closely related to Bengali. Many linguists now consider the modern Chakma language (known as Changma Vaj or Changma Kodha) part of the Southeastern Bengali branch of Eastern Indo-Aryan language. Changma Vaj is written in its own script, known as Ojhopath.Chakma language is written in an alphabet which allowing for its cursive form, is almost identical with the Khmer character, which was formerly in use in Cambodia, Laos, Siam and southern parts of Burma.

[edit] Culture

The Chakma's are a people with their own culture, folklore, literature,traditions. The Chakma women wear an ankle length cloth around the waist which is also called Phinon and also a Khadi wrapped above the waist. The phinon and the khadi are colourfully hand weaved with various designs, the whole designs being first embroidered on a piece of cloth known as alam. Biju, a cultural new year is the festival of Chakma People.

[edit] References

^ Sir Arthur P.Phayre, Chief Commissioner of Burma. History of Burma. p. 79.
^ [1]
^ Sugata Chakma. Parbattya Chattagramer Upajati O Sangskriti. p. 19-20.
^ Majumdar, R.C. (ed.) (2007). The Mughul Empire, Mumbai: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, ISBN 81-7276-407-1, p.230
^ Saradindu Shekhar Chakma. Ethnic Cleansing in Chittagong Hill Tracts. p. 23.
^ Government of Bangladesh. The District Gazetteer of Chittagong Hill Tracts. p. 35.
^ Dr. Suniti Bhushan Kanungo, Professor of History, University of Chittagong. Chakma Resistance to British Domination 1772-1798. p. 52.
^ S.P Talukder. The Chakmas: Life & Struggle. p. 36.
^ Crosswalk.com - Bangladesh Church Burned as Four Faiths Clash
^ Baptist Militants kill Five Chakma Tribesmen

[edit] External links

[hide] v • d • e Scheduled tribes of India

Asur · Baiga · Bharia · Bhil · Bhumij · Bhutia · Birhor · Bodo · Bodo-Kachari · Boksa · Bonda · Chakma · Chenchu · Dimasa · Garo · Gondi · Hmar · Ho · Karbi · Khasi · Khonds · Kol · Korwa · Kuki · Lepcha · Lodha · Mahli · Mara · Mech · Mishing · Mizo · Mog · Munda · Mudugar · Naga · Oraon · Rabari · Rabha · Reang · Santals · Sora · Tripuri

I am SORRY for not writing on rajiv Kumar`s latest film `NO BODY'S PEOPLE in NO Body`s Land' dealing with the Pathetic plight of CHAKMA Refugee in the North East belonging originally to CHITAGANG Hill Tracts , now in Bangladesh. These Most Peaceful Buddhist tribals are now BRANDED as Illegal Immigrants and they face a HELL of Troubles specially in ARUNAHAL Pradesh.

CHITAGANG Hill Tract demography was consisted of NINETY EIGHT Non Muslim Tribal People who wanted to remain in India. Their demand was rejected . As many of the Non Muslim districts of East Bengal along with Shrihatt in Assam were gifted to Pakistan by REDCLIFF mission dictated by Manusmriti hegemoy to which the POWER was transferred eventually, CHITAGANG Hill tracts was also made a part of Pakistan which provided them a STRATEGICAL Port in the East. The demography remained NON Muslim even after the partition while the Ruling hegemony delibrately manipulated the Human Scape . Just befor INDO SINO war in 1962, they constructed a BIG DAM in CHT evicting out lacs of Chakma Tribals who influxed all over North East. Then, the Government of India, planned to create a Human wall in NEFA and rehabilated the CHAKMA Refugees in the Dense forest of NEFA along with the border of China. The Chakma people accepted the DESTINY and tried their best to live in peace and harmony. But as like the Bengali dalit Refugees scatterd all over India and even in Tripura and Assam and entire North East have become the subject of ETHNIC Cleansing, they may not chose a better option as survival strategy.

Rajiv zoomed the camera right into the Mind set of the CHAKMA Human scape beginning his journey from GOHPUR Rly station. He shot beautiful Visual Landscape, an asset of the film but Never Forget to focus on the PUZZLE how the GOVERNMENT of India run by the BRAHMIN Rulers used the Refugee Problem violeting all aspects of Human Rights!

I saw the docu film in Film division some months before and just forgot. Last DASHAMI, I visted rajiv`s home in kalikapuron the Bypass in absence of Rajiv as he was awya in bareilly to attend a Marriage party. This time the youngest son of Poet Biren Dangwal got married. I spent some time with the kids, GOLU and PRITHU once agin. The boys showed me the DVD of the film on LCD.

Meanwhile, while I write on the Chakma people, Militants of outlawed National Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT) have abducted six tribals from Taichakma region of south Tripura district but later released half of them, police said today.

The ultras abducted the tribals of Chakma community at gun point from their village on Wednesday but later freed three of them while demanding Rs 50,000 for the release of others, they said.

Police have launched a massive search operation in the area for safe release of the abducted tribals.

Rajiv Kumar, as I know is very calm and most clear with his concepts. It is a Film Division Project and within this limitation, it may not be dismissed as a Typical Film Division Film. Rajiv Kumar has dealt with the Landscpae and Humanscape for the First time. But his treatment is amzing. We are habitual to focus on North east with another Film Division Director, Joshy Joseph. I ahve worked with both rajiv and Joshy. They very in styles and methods of Production but NEVER fail to acomplish the agenda of a Perfect IMPRESSION with surgical Precision.

Specially Rajiv who had always been a most sincere friend since my Nainital DSB college days, has the credit to involve me in the media. Joshy has made me INDULGE in it. I knew nothing abut Film Making and had been quite unawre of the Celluloid Aesthetics until Rajiv consulted me on his task to make a film on Bihar Genocides. He just dropped in my office at grant lane in a fine morning. We went out and sat just before Lal bazar Police Head Quarter on the Foot path amidst the slumdwellers swarming around. He offered me to join his team. I was quite reluctant and he tried his best to convince me. I did not change his mind. Then, we discussed at length the Bihar genocide realities. He shot the film in Jehanabad while two genocides took place back to back. he treated the subject so correctly that he got the National award for best director in Documentary Soocil realism catagory. It was the `HORROR of Darkness'.Then he draged me in film making and I wrote the script and diologues of his First Feature film `VASEEYAT'.He got each and every man belonging to Nainital and scattered all over the country. he revived the Yugmanch Nostalgia. We worked together once again and spent a few weeks in Banaras for outdoor shooting. GIRDA, Zahoor,DK, Neeraj, IDRISH and others gathered. We had a nold friend rooted in ALLAHABAD, as our local production in charge.

Then, I worked with Joshy right in North East. We shot just three KM away from KOHIMA in Maram valey under Senapati district of Manipur. We spent a full month there. My father was ill and eventually died in 2001 when i managed to see him in death bed. But I dared not to skip the Explosive experience. This was the beginning of my North east Link.

Rajiv was working on the topic for last five years.I had interactions with Chakma refugees resettled in Tripura and originally we planned to shoot in Tripura. Rajiv also did the Location survey in Tripura. Tripura Government agreed to cooperate. But rajiv realised very soon that Chakma refugees in Tripura do not want to expose themselves as they have already adjusted in the Main stream. Meanwhile Anti Chkma Movement got momentum and rajiv decided to shoot right in Arunachal.

Just realise the reality in North east which has been ISOLATED from the mainstream of the country as we have become familiar to treat each other as FOREIGNERS!About 15,000 children in Mizoram, aged six to fourteen, are deprived of schooling even though the northeastern state is India's second most literate after Kerala, an official report said.

"After finding that around 15,000 children, mostly tribals, are deprived of formal education, the state's mission of Sarva Siksha Abhiyan (SSA) sent education volunteers as mobile teachers in the interior villages," a report of the Mizoram education department said.

The mobile teachers would persuade the children and their parents to enrol themselves in government schools.

According to the report, the children deprived of education were mainly concentrated in Lunglei, Lawngtlai and Saiha districts of southern Mizoram and Mamit district in the east adjacent to Tripura.

Of the 15,000 illiterate children, 40 percent were school dropouts and the remaining had never been enrolled in schools. In Mizoram, 88.80 percent of the 900,000 people are literate.

"The main reasons for staying away from educational institutions were poverty, child labour, absence of schools in their and adjacent villages and parents' ignorance," the report added.

It said: "Majority of the children who are not attending schools belong to Chakma and Reang (communities) as the two communities are primitive and nomadic tribes and practise 'Jhum Cultivation' (shifting or slash and burn cultivation)."

"It is hard to bring tribal children to schools due to their shifting from one village to another frequently," the report added.

In the mountainous state of Mizoram, education was first initiated and popularised by the British. Missionaries were responsible for the growth and institutionalisation of education in the state, bordering Myanmar and Bangladesh.

The first educational institution in Mizoram was initiated by missionaries in the Aizawl region in 1897. Later, three more government primary schools opened in Aizawl in 1898.

On the other hand, CHT Commission urges government to investigate grave violations of human rights of indigenous people and to fully implement the CHT Accord of 1997.

Below is an article published by: The Daily Star

The Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) Commission yesterday expressed grave concern over the violations of human rights of the indigenous people at Sajek in Rangamati and urged the government to investigate the incidents immediately.

"As you are aware, tension between indigenous peoples (Paharis), Bengali settlers and the army has been rising in Sajek for many years, and has reached particularly intense levels over the past year," the commission said in a letter to the prime minister.
The letter signed by CHT Commission Co-chairs Eric Avebury, Sultana Kamal and Ida Nicolaisen was also sent to the CHT affairs ministry, Peace Accord Implementation Committee, Parliamentary Standing Committee on CHT affairs ministry, home ministry and the National Human Rights Commission.

The commission urged the government to ensure that those found responsible for violations are arrested and prosecuted and that reparations are made to the victims for their security and safety.

"On April 20 last year, a group of settlers attacked several indigenous villages, injuring people and burning down more than 70 houses, with no effective intervention by the authorities and despite the presence of nearby army camps. Subsequently, many indigenous people fled the area and lived in hiding," said the letter.

"On August 19 the same year, Ladu Moni Chakma, aged 55, of Sajek, was killed. Although arrests have been made regarding the killing, no one has yet been charged either for the arson attacks or the killing," it added.

"On May 6 this year, two settlers -- Alkajjya and Mojibor -- were allegedly kidnapped from Sajek, and their bodies recovered from the same area four days later."

"It appears that six Pahari villagers were arrested on May 10 in connection with this incident, and since then, many Paharis have alleged continuing harassment by the army," the letter said.

"On July 2, 2009, a group of local Paharis held a press conference in Dhaka where they made a number of allegations concerning arrests, persecution and land occupation in Sajek."

"Following their return to their villages, they alleged that they were harassed by settlers and army personnel, and that two local people from Sajek had been arrested and questioned about the particulars of the participants of the press conference," the letter added.

"The failure to implement key provisions of the CHT Accord, including the return of land to the indigenous peoples and the withdrawal of temporary army camps from the area is a major contributory factor to such violations," the CHT Commission said.

To fully implement the CHT Accord of 1997, the commission urged the authorities to put an immediate end to all attacks against indigenous communities and individuals in CHT.

Brief history

Early Period

Prior to the advent of the British colonial rule, very little is known about the region's history. It is generally assumed that prior to settling in the region, its various indigenous inhabitants were "nomads" transmigrating from one area to another. Circumstantial evidences may be supportive of this assumption - the Jhum cultivation system (also known as rotational or swidden cultivation) which was the primary livelihood means for most of the ethnic groups before they settled down for a sedentary lifestyle is basically a nomadic type of agriculture.

Although no historical facts can be given, the earliest people to arrive in the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) may belong to the larger Kuki group of peoples: Lushai, Pankho, Mro, Kyang and Khumi. The subsequent migration came from the Tripura group: Murung and Tripura. The Marmas are basically from the Arakan region of the present-day Myanmar (Burma).

The origin of the Chakmas - the largest and most dominant indigenous group - is veiled in legends. According to this legend, they came from a place called Champaknagar and descendants of one of the Prince of the kingdom - Bijoygiri. But legends apart, they probably settled in the CHT at least as early as the sixteenth century - a map of that period by a Portuguese named Joao De Barros show a people called "Chakomas" living in the region, although the exact relations between the Chakomas of Barros' map and the Chakmas could not be fully corroborated.

During the late eighteenth century when the rule of the East India Company was established in the province of Bengal, the Chakmas exerted the greatest influence and their kings exercised almost total control over indigenous society of the region.

Early contacts with the British

As a result of the victory at the battle of Plassey in 1757, the East India company became the virtual rulers of Bengal. In 1760, the then Nawab of the Province, Mir Kasim, in a secret treaty, ceded the three districts of Burdwan, Midnapore and Chittagong to the British to the authority of the Company. With the arrival of the British rule, the then Chakma chief - Jun Box Khan -agreed to pay a yearly tribute in cotton amounting to nine maunds (about 350 kg) in lieu of which he and his subjects got access to trade with the plains.

Following this agreement, Mr Henry Verelest, the representative of the East India Company at Chittagong, issued a Proclamation recognizing the jurisdiction of the Chakma Raja over "All the hills from the Pheni River to the Sangu, and from Nizampur Road (Dhaka-Chittagong Road) to the hills of the Kuki Raja (State of Mizoram, India)".

However, peace between the British and the Chakma Chief did not last long and by 1777 a general war broke out between the two parties with Ronu Khan, the general of the Chakma King, formally declaring war against the British. The war ended in 1987 when the British had imposed an economic blockade and forced the Chakma Raja Jan Bakhsh Khan to a negotiated settlement.

However, despite this episode of war, British role in the region remained very marginal, being mainly limited to a collection of annual tax in cotton or in cash. This relative "sovereignty" of the CHT is deftly summarized in the statement of Mr. Halbed, Commissioner of Chittagong, in 1829;

"The hill tribes of the Chittagong Hill Tracts are not British subjects, but merely tributaries, and we have no rights on our part to interfere with their internal arrangements".

British Rule (1860-1947)

Following the Sepoy Mutiny in 1857, the Crown took over the direct administration of their Indian colonies from the East India Company. In 1860, by Act XXII, a separate district - Chittagong Hill Tracts - was curved out, with its headquarters located in Chandraghona. Captain Magrath was appointed as the first District Superintendent of the district.

In 1867 the position of the district Superintendent was changed into Deputy Commissioner by virtue of Bengal Act XXII and Captain Thomas Herbert Lewin (known legendarily as "Lubin Saab" to the Chakmas and "Thangliana" to the Mizos) was appointed as the first Deputy Commissioner. In the following year, the district headquarters was transferred from Chandraghona to Rangamati.

In 1882, the district was sub-divided into three separate Circles and a new Circle - Mong Circle - was created by curving out the Chakma Circle, in addition to the two existent Circles - Chakma and Bohmong Circle.

In 1900, the British administration enacted the CHT Regulation Act 1900 (popularly known as the CHT Manual). It laid down detailed rules and regulation for the administration of the CHT and stipulates provisions to address the particular context of the region (e.g. recognition of the Chiefs and the traditional institutions in the administrative system, the region as "special" tribal dominated area and restriction of permanent settlement and acquisition of land by the outsiders). To this day, the CHT Manual is frequently referred to and although various subsequent legislations amended many of its provisions, parts of it are still in force.

This provision of the special status of the Chittagong Hill Tracts was further underlined with the Government of India Act 1935 that designated the district as a "Totally Excluded Area". This meant a formal recognition for the region and its indigenous inhabitants to the entitlement of specific legal provisions for their safeguards, including restriction on settlement of peoples (mainly Bengalis) from out side of the region.

Pakistan Period (1947-1971)

In 1947, the sub-continent was partitioned in two separate states on the basis of religious nationhood and Pakistan was born comprising of the areas in the eastern and western parts where Muslims were the majority. The Chittagong Hill Tracts, though overwhelmingly non-Muslim (to the extent of 97%) at that time, found itself in the new state of Pakistan. Its proximity with the Chittagong region and the greater Bengali culture are thought to be the primary reasons for its inclusion in Pakistan, although various differing versions in this regard also exist. In fact, a section of the indigenous societies of the region demanded its inclusion in India (Chakma Circle) and in Myanmar (Bohmong Circle).

The first Constitution of Pakistan in 1956 gave recognition to the special status of the CHT. This was further strengthened in 1962 when CHT was recognized as a "Tribal area" and provided with relevant constitutions guarantees. But, in a dramatic turn from the previous status, in 1964, the government revoked the special status of the CHT and henceforth the region ceased to be provided with any specific legal or constitutional safeguards.

Another very important event during the Pakistani regime is the construction of a hydro-electric dam at Kaptai in 1960, situated around 20 km downstream of Rangamati town. The dam created a huge artificial lake over an area of 1,036 square kilometers. But most importantly, it submerged approximately 40% of all cultivable lands of the region and in the process around 50,000 families (about 1/3 of the total population at that time) lost their ancestral homes.

The compensation for the victims was far from appropriate - in fact many did not receive any compensation at all - which together with the fact that the government took the decision of revoking the special status of the CHT around that time; the seeds of discontentment of the indigenous peoples of the region were sown.

The permanent loss of habitat from the Kaptai dam gave birth to another tragedy. In the absence of any compensation most of the evicted families re-settled elsewhere in the region. But a good number of them, mostly Chakmas, decided to migrate to India and where they were rehabilitated in the present-day state of Arunachal Pradesh by the Government of India. None of them received any official recognition of their status in India and are still languishing as 'stateless people' in Arunachal Pradesh. The Indian authorities still refuse to fully carry out the implementation of the verdict of India Supreme Court, delivered in early 1996 that recognized the Indian citizenship of these people who now number around 80,000. The entire episode still resonates deeply in collective psyche of the CHT indigenous peoples, which the Chakmas came to call the 'Bar Parang' (the calamitous Great Exodus).

Bangladesh Period (1971-present)

Bangladesh emerged as an independent state on 16 December 1971 after a nine-month long war. Its birth, rooted in the ethno-centric ethos of 'Bengali Nationalism', the new-born country was declared as a unitary, independent and sovereign Republic, to be known as the "People's Republic of Bangladesh", and effectively failed to address the concerns of the CHT peoples; 1) Autonomy for the region, 2) Retention of the CHT Regulation 1900, 3) Recognition of the three Circle Chiefs and 4) Ban on the influx and settlement of people of non-indigenous ethnic communities into the region. These demands were made immediately after independence through a delegation led by Manabendra Narayan Larma, the sitting Member of Parliament from the region, when it called on Prime Minister Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in February 1972. Following the failure of the meeting with the Prime Minister, Larma founded a regional political party - Parbatya Chattagram Jana Samhati Samity (PCJSS) in March 1972. A military wing - Shanti Bahini - was later added to it.

In 1975, Prime Minister Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and almost his entire family were brutally assassinated in a military coup d'état. This particularly shocking incident and the subsequent uncertainty prevailing over the country at that time led M N Larma to go underground and to wage an insurgency against the government of Bangladesh for the rights of the CHT peoples.

The insurgency effectively continued for the next two decades, impacting severely on the fabrics of the CHT society; rapid demographic transformation resulting from government sponsored programs rehabilitating around 300,000 Bengalis from the plains that rendered the region's indigenous peoples into minority overnight, internal displacement being as high as 70% of the total indigenous population, massive environmental destruction and refugee problems (at one point there were reportedly over 60,000 indigenous refugees who took shelter in the neighboring State of Tripura, India). The region became heavily militarized and throughout the insurgency periods, there have been repeated accusations of human rights violations that included massacres, mass tortures, sexual abuse/violence and religious intolerance against the government and the armed forces by various national and international media and human rights organizations. Many of these allegations were substantiated by neutral third party investigations - the most prominent being that of the Chittagong Hill Tracts Commission, which periodically published human rights reports under the title 'Life is not Ours'.

By 1990s, a truce was declared and after prolonged negotiations, a Peace Accord was signed between the PCJSS and the Government of Bangladesh on 2December 1997. It was expected that the Accord would finally put an end to the hostilities and conflicts and provide a certain specific guarantees as to the status and legal safeguards for the region and its indigenous populations while paving the way for future socio-economic development. However, the signing of the Peace Accord let to a divide in the indigenous movement in the CHT and to date, the Peace Accord remains largely unimplemented.

http://chtcommission.org/?page_id=85

Chakma Refugees Pushed Back from Mizoram, India

CHT

Background

Bangladeshi
Settlers

Armed
Resistance

Massacres

Genocide

Religious
Persecution

Rapes &
Abductions

Jumma Refugees

CHT Treaty

Foreign Aid

This elderly Chakma woman being moved to safety from the marauding Bangladesh military and the Bangladeshi settlers.

On 25th January 1986, an Indian Army Brigadier, a Major, a Captain with the Deputy Commissioner of Lunglei, along with a Superintendent of Police came to the refugee camp at Tagolok Bak, Mizoram, India. There were over 300 Army, BSF (Border Security Force), CRP (Central Reserve Police) and MRP (Mizo Ram Police) in strength and many Mizos who were present there. The Indian Army Brigadier held a meeting with the leaders of the Chakma refugees at the refugee camp. At first the Indian Army Brigadier made a speech in Hindi language which the Chakma refugee leaders could not understand. Then the Captain interpreted his speech in the Bengali language as follows: "You know that in the last SAARC conference held in Dhaka, there was a talk between Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and Bangladesh President Ershad about your repatriation. On the basis of their talks, you will be handed over to the Bangladesh Army on 29th January, 1986 and you will have to go. You should not feel sorry for this. Rather should you be grateful to India for giving you shelter, security and ration for the last 19 months." After his speech the Chakma refugee leaders became panicky and prayed for permission to talk with the Indian Brigadier about their problems. But the Brigadier outrightly said: "You have not the right to speak a word".
Then after the Brigadier's speech, the Deputy Commissioner of Lunglei on behalf of the Mizoram government spoke to the refugee leaders in broken Bengali in this manner: "You are shameless. Don't you know that this is Mizoram, this is not your country. You can't stay here. You should be ashamed of yourself. Do you know what is the meaning of push back? You are going to be pushed back by any means".
Then refugee leaders tried to explain that they did not come here to stay. They would return to their homeland if their demands were fulfilled by Bangladesh. At that moment the Deputy Commissioner threateningly shouted and ordered the refugee leaders to go out.
After the Brigadier left the refugee camps, curfew orders were announced through loudspeakers throughout the refugee camps for indefinite period and no one was allowed to come out of the camps.
On the 29th January, 1986 during the early hours of the morning, before the Sunrise, all the refugee camps were surrounded and the refugees were bodily searched by the MRPs and the CRPs. At 7 or 8 o'clock in the morning the BDR (Bangladesh Rifles) party arrived in a motor launch on the western side of Tagolok Bak across the Karnafully river and took up positions at a nearby garden. Then another motor launch slowly proceeded towards the refugee camps' wharf. The Mizo Police Superintendent gave order to the refugees to remain in the camps and not to come till further instructions. The MRPs have already rounded up the refugee camps. Then the first batch of 51 families of Chakma refugees were gathered from the camps and taken to school premises from where they were being taken towards the BDR motor launch, But the refugees realising their fate, started shouting loudly: "We don't want to be handed over to the BDR, we are afraid of them. They will kill us!". At this moment, the MRPs swooped down upon refugees, young and old, men, women and children were all beaten up indiscriminately and force was used to make them board the BDR motor launch. The refugee men tried to save their women and children from beatings by the MRPs, But the MRP became more furious and indiscriminate beating continued with more ferocity. As the refugees were crying for help to save them from the MRPs, refugees from other camps went to their rescue, They tried to make the MRPs understand and not to be so cruel. But the MRPs including the CRPs giving a deaf ear to their appeal, fell upon these helpless refugees just like tigers. The Mizo SP (Superintendent of Police), through a loudspeaker, gave order to shoot the refugees, and the Mizos who were also present with their catapults with marbles, threw stones at these pitiful refugees. The refugees became panicky at this hostile treatment by the Mizo people, MRPs and CRPs. They tried to run away for life. But by that time all the refugee camps were rounded up by the Indian Army and BSF personnel. They caught the fleeing refugees and handed them over one by one to the cruel hands of the MRPs and CRPs. The MRPs and CRPs tied the refugees on the necks and waists with ropes and pulled them as if they were not human beings and then handed them over to the BDR who received them with such happiness that while counting them in the motor launch they picked each one for each number.
While these refugees were being taken to an unknown place in Barkal area, they were subjected to physical tortures, young girls and women were raped. The BDR personnel picked the refugees left and right when they were disembarked from the motor launch. The plight of these Chakma refugees seems to be precarious as the Bangladesh Governments policy of extermination of the tribal people continues unabated.

For reports on the status of the implementation of the Peace Accord see Links and further reading

http://www.angelfire.com/ab/jumma/refugee/refugeemr.html

The US and the Internal Islamic Threat

Posted GMT 9-29-2009 6:30:56

The United States is now gradually waking up to a growing internal Islamic menace which desires to kill in the name of Islam. In the past week you have had three different cases involving Islamists who desired to kill and intimidate the people of America. In the United Kingdom the same problem exists but just like in America, under President Obama, both nations are pandering to Islam and propagating false lies about this religion. Therefore, it is time to focus on the real factors behind the growing Sunni Islamic threat within America and in other nations.

The first important factor that must be understood is that this threat comes from radical Sunni Islam and not from Shia Islam. In America and the United Kingdom you have many Shia Muslims; however, it is clear that all major global Islamic terrorism derives from radical Sunni Islam.

It is also abundantly clear that the Ahmadiyya Muslim community is not involved in terrorism because their brand of Islam is based on different interpretations and this branch of Islam suffers greatly in Pakistan and other nations, for example in Indonesia. Therefore, it is vital to understand where the focus should be because Ahmadiyya Muslims and Shia Muslims, and other branches of Islam like the Alevi, must be split from where the problem exists.

In Lebanon you do have Shia terrorist organizations however they are focused on either internal problems in Lebanon or on the situation in Israel. Also, in Yemen you have current problems with the restive Shia population but once more this is an internal matter and not based on expanding jihad and the same applies to Shia organizations in Iraq and Pakistan.

Therefore, Islamic terrorist attacks in America, India, Indonesia, Kenya, the United Kingdom, and other nations, have all been done by radical Sunni Islamists. Also, the inspiration behind these terrorist attacks is coming from the same avenue and this avenue of terrorism and global Islamic jihad can be traced back to Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.

B. Raman, a specialist in this field stated in the South Asia Analysis Group, paper number 1767, that "While the Deobandi extremists have been backing---openly or covertly--- Al Qaeda and its ideology, the Barelvis have been uncomfortable over it. Many of them have been critical of the use of the Pakistani territory by Al Qaeda and the (International Islamic Front) IIF for their terrorist operations in other countries. They have also been worried over the implications of the message disseminated by bin Laden in January, 2006, in which he claimed that plans for another terrorist strike in the US homeland were already underway."

B. Raman also states that "There are two main groups of Sunni sectarian organisations in Pakistan---the Sipah-e-Sahaba and the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, both strongly Deobandi-Wahabi-Salafi and both members of the IIF, and the Sunni Tehrik, strongly Barelvi and anti-Deobandi-Wahabi-Salafi. Since many years, the Sipah-e-Sahaba and the LEJ have embarked on a campaign for the Arabisation and Wahabisation of the Barelvi Muslims and for removing the distorting influence of Hinduism. The Sunni Tehrik has been resisting the onslaught of the Deobandis, Wahabis and Salafis."

Therefore, just like B. Raman points out, we can apply this to the international arena because the same forces and with Saudi financial backing, irrespective if government or organizations or wealthy individuals, is spreading the same message of hate to other nations far and wide. Yet why do nations like America, Indonesia, and the United Kingdom, and many others, allow this?

It is abundantly clear that the Muslim community in the UK in the 1960s and 1970s is very different to elements within the Muslim community today. According to B. Raman he states that "For the last fifteen years, there has been a conflict between the Deobandis and the Barelvis for the control of the mosques and their funds not only in Pakistan, but also in the UK. Previously, the Barelvis used to control the mosques in the UK frequented by immigrants from the sub-continent, but they have since been driven out by the Deobandis and Wahabis. This was the starting point for the radicalisation of the Pakistani-origin Muslims in the UK and in the other countries of West Europe. The ISI (Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence) has been supporting the Sipah-e-Sahaba and the LEJ in Pakistan as well as in West Europe."

Therefore, it is clear that funding within Pakistan and Saudi Arabia is causing mayhem and it is obvious that you have "a war within Islam" and "an ongoing Islamic jihad" against moderate Muslims, other sects within Islam and against non-Muslims. Other channels of funding throughout the Middle East also applies but the mindset and ideological thinking is based on the same branches of Islam and it is clear where the counter-jihad must begin.

Yet amazingly, and even after September 11th, whereby nearly all Sunni Islamists were Saudi nationals; the United States destroyed a secular based nation in Iraq and ignored the greater problem. After all, how many American soldiers and other international forces have been killed by radical Saudi Islamists in Iraq or by Saudi Arabian organizations which preach jihad and hatred?

Given this, it appears that the focus of attention is based on the wrong area and even today Saudi Arabian funding is creating mayhem in mainly Muslim societies or mainly non-Muslim societies where Muslim minorities are growing.

Walid Phares, author of "The Confrontation: Winning the War against Future Jihad," and of many other books and a senior expert in this field, stated "Petro-Islamism is also having a big impact in the higher education sector. As Walid Phares, an expert on global terrorism remarks in The War of Ideas (2007), globally, "a wave of oil funding hit university after university, college after college, and research centre after research centre. The objectives were fully ideological: further the cause of Islam, support the Palestinian cause, and plant the seeds of the concept of an illegitimate West."

In Britain, a report about the growing rise of Islamic funding by Brunel University's Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies highlighted the nature of the problem. The report stated that more than $491 million dollars have been spent on funding Islamic study centres and other forms of propagation. These institutions include Cambridge and Oxford, therefore, radical Islamists have gained a foothold in major circles.

I myself studied at the University of London and radical Islam was clearly a daily problem and militants were often trying to spread their hatred and propaganda. It is also noticeable that Omar Sheikh who was convicted for the beheading of Daniel Pearl, the Wall Street Journal reporter, also studied at the London School of Economics.

Getting back to the radical Sunni Islamic threat then it is vital to confront this threat openly and to stop hiding behind liberalism, moral relativism, or untold excuses for why we must understand the causes behind radical Sunni Islam. The apologist brigade, for example Karen Armstrong, and countless others, portray Islam to be a religion of peace but Mohammed, the prophet of Islam, did not show much peace towards his enemies, instead he either enslaved them, had them killed or they were exiled.

Another important factor which must not be overlooked is history. For example the Buddhist/Hindu lands which are now called Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Uzbekistan (especially influenced by Zoroastrianism), and other nations; all allowed diversity despite occasional bouts of religious tensions. Therefore, you had Buddhists, Hindus, Jains, Nestorian Christians, Pagans, Zoroastrians, and other faiths, all mingling together in a vast region

However, the onset of Islam changed all this because over time in both Afghanistan and Uzbekistan, the older religions of Buddhism, Hinduism, and Zoroastrianism (the oldest religion), would be Islamized because of several factors.

These factors were multiple but clearly the role of Islamic jihad, dhimmitude, jizya, massive persecution, slavery, forced conversion, control of resources, and so forth, all culminated in a tide of Islamization.

Yet the leaders of these areas would also have believed that accommodation could have been met and that Islam was just another religion. However, Islam is based on victor and vanquished, and this religion is more like an ideology because it fuses religion, politics, economics, law, and the regulation of society, together and clearly non-Muslims are unequal (indeed Buddhists and Hindus are deemed to be subhuman because they are not people of the Book) in accordance with the teachings of Islam.

Even in 2009 apostates from Islam can be killed in accordance with the teachings of Mohammed and other religious believers are still suffering from Islamization. This applies to Christians being burnt alive in Pakistan, apostates from Islam being killed in Somalia, attacks against Ahmadiyya Muslims in Pakistan, persecution of Baha'is in Iran, Christian pastors being beheaded in northern Nigeria, Assyrian Christians and other minorities (Shabaks, Yazidis and Mandaean) also fear daily attacks and the same applies to the persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt.

The forces of Islamic jihad is ongoing and Buddhists face severe persecution in southern Thailand and the Chittagong Hill Tracts (also Christian and Hindu tribal's) in Bangladesh and of course Buddhism in history always collapsed when Islamic armies conquered their lands.

I stated in a past article, that "Today, just like the 7th century, Islam is still killing apostates or persecuting them. Today, just like in the 7th century, Muslims are still waging wars against non-Muslims in countless numbers of nations. Today, just like the 7th century, Muslim fanatics are still killing fellow Muslims who are deemed to be not Muslim enough."

"The apologists will keep on making excuses; however, it is clear that in many parts of the Islamic dominated world, that hatred still dictates. Therefore, in 2009, just like in the 7th century, non-Muslims still suffer enormous persecution and some Islamists are still dreaming of spreading Islam by the sword or by propaganda."

Now this war against non-Muslims and moderate Muslims alike is being waged in northern Nigeria against Christians, against Ahmadiyya Muslims in Pakistan, against Hindus in Bangladesh and Pakistan, and against Buddhists in southern Thailand. The same also applies to countless other conflicts or nations where minorities suffer enormous persecution, for example the persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt.

This jihad is now being propagated within nations like America and the United Kingdom. Yet how can you confront your enemy when you have to play by political correctness, pander to the very same people who want to enforce Islamic Sharia law on you or have dialogue with a religion which supports killing all apostates and treating non-Muslims unequally in Islamic Sharia law?

If we ignore the past diversity of Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Uzbekistan, then one day our civilizations may end up the same way?

After all, just like the past, religious leaders and elites within the Buddhist, Hindu, Nestorian Christian, and Zoroastrian communities did not understand the true nature of Islam. However, by the time they understood it was too late and today Buddhism in Afghanistan and Pakistan is a distant memory and the same applies to Zoroastrianism in Uzbekistan. At the same time, in the modern world Buddhism may soon be a distant memory in southern Thailand if Islamists get their way and maybe Iraq will soon have no more Mandaeans?

Walid Phares comments on recent events in America and states that "The North Carolina cell, the New York subway plot, the Dallas attempt, the Illinois case, added to the previous cases of the shooting of a soldier in Arkansas, the precedent New York cells, Georgia's young Jihadists, all the way back to the infamous Virginia paintball network, if anything gives us the genome of what is morphing inside the country -- a vast body of dispersed cells with at least one binding force -- the Jihadi ideology. The question thus is to find out who is propagating the doctrines of Jihadism: who is funding it; who is protecting the indoctrination operation which leads naturally to the rise of homegrown or foreign linked, lone wolves or packs of Jihadists, Terrorists. That is the real question: where is the factory?"

Therefore, it is vital to stop major funding which is spreading radical Sunni Islam and to focus on where the threat is. It is also vital that national governments work together and that history is not forgotten. Also, more attention must be focused on persecution and injustice "within the House of Islam" and the "real Mohammed" must be told instead of the Western liberal version which is bent on appeasement and revisionism.

By Lee Jay Walker
www.theseoultimes.com

http://www.aina.org/news/20090929013056.htm

Chittagong Hill Tracts

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article needs additional citations for verification.
Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2007)

The Chittagong Hill Tracts (Bengali: পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রাম Parbotto Chôṭṭogram) comprise an area of 13,180 km² in south-eastern Bangladesh, and borders India and Myanmar (Burma). It was a single district of Bangladesh till 1984. In that year it was divided into three separate districts: Khagrachari, Rangamati and Bandarban. Topographically, this is the only hill intensive area of Bangladesh.

[hide]

[edit] Demography

According to the 1991 census the population was 974,447 of which 501,114 were tribals and the rest were from different communities. The indigenous peoples, collectively known as the Jumma, include the Chakma, Marma, Tripura, Tenchungya, Chak, Pankho, Mru, Murung, Bawm, Lushai, Khyang, Gurkha,Assam,Santal and Khumi.^[1]

The current population is between 1 million and 1.5 million.^{[citation needed]} About 50% of the population are tribals and mainly followers of Theravada Buddhism. 48% of the inhabitants are Bengali Muslim settlers. The remainder are followers of Hinduism, Christianity and Animism. ^[1]. At the time of the partition of India in August, 1947 non MusIims constituted 98.5% of the population of the Chittagong Hill Tracts. Buddhists were 85%, Hindus (mainly Tripuri tribe) 10%, Animists 3% and Muslims 1.5%

[edit] History

The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (December 2007)

See also: Chittagong Hill Tracts Conflict

Bandarban.

The early history of the Chittagong Hill Tracts is a record of constantly recurring raids on the part of the eastern hill tribes, and of the operations undertaken to repress them. The earliest mention of these raids is to be found in a letter from the Chief of Chittagong to Warren Hastings, the Governor-General, dated April to, 1777,' complaining of the violence and aggressions of a mountaineer named Ramu Khan, the leader of a band of Kukis or Lushais ; and that they continued without any long intermission down to 1891 when the Lushai Hills were annexed to British territory. The recorded population increased from 69,607 in 1872 to 101,597 in 1881, to 107,286 in 1891, and to 124,762 in 1901. The Census of 1872 was, however, very imperfect, and the actual growth of population has probably not exceeded what might be expected in a sparsely inhabited but fairly healthy tract.^[2]

When the 1901 census was taken there were no towns, and 211 of the villages had a population of less than 500, while only one exceeded 2,000. The population density, excluding the area of uninhabited forest (1,385 square miles), was 33 persons per square mile. There was a little immigration from Chittagong, and a few persons had emigrated to Tripura. The proportion of females to every 100 males was only 90 in the district-born, and 83 in the total population. Buddhists numbered 83,000, Hindus 36,000, and Muslims 5,000.^[3]

The Chittagong Hill Tracts, combining three hilly districts of Bangladesh, were once known as Korpos Mohol, the name used until 1860. In 1860 it was annexed by the British and was made an administrative district of Bengal. As of today, it is a semi-autonomous region within Bangladesh comprising the districts, namely, Chengmi (Khagrachari District), Gongkabor (Rangamati District), and Arvumi (Bandarban District).

The last Viceroy, Lord Mountbatten, who considered the grant of independence to India as his act of crowning glory, was ambitious to achieve this "superhuman" task in record time. He said that before accepting the post of Viceroy he had told King George VI, who was his cousin: "I am prepared to accept the job only on one condition. India must be granted independence by July, 1948 and I will not stay there a day longer". Mountbatten came to India in March, 1947 and this left him just about sixteen months to complete such a gigantic task. In reality, he achieved it in five months, on 15th of August, 1947 for which he was given so much credit.

The Radcliffe Commission submitted its Report on 9 August 1947. At the Staff Meeting on 12 August V.P. Menon, who was a confidant of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, reacted most violently when it came to be known that the Chittagong Hill Tracts was going to be given to Pakistan. The following day, on 13 August, the All India Congress Committee issued a declaration alleging that the award "lacked all sense of justice, equity and propriety" and, therefore, it was "ineffective, infurctuous and incapable of execution in international consciousness". Sardar Patel wrote an angry letter to Mountbatten expressing his indignation, calling the Radcliffe award "monstrous and a blatant breach of the terms of reference". He warned that "I am urging the tribesmen to resist amalgamation with Pakistan by force, if necessary".

Originally, the award of the Boundary Commission was to be made public on 13 August. But Mountbatten was reluctant to spill the beans. According to Philip Ziegler, the author of Mountbatten's official biography, the case of the Chittagong Hill Tracts was uppermost in Mountbatten's mind. "He (Mountbatten) foresaw an Independence Day marred by rancour, Nehru boycotting the ceremonies, India born in an atmosphere not of euphoria but of angry resentment. So Mountbatten decided to announce the award only on 16 August when the celebrations were over. As Zeigler writes, "India's indignation at the award of the Chittagong Hill Tracts to Pakistan may have been a factor in making up Mountbatten's mind to keep the reports to himself till after independence".

Mountbatten was himself surprised by the ferocity of Sardar Patel's reaction to the issue. In his memoirs he wrote: "The one man I had regarded as a real statesman with both his feet firmly on the ground, and a man of honour whose word was his bond, had turned out to be as hysterical as the rest. Candidly I was amazed that such a terrific crisis should have blown up over so small a matter. However, I have been long enough in India to realise that major crises are by no means confined to big matters." Leonard Mosley in his book The Last Days of the British Raj puts it "This is a matter for Mountbatten's conscience.

Mr Jaipal Singh, who was member of the Sub-Committee of the Constituent Assembly of India dealing with the Excluded Areas, recorded a minute of dissent in which he wrote: "The Chittagong Hill Tracts must be claimed back to India". Soon afterwards, in a public speech in Calcutta, Nehru himself said that gross injustice had been done in regard to the Chittagong Hill Tracts. He also declared that the matter would be taken up with Pakistan. But nothing was done.

During the 1970s and 80s, there were attempts by the Government to resettle the area with Bengali people. These attempts were resisted by the tribals, who, with the latent support of neighbouring India, formed a guerilla force called Shanti Bahini. As a result of the tribal resistance movement, successive governments turned the Hill Tracts into a militarised zone. Professor Bernard Nietschmann wrote a letter about Shanti Bahini and the Chittagong Hill Tracts people to the editor of the New York Times by published on October 25, 1986 (archived by the Fourth World Documentation Project) at the Center for World Indigenous Studies website.

The Bangladesh military and settlers have been accused of committing genocides against the minority tribal people with silent support from the law enforcers.^{[citation needed]} One often citied incident took place in 1992 in Mallya^[4] and / or Logang^[5]. The Bangladeshi army, too, have been accused of numerous human rights violations within the Hill Tracts, and their personnel have been accused of torture, killings and abduction^{[citation needed]}. Amongst these, the disappearance of Chakma political activist Kalpana Chakma in 1996 attracted widespread condemnation^{[citation needed]}.

Following years of unrest, an agreement was formed between the Government of Bangladesh and the tribal leaders which granted a limited level of autonomy to the elected council of the three hill districts.

The 1997 Peace Treaty signed between the then Sheikh Hasina Government and the Jana Shanghati Shamiti or Shanti Bahini has been opposed by the opposition parties as well as a fraction of the tribal rebels^{[citation needed]}. Opposition parties of the time argued the autonomy granted in the treaty ignored the Bengali settlers. The successive Khaleda Zia government promised to implement the peace treaty, despite their opposition to it during the previous government's term. According to the Ministry of Chittagong Hill Tracts Affairs, a Peace Treaty between Government of Bangladesh and Parbattya Chattagram Jana Samhati Samiti was signed on 2 December 1997. ^[1]

[edit] See also

[edit] Bibliography

Shelly, Mizanur Rahaman. (1992). The Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh: The Untold Story. Dhaka, Bangladesh: Centre for Development Research, Bangladesh.
Life is not Ours: Land and Human Rights in the Chittagong Hill Tracts, Bangladesh. Copenhagen, Denmark: Organizing Committee, Chittagong Hill Tracts Campaign, 1991.

[edit] References

^ ^a ^b ^c Ministry of Chittagong Hill Tracts Affairs
^ Chittagong Hill Tracts - Imperial Gazetteer of India, v. 10, p. 319.
^ Chittagong Hill Tracts - Imperial Gazetteer of India, v. 10, p. 320.
^ Chittagong Hill Tracts at a Glance; May 1997; A Conclusion Report: International Peace Conference on Chittagong Hill Tracts WORKING TOWARD PEACE.
^ Human rights in the Chittagong Hill Tracts; February 2000; Amnesty International.

[edit] External links

Chittagong Hill Tracts travel guide from Wikitravel

[hide] v • d • e Geography of South Asia

Mountains and Plateaus	Himalayas · Western Ghats · Eastern Ghats · Aravalli Range · The Nilgiris · Vindhya Range · Satpura Range · Garo Hills · Shivalik Hills · Khasi Hills · Annamalai Hills · Cardamom Hills · Sulaiman Mountains · Toba Kakar Range · Karakoram · Hindu Kush · Chittagong Hill Tracts · Deccan Plateau · Thar Desert · Makran · Chota Nagpur · Naga Hills · Mysore Plateau · Ladakh Plateau

Lowlands and Islands	Indo-Gangetic plain · Indus River Delta · Ganga basin · Ganges Delta · Atolls of Maldives · Coromandel Coast · Konkan · Lakshadweep · Andaman and Nicobar Islands · Sundarbans · Rann of Kutch · Protected areas in Tamil Nadu

Countries	India · Pakistan · Nepal · Bhutan · Tibet · Sri Lanka · Bangladesh · The Maldives · Portal:Himalaya region

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chittagong_Hill_Tracts"

Categories: Chittagong | Geography of Bangladesh | Mountain ranges of Asia

Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Bangladesh

This article is part of the series:
Politics and government of
Bangladesh

Other countries · Atlas
Politics portal

The Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord is a political agreement and peace treaty signed between the Government of Bangladesh and the Parbatya Chattagram Jana Sanghati Samiti (United People's Party of the Chittagong Hill Tracts), the political organisation that controlled the Shanti Bahini militia. The accord allowed for the recognition of the rights of the peoples and tribes of the Chittagong Hill Tracts region and ended the decades-long insurgency between the Shanti Bahini and government forces.^[1] ^[2]^[3]^[4]^[5]

[hide]

[edit] Background

The modern conflict in the Chittagong Hill Tracts began when the political representatives of the native peoples protested against the government policy of recognising only the Bengali culture and language and designating all citizens of Bangladesh as Bengalis. In talks with Hill Tracts delegation led by Chakma politician Manabendra Narayan Larma, the country's founding leader Sheikh Mujibur Rahman insisted that the ethnic groups of the Hill Tracts adopt the Bengali identity.^[6]^[7] Sheikh Mujib is also reported to have threatened to settle Bengalis in the Hill Tracts to reduce the native peoples into a minority.^[8]^[7]

[edit] Conflict

Consequently, Manabendra Narayan Larma and others founded the Parbatya Chhatagram Jana Shanghatti Samiti (PCJSS) as a united political organisation of all native peoples and tribes in 1973. The armed wing of the PCJSS, the Shanti Bahini, was organised to resist government policies.^[9]^[7] The Shanti Bahini insurgencts hid in the neighbouring Indian state of Tripura, where they trained and equipped themselves. In 1977, they launched their first attack on a Bangladesh Army convoy.^[10]^[9]^[7] The Shanti Bahini divided its area of operations into zones, and raised forces from the native people, who were formally trained. The Shanti Bahini attacked Bengali police and soldiers, government offices and personnel, and the Bengali settlers in the region. The group also attacked any native believed to be opposing it and supporting the government. During the insurgency, the Shanti Bahini, the Bangladeshi Army, police and gangs of Bengali settlers were accused of perpetrating abuse of human rights and ethnic cleansing.^[11]^[12]

[edit] Attempted solutions

The then-President of Bangladesh Ziaur Rahman created a Chittagong Hill Tracts Development Board under an army general in order to address the socio-economic needs of the region, but the entity proved unpopular and became a source of antagonism and mistrust amongst the native people against the government. The government failed to address the long-standing issue of the displacement of people, numbering an estimated 100,000 caused by the construction of the Kaptai Dam in 1962. In the 1980s, the government began settling Bengalis in the region, causing the eviction of many natives and a significant alteration of demographics. Having constituted only 11.6% of the regional population in 1974, the number of Bengalis grew by 1991 to constitute 48.5% of the regional population. In 1989, the government of then-president Hossain Mohammad Ershad passed the District Council Act created three ties of local government councils to devolve powers and responsibilities to the representatives of the native peoples, but the councils were rejected and opposed by the PCJSS.^[4]

[edit] Peace accord

Peace negotiations were initiated after the restoration of democracy in Bangladesh in 1991, but little progress was made with the government of prime minister Begum Khaleda Zia, the widow of Ziaur Rahman and her Bangladesh Nationalist Party.^[13] Fresh rounds of talks began in 1996 with the newly-elected prime minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed of the Awami League, the daughter of Sheikh Mujib.^[13] The peace accord was finalised and formally signed on December 2, 1997.^[5]

The agreement recognised the distinct ethnicity and special status of the tribes and indigenous peoples of the Chittagong Hill Tracts, and established a Regional Council constituting of the local government councils of the three districts of the Hill Tracts.^[4] The council was to be composed by men and women from the Chakma, Marma, Tripura, Murang and Tanchangya tribes; the delegates would be elected by the district councils of the Hill Tracts.^[4] Elected for a five-year term, the council would have authority and responsibility to maintain law and order, social justice and tribal laws, oversee general administration, coordinate disaster relief and management, issue licenses for heavy industries and oversee other development projects.^[4] The central government would be required to consult the regional councils over all issues concerning the Hill Tracts.^[4]

The agreement also provided for the setting up of a central Ministry of Tribal Affairs to be headed by a person of tribal ethnicity to administer the affairs concerning the Hill Tracts.^[4] The agreement also laid out plans for the return of land to displaced natives and an elaborate land survey to be held in the Hill Tracts.^[4]

[edit] Assessment

After the treaty was signed, the PCJSS emerged as a mainstream political party. The Shanti Bahini insurgents formally laid down their arms and received monetary compensation.^[2] More than 50,000 displaced tribals were able to return to their homes.^[3]^[2]^[13] The treaty received a mixed response in Bangladesh. While praised by many who sought an end to violence and to forge peace and development, the accord was seen by others as compromising the territorial integrity of Bangladesh and the assertion that the Chittagong Hill Tracts were an inalienable part of the country.^[1] The treaty was also criticised due to the secrecy surrounding the negotiations and allegations by the then-opposition party, the BNP, which claimed that the demands of the Bengali settlers were not accommodated in the agreement and that far too many concessions had been made.^[2]^[1]^[4] However, the BNP promised to implement the accord after its election victory in 2001.

[edit] References

^ ^a ^b ^c Rashiduzzaman, M. (July 1998). "Bangladesh's Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord: Institutional Features and Strategic Concerns". Asian Survey (University of California Press) 38 (7): 653-70. http://www.jstor.org/pss/2645754. Retrieved 2008-06-12.
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d "Bangladesh peace treaty signed". BBC News. 1997-12-02. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/despatches/36256.stm. Retrieved 2008-06-11.
^ ^a ^b "Chittagong marks peace anniversary". BBC News. 1998-12-02. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/226373.stm. Retrieved 2008-06-11.
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ "Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord, 1997". Banglapedia - National Encyclopedia of Bangladesh. http://banglapedia.search.com.bd/HT/C_0216.htm. Retrieved 2008-06-11.
^ ^a ^b Ministry of Chittagong Hill Tracts Affairs
^ Nagendra K. Singh (2003). Encyclopaedia of Bangladesh. Anmol Publications Pvt. Ltd.. pp. 222-223. ISBN 8126113901.
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d Bushra Hasina Chowdhury (2002). Building Lasting Peace: Issues of the Implementation of the Chittagong Hill Tracts Accord. University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign. http://www.acdis.uiuc.edu/research/OPs/Chowdhury/contents/part2.html.
^ Shelley, Mizanur Rahman (1992). The Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh: The untold story. Centre for Development Research, Bangladesh. pp. 129.
^ ^a ^b Nagendra K. Singh (2003). Encyclopaedia of Bangladesh. Anmol Publications Pvt. Ltd.. pp. 229. ISBN 8126113901.
^ Bangladeshi Insurgents Say India Is Supporting Them - New York Times
^ "Shanti Bahini". Banglapedia - National Encyclopedia of Bangladesh. http://banglapedia.search.com.bd/HT/S_0296.htm. Retrieved 2008-06-11.
^ Human rights in the Chittagong Hill Tracts; February 2000; Amnesty International.
^ ^a ^b ^c "PCJSS". Banglapedia - National Encyclopedia of Bangladesh. http://banglapedia.search.com.bd/HT/P_0088.htm. Retrieved 2008-06-11.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chittagong_Hill_Tracts_Peace_Accord"

Chittagong Hill Tracts: Arson Premeditated

Tuesday, 06 May 2008

Sample Image An independent citizens group has revealed that Bengalee settlers were responsible for the looting and arson of indigenous Chittgong Hill Tracts peoples' homes.

Below is an article published by The Daily Star:

The April 20 [2008] arson attack on villages of indigenous communities in Baghaichhari of Rangamati was well orchestrated and pre-planned, and the government has yet to take any action against the perpetrators, an independent citizens' group said.

They also said the victims are still living under the open sky.

The citizens' group comprising different professionals including human rights workers, university teachers, lawyers, and journalists raised questions yesterday at a news conference following a visit to the spot, wondering who could have dared to set fire to the houses next to an army camp.

"We think the reason behind the arson attack was not only the conflict between the indigenous communities and Bangalee settlers, the main motive was to drive away the indigenous people from the area to make way for new Bangalee settlements," said Robayet Ferdous, a teacher of mass communications and journalism at Dhaka University, while reading out a written statement at the conference.

At the conference, the citizens' group said in Sajek they visited eight villages, Nursery Para, Dane Bhaibachhara, Bame Bhaibachhara, Purbopara, Balughatpara, Retkaba, MSF Para, and Gangarammukh, where most of the houses that were gutted belonged to indigenous people while only a few burnt houses belonged to Bangalee settlers, and the government has yet to take an account of the damage.

They said, tension started to mount in Sajek since the Bangalee settlers started building new houses in Chakma villages just a couple of months ago. Quoting local indigenous people, the written statement said the attackers, who were speaking Bangla, first looted all furniture and other valuables in the houses and then set fire to them.

Some Bangalee settlers in Gangarammukh village even did not flinch to destroy a Buddhist temple, Bonobihar Kuthir, to build new houses for themselves, the news conference alleged.

Some Bangalee settlers there have been threatening local indigenous residents with arson attacks on their houses, if they do not go on an exodus into the forest, the citizens' group said quoting local indigenous residents.

They also said the Bangalee settlers there are very poor and depend on government provided rations.

"In Bhaibachhara village we saw a house in between two Chakma houses. The house of Bangalee settler Anawar Hossain was not burnt while the Chakma houses were gutted," said Robayet Ferdous.

In most of the villages all houses of the indigenous people were gutted while the houses of settlers were not, with only a few exceptions, the visitors noted.

"But the Bangalee victims said local indigenous people did not set fire to their houses," Robayet said reading out the written speech.

At the news conference the citizens' group demanded formation of a divisional probe committee and publication of the report. They also demanded stopping settling of Bangalees in Sajek area, and activating the Chittagong Hill Tracts Land Commission to resolve land disputes in the area.

They also demanded release of three indigenous youths who have been detained in the army camp since the attack.

Human rights activist Barrister Sarah Hossain, Gono Forum leader Pankaj Bhattachariaya, and journalist Shameema Binte Rahman were also among the visitors, who were present at the news conference too.

HUMAN RIGHTS/CITIZENSHIP
Livelihood crisis for Chakma, Hajong refugees
45 years after their settlement in Arunachal Pradesh, these refugees are still fighting for citizenship and livelihood rights. There is sustained local opposition to their settlement, reports Ratna Bharali Talukdar.

14 September 2008 - Nearly 18 years back when Montosh Chakma of Jyotipur village of Diyun Circle in Changlang district of Arunachal Pradesh undertook a long journey to Guwahati to pursue higher education in Cotton College, he had a dream of dedicating himself to the service of his downtrodden community. He planned to sign up for a government job after graduating from the most reputed institution in the Northeast and then returning to his birthplace. He successfully completed his studies but his dream of a job remained unfulfilled. He was denied a government job by Arunachal Pradesh government on the grounds that he belonged to a refugee family and hence was not entitled to a government job.

Montosh had no other option but to become a farmer to earn his bread. His tale is no different from the stories of thousands of youth belonging to Chakma and Hajong refugee families of Arunachal Pradesh.

Jayanta Chakma displaying the registration certificate that was issued to his father Chandra Sekhar when they had arrived at then Mizo district of Assam in 1964 along with other Chakma and Hajong refugees from erstwhile East Pakistan. Pic: Ratna Bharali Talukdar.

The life of a farmer in the refugee settlement pockets is definitely not comfortable. Montosh uses a mere two and half acres of land (after partition of parental land between his father and uncle) for agriculture, and this hardly fetches him enough money to run his four-member family--two brothers who are younger than him and ailing parents. But there is no other way. "Even if I try to go for multi-cropping agriculture system for surplus production, there is the problem of selling these products outside the refugee pockets," he says. The twice-a-week Diyun (Sunday and Wednesday) market is the only place where they can sell their surplus products, mostly vegetables, to their community people. Both buyers and sellers comprise of poverty-stricken refugee families, and thus there is no scope of doing a good business, he adds. To earn just Rs.50 on the market day, some people walk up to 10 kilometres.

Montosh himself is the Assistant General Secretary of the Committee for Citizenship Rights of Chakmas of Arunachal Pradesh (CCRCAP), the apex organisation that has been fighting for grant of citizenship to Chakma and Hajong refugees. He says agriculture is becoming less remunerative due to population pressure in these refugee pockets. This fact coupled with the absence of livelihood options has compelled a large number of educated boys and girls to migrate to cities such as Ahmedabad, Dehli and Kolkata to get employed at petty jobs such as salesmen in shops, in textile-mills, private security personal and other hazardous professions. Those who cannot afford to go outside mostly work in the agriculture fields of neighbouring Singpho and Tangsa Naga tribes on a share-crop system.

Most of these refugee pockets were allotted land on riverbank areas of the river Noa-Dihing and of late there is severe erosion problem in some villages. While there is acute livelihood crisis and joblessness everywhere, denial of family ration cards to avail facilities under Public Distribution System have pushed them into penury.

Mantosh's parents came to India way back in 1964, along with groups of fellow refugees from the Chitagang Hills Tract of erstwhile East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) after being displaced due to submergence of their habitat during construction of Kaptai Dam. India accommodated a huge number of such refugees belonging to Chakma and Hajong communities in different states. As part of the refugee settlement programme, altogether 14,888 persons belonging to 2,748 families of both the communities were rehabilitated in Lohit, Subansiri (now in Papum Pare) and Tirap (now in Changlang) districts of the then North East Frontier Agency (NEFA), which was administered by the Ministry of External Affairs with the Governor of Assam acting as the agent of the President of India.

At the time of settlement, each of these families was allotted five acres of land for livelihood. The settlement process was completed between 1964 and 1969. Mantosh belongs to the second generation of these refugees born on Arunachal Pradesh's soil in 1968. NEFA was made a Union Territory in 1971, and finally a full-fledged state of Arunachal Pradesh in 1987.

Sustained opposition to the settlement of Chakma and Hajong refugees

The issue of settlement of refugees who had entered India from erstwhile East Pakistan during and post partition period was addressed through Indira–Mujib pact of 1972. According to the provisions of the pact, those refugees who had entered India before 25 March 1971 are to be treated as Indian citizens.

• Long disenfranchised in Assam

However, the issue of providing citizenship rights to around 60,000 Chakma and Hajong refugees currently living in Arunachal Pradesh is yet to be decided due to constant opposition of the successive state governments as well as various organisations including the most powerful All Arunachal Pradesh Students Union (AAPSU). The Chakma and Hajong refugee issue is still a matter of endless conflict between locals and refugees at ground, as well as a matter of serious concern at administrative level. Successive state governments and political parties irrespective of their political affiliations have been demanding deportation of these refugees from the state. The refugees were also served 'Quit Arunachal Pradesh' notices by the AAPSU in 1994, which spearheaded a massive statewide agitation programme on the issue.

The National Human Rights Commission had moved the Supreme Court in 1996 pleading for protection of lives and properties of the Chakma and Hajong refugees in view of the AAPSU movement. The Supreme Court in its judgment on 9 January 1996 on this petition directed the Arunachal Pradesh government to ensure life and personal liberty of every Chakma residing within the state. The Apex Court also directed the state government to enter the applications for Indian citizenships submitted by the Chakmas under Section 5 of the Citizenship Act in the register maintained for the purpose.

Montosh alleges that despite this, Supreme Court directive officials at local levels often refuse to accept such applications.

The government is yet to take a decision on 4,677 applications for grant of citizenship, submitted by the Chakma and Hajongs through CCRCAP. However, with the intervention of the Election Commission of India, names of 1,497 Chakma and Hajong youths born in Arunachal Pradesh between 1964 and 1987, were included in the electoral roll and allowed to exercise their franchise during the 2004 Lok Sabha polls.

In its 'White Paper on Chakma and Hajong Refugee Issue' published by Government of Arunachal Pradesh in 1996, the state government alleged: "Central Government hardly took any initiative to find a solution to the satisfaction of the local people. It seems that the central government never felt any urgency to resolve the problem as it failed to gauge the gravity of the issue, if left unattended to, in giving rise to a situation which may snowball into a major law and order problem, threatening the peace and tranquility in this 'Island of peace', in the turbulent north-east India."

C C Singpho, health minister of the state who represents Diyun-Babrdumsa assembly constituency asserted the state government's demand for immediate deportation of these refugees from the state and expressed the state's inability to bear the burden of welfare responsibilities such as education, health, issuing of family ration cards and others. "We strongly demand that these people should be immediately deported from our state. Even if it is taken into consideration that they are entitled for granting citizenship right under the Indira-Mujib Agreement, 1972, they must be taken away from our state first, before providing them the right in other states," he says.

Locals belonging to Singpho and Tangsa Naga tribes too have opposed the settlement of Chakma and Hajong refugees in the locality right from the time of allocation of land to the refugee families. Their fear is two-fold--that customary laws and traditional rights of indigenous people living in surrounding areas will be violated, and also of being outnumbered by the huge size of refugee population, the minister says.

Such opposition by state administration even after 45 years of settlement of these refugees ultimately reflects not only issues like denial of job opportunity or livelihood crisis, but also basic human rights. It is difficult for an outsider to meet Montosh in his own residential pocket. The Office of the Deputy Resident Commissioner, Arunachal Pradesh where one has to apply for the Inner Line Permit (ILP) to enter into the state, is itself in Guwahati, the capital city of Assam. This office does not entertain any application for ILP for the Changlang and Tirap districts which house the refugee settlements, considering the sensitivity of the issue.

Differentiated treatment of refugees

However not all refugees suffer this fate in Arunachal. The state also shelters groups of Tibetan refugees at Miao, Tezu and Bomdila. The difference in treatment is easily visible between Tibetan refugees and the Chakmas and Hajongs refugees. The Choephelling Tibetan settlement in Miao has a well-defined territory having all basic facilities including assured education, health, vocational institutions meant for girl school dropouts and a comfortable livelihood support which also include employment opportunities mostly in the Indian Army.

According to eminent legal expert Dr Rajeev Dhavan, "Tibetans are often said to be the model refugee community and are among the best treated refugees in India with semi-autonomous settlements, government expenditure on their education, and freedom to pursue their cultural, social and political goals." (Refugee Law and Policy in India, published 2004, page 123).

Overdue - a refugee-specific legislation

At the micro level, issues including livelihood support as well as ensuring a dignified life of the Chakma and Hajong refugees are associated with granting of citizenship rights. But from a wider national perspective, the issue of addressing overall refugee situations in India is centered round one pertinent question - does India need a refugee-specific legislation to address issues of all refugees in the country equally?

India is a safe home to countless refugees, mostly from South-East Asian countries, not only for accommodation but for livelihood support as well. Since the time of India's independence the country has experienced major population transfer. India successfully dealt with the process of rehabilitation of millions of partition refugees immediately after independence, many of whom were later locally integrated.

India also hosted about one lakh Tibetan refugees in 1959, who entered here with Dalai Lama. This was followed by two waves of Tibetan refugees in 1980 and 2000. The country experienced another major population influx of over 10 million refugees during Bangladesh War in 1971. Most of them were later returned to their homeland following creation of Bangladesh. We have also hosted over 80,000 Sri Lankan Tamil refugees and Bhutanese refugees. Apart from these there are 11,750 Afghan, Myanmar and other refugees under the mandate of the United Nations High Commission on Refugees (UNHCR) in the country. (The statistics have been gathered from the publications Refugee Law and Policy in India and A Pocket Guide to Refugees published by UNHCR.)

Besides, it has countless economic migrants, most of whom have illegally entered through porous India-Bangladesh border from Bangladesh inside its territory.

India has been accommodating and dealing with such huge volume refugees, practically without having any refugee-specific legislation. The Foreigners Act of 1946 is the only legislation that deals with all non-citizens within the Indian borders, making no differences between tourists, economic migrants, asylum seekers or refugees. This legislation is the core of all refugee-related issues ion the country. The act bestows unlimited powers on the government to identify, arrest and prosecute any 'foreigners' they suspect to have violated any laws within the territory, making them vulnerable to attacks of political discretion.

In absence of a refugee-specific legislation or any systematic policy to deal with the refugees, Indian governments have dealt with refugee issues of different groups with a differential administrative approach. This means, the approach varies for each refugee group with regard to their determination and treatment, as is the Tibetan case. Again, there is no policy guideline for individual refugees who have no alternative but to approach UNHCR for asylum.

According to UNHCR, the absence of a legislation on refugee protection has led to differential administrative measures between refugee groups and a national legislation for refugee protection would provide standardised and acknowledged principles for refugee determination and treatment.

An Eminent Persons Group has already come up with a Model Law in this regard, drafted under the aegis of Regional Consultations on Refugees and Migratory Movements in South Asia. This was made public in 1995. Justice P N Bhagawati as the Chairperson of the Drafting Committee of the India-specific version of the national law on refugee protection. However, Government of India is yet to take a decision on the subject. ⊕

Ratna Bharali Talukdar
14 Sep 2008

Ratna Bharali Talukdar is a freelance journalist based in Guwahati, Assam. She received the Chameli Devi Jain Award for Outstanding Women Media Person and the Ramnath Goenka Excellence in Journalism Award in 2005 and 2006 respectively. This article is part of the author's work under a media fellowship awarded by the UNHCR and the Centre for North East Studies and Policy Research [C-NES].

Refugees Within, Refugees Without

The Chakma are too few to be so fragmented and scattered, but there is little incentive for anyone to try and redress their condition.

by Sanjoy Hazarika

On 15 August 1947, the Indian tricolour went up a flagpost in Rangamati, the main town in the Chittagong Hill Tracts. The Chakma leaders had believed during the tortuous negotiations leading up to Partition that, given the religious composition of the largely Buddhist CHT, their district would be parcelled out to India.

Not so, decided Sir Cyril Radcliffe, head of the commission with the task of apportioning the territories, and the Hill Tracts were awarded to (East) Pakistan. On 18 August, Pakistani troops marched into Rangamati, pulled down the Indian flag, and sent up in its place the star and crescent of Pakistan.

The days of travail had begun for the Chakma, a minority which, over the following half century, has had more than its share of fragmentation, even by South Asian standards. Today, their own homeland, the CHT, is overrun with Bengali settlers from the overpopulated Bangladeshi mainland, and divided groups survive under trying circumstances in Tripura, Mizoram and Arunachal.

However, for all the tragedy they have suffered, the world knows too little about Chakmas. Within Bangladesh, they pale to insignificance before the size of the mainland population and the suffering that regularly visits it. In India, Chakmas make up three segregated groups whose problem is one among so many in the increasingly violent Northeast, itself a region that suffers neglect from India's rulers.

Colony to Bahini

The Chakma form part of the great Tibeto-Burman language family whose antecedents, like those of the tribal communities stretching all the way east from central Nepal, go back to the central and eastern Asia of thousands of years ago. The jungles of the CHT are home to several such Tibeto-Burman tribes, among whom Chakmas and Marmas are the largest.

The Hill Tracts, an undulating curiosity in a Bangladesh that is otherwise remarkable for its deltaic flatness, became a refuge for Buddhism even as the faith declined across the region in the face of a resurgent Hinduism and, later, Islam. The Buddhist character of what is today the CHT, in fact, seems to have been cemented in the 14th century when Sawngma (Chakma) Raja Marekyaja migrated from neighbouring Arakan hills into the Chittagong belt to establish his rule and dynasty here.

During colonial times, the Chakma did not take kindly to new demands for taxes by the British, who had to make at least three major offensives to subdue the tribals until an agreement was extracted from them. However, relations with the British became progressively cordial afterward, to the extent that Chakmas under Rani Kallendi sided with the imperial rulers during the Great Mutiny of 1857.

In 1860, the British divided the hill tracts into three subdivisions, under the control of three tribes. In 1900, in return perhaps for loyalty shown, they introduced a regulation banning the settlement of outsiders in the Hill Tracts and prohibiting the transfer of land to non-indigenous people. The 1935 Government of India Act defined the hills as a "Totally Excluded Area", taking it out of Bengal's control.

These actions to protect the tribal identity and economy were strongly resented in Dhaka and Calcutta. The displeasure found expression immediately after 1947 in the open season that was declared for settlers. Successive regimes in East Pakistan, and later Bangladesh, supported the influx of Bengali-speaking Muslim migrants into the 5,000 sq km Hill Tracts, which is sparsely populated in relation to the rest of the country. Today, as a result of the aggressive settlement policy, the Hill Tracts has a population of 900,000 which is evenly divided between Muslim homesteaders and the indigenous Buddhists.

If the first political blow suffered by the Chakma was when their territory was placed with East Pakistan, the following decades saw successive measures that fuelled discontent. It started with the crackdown on the anti-Pakistan demonstrations of 1947. Then came the inundation of prime agricultural lands by the Kaptai Dam reservoir, one of the first mega- projects in all South Asia. The reservoir displaced tens of thousand Chakmas.

During the 1971 war for Bangladesh's liberation, the CHT population backed the Mukti Bahini against the Pakistani army. The following year, Manobendra Larma, who had been elected to the national parliament from the Hill Tracts, called on Sheikh Mujibur Rahman with a delegation, seeking to place Chakma concerns on the new nation's political agenda. As it became clear that Shiekh Mujibur and the new establishment he represented was in no mood to listen, Mr Larma set up the Jana Sanghata Samiti as a political group, and later, its armed wing, the Shanti Bahini.

Over the course of the following years, operations by the Bangladeshi army in the Hill Tracts against the Shanti Bahini led to an exodus of Chakma refugees into neighbouring Tripura, the Indian state which juts like a wedge into Bangladesh's east. Over the last 20 years, Indian security forces have supported the Chakma fighters and have provided training which is conducted for the most part in Tripura. During this period, the Bahini has carried out a series of attacks on Bangladeshi forces and on civilian targets as well.

There was a split in the Bahini in 1983 and a faction surrendered to the Dhaka authorities. However, the leftist group that is backed by India battles on. Manobendra Larma was killed during the factional in-fighting, but his brother, Shanto, has continued the campaign against Dhaka. The hills are presently quiet, as a ceasefire is in force while peace negotiations continue.

Fourfold Division

The number of Chakma who continue to live in their homeland of the Chittagong Hill Tracts is said to be about 300,000. Another 80,000 Chakmas are to be found concentrated in the southwest of Mizoram, the Indian state that is sandwiched between Burma and the CHT. Most of this population is now regarded as Indian, having lived in Mizoram for generations. A third group of most recent arrivals is located in Tripura, and numbers 50,000. Here since 1988, these Chakma refugees fled the Bangladesh Army operations against their villages in the CHT. Today, they live in decrepit settlements that are euphemistically termed refugee camps by the Indian government.

A fourth group of Chakma consists of those displaced by the Kaptai Dam reservoir in 1964, who were forced to fend for themselves when the erstwhile government of East Pakistan failed to pay compensation. About 30,000 of these Chakma "development refugees" ended up in the Cachar and Lushai hills (which later became the Mizo Hills, and then the state of Mizoram). At least 20,000 more left for the Arakan hills in Burma, where they are now settled.

"They came in a hopeless, pathetic condition, just with the clothes that they wore," recalls one senior Mizoram official, who was part of the Assam government team that received the Chakma in the Cachar and Lushai hills. At one point, the Indian authorities toyed with the idea of moving the Chakma en masse to the Andaman and Nicobar islands, but it was later decided to shift the refugees to the North East Frontier Agency, now the state of Arunachal Pradesh.

No Honour, Nor Dignity

The Chakma encampments in Tripura are not "refugee camps" as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees would define them. They have none of the facilities available to, say, the Bhutanese refugees in the Jhapa camps of Nepal. The Chakma huts are of mud and thatch, and for years they have received from the Government of India a measly daily quota of 400 grams of rice, some salt, and 20 paisa on the side.

Because this dole is hardly enough, many Chakmas work outside the camps for wages lower than what the locals ask. This has created tension, and recently, the Tripura state government passed an order restricting the refugees to the camps. This year, for the first time since the Chakmas arrived in Tripura, refugee students were not allowed to sit for school-leaving examinations of the state education system.

Repatriation talks between the Bangladesh authorities, the Indian Government and the Chakma leadership have continued over the past few years, but there appears little hope that the refugees will be returning anytime soon with the "honour and dignity" that their leaders insist on. Assurances from the Bangladeshi authorities do not seem enough, and the Indian side does not favour forced repatriation. Conditions are far from settled, especially as the ceasefire between Dhaka and the Shanti Bahini is due to end on 31 March.

The Chakma of Mizoram, while they seem to be the most secure among the displaced groups, have problems of their own. Regarded as Congress party backers, they were granted an autonomous district council back in 1972. The local Mizo, who see a cultural and demographic threat in the Chakma presence (they now make up ten percent of Mizoram's population), resent the granting of the council, especially as it was done without consulting them. Besides, the Mizo also suspect that many of the state's Chakmas are subsequent migrants from Bangladesh, and not part of the original settlers.

The Mizo are predominantly Presbytarian and they recently celebrated 100 years of the coming of the Church to their hills. The growth of the Chakma population, whether natural or through illegal influx, has sparked a campaign of intimidation by the militant Mizo Students Union. Chakmas have been assaulted, their houses torched, and names struck off the electoral lists. The anti-Chakma campaign is set to resume this spring and continue through the summer. "The Chakma are foreigners, and they do not belong here," is the refrain among the Mizo student leaders.

Another 70,000 or so Chakmas are into hard times in nearby Arunachal Pradesh, where a student-led campaign is underway to drive out the Kaptai 'oustees' who were settled here by the Indian government 32 years ago. Here, too, a campaign to frighten them is on, which recently forced hundreds to flee to the relative safety of Assam. The Supreme Court of India has given directives against the anti-Chakma drive, but Arunachali leaders and agitators insist that the campaign will continue. The Central government has appointed a committee to review the situation, but with both the state government and opposition agreed on the question, uncertain times loom ahead for the Chakma of Arunachal.

Demographic Threat

In their homeland of the Chittagong Hill Tracts as well as in their Northeast India exile, the Chakma are about as vulnerable as it is possible for any community to be. A tenuous peace prevails in the Hill Tracts themselves, and in the points of their diaspora in India—Tripura, Mizoram, and Arunachal—they face hostile locals and a rising threat of eviction. The politics of demography is all the rage in the Northeast, and the Chakma have no constituency. The New Delhi authorities may try to show understanding, but that is no match for the rising animosities on the ground. The fact that the Chakmas of the Northeast are fragmented into three different populations makes their voice that much weaker.

If there were to be a common effort by New Delhi politicians and bureaucrats, the chief ministers and opposition leaders of the Northeast states, the Chakma leaders, and eminent members of the public, a humane solution that addresses the interests of long-time residents as well as the demographic concerns of the locals may be found.

Even in the unlikely event of the Chakma problem in the Northeast being resolved in a few swift strokes, however, the problem of Chakma in the Chittagong Hill Tracts would remain. That was, after all, how it all began.

S. Hazarika is a Delhi-based writer with special interest in the Indian Northeast.

http://www.south-asia.com/himal/April/chakma.htm

40 years on, Chakma refugees win right to vote

Chakma girls showing their age certificate after their names were enrolled in the voters list in Jyotiput Chakma refugee village. - Photo: Ritu Raj Konwar

Sushanta Talukdar

DIYUN, ARUNACHAL PRADESH

Bimal Kanti Chakma, assistant gaon burah (assistant village headman) of Jyotipur, a Chakma village in the East Arunachal Lok Sabha constituency, is today a happy man. The reason: his daughter Helen will be one of the first batch of 1,497 privileged Chakma and Hajong refugees of Arunachal Pradesh exercising their right to vote when polling takes place on May 5.

Even though Mr. Chakma himself did not get the franchise, he is busy trying to get the young voters of his community understand the importance of exercising their franchise, earned after a relentless struggle of 40 years. Mr. Chakma is also the assistant general secretary of the Committee for Citizenship Rights of the Chakmas of Arunachal Pradesh (CCRCAP) that has been fighting for Indian citizenship for over 60,000 Chakma and Hajong refugees living in Arunachal Pradesh. The Chakma and Hajong refugees in Arunachal Pradesh fled their ancestral land in the Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh following religious persecution of these Buddhist followers.

"We have decided to form committees in each Chakma village to ensure that every Chakma voter with voting rights exercises this hard-earned right. On the day of the polling the village elders will accompany these young voters to the polling station. The granting of voting rights to Chakma and Hajong youths is an important step in our struggle for citizenship rights," Mr. Chakma says.

The boycott call given by the All Arunachal Pradesh Students Union (AAPSU) in protest against granting of voting rights to the Chakma and Hajong refugees seems to have made no impact in Diyun, which has the highest concentration of refugees. However, the election department has identified all the 14 polling stations, of which eight are in Chakma and Hajong settlements, as sensitive and has arranged adequate security to ensure that Chakma and Hajong voters are not prevented from voting.

Expressing full confidence that the polling would pass off peacefully, Assistant Electoral Registration Officer, T. Rumi, said that personnel of the Border Security Force and India Reserve Battalion besides Arunachal Pradesh Police have already been deployed in the polling areas.

Leaders of the Singpho and Khamti, local Arunachali tribes, have also not opposed granting of voting rights to the Chakmas and the Hajongs. "We are happy that our Chakma and Hajong brothers will be voting for the first time. The Singphos and Chakmas have many things in common. Both follow the Hunyan sect of Buddhism. Since they have been given shelter by the Indian Government we feel that they should be granted their constitutional rights too," says former MLA K.G. Singpho who met Bimal Chakma to discuss the elections. In sharp contrast to the protest by the AAPSU in Itanagar, posters of the Independent candidate Tony Pertin could be seen in Lohit and Changlang districts sporting the legend "Supported by AAPSU."

Though numerically the 1,497 Chakma and Hajong voters are insignificant in the poll battle between the sitting MP, Wangcha of the Congress, and Tapir Gao of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the Chakma and Hajong refugee issue has tended to dominate Arunachal Pradesh politics.

Only those descendants of Chakma and Hajong voters were included in the voters list who were born in Arunachal Pradesh between 1964 and 1987 after the Election Commission directed the State Election Department to undertake a special summary revision of the rolls in May last year. The CCRCAP moved the Delhi High Court after the State election department rejected its application for inclusion of Chakma names in the electoral rolls.

Thirtytwo-year-old Kriti Bikash Chakma, a graduate of Assam's Dibrugarh University, is excited to have received the right to vote. "We are grateful to both the Central and the State Governments for giving us the right," he says.

http://www.hindu.com/2004/05/04/stories/2004050401291500.htm

Chittagong Hill Tracts: Arson Premeditated

UNPO - Chittagong Hill Tracts: Arson Premeditated

Chittagong Hill Tracts: Arson Premeditated ... residents with arson attacks on their houses, if they do not go on an exodus into ...