Surrenders seen as body blow to ULFA

The question of surrenders itself was subject for political debate with the state Chief Minister Prafulla Kumar Mahanta resisting the move to accept the efficacy of the surrenders of the militant cadres.

He had earlier clearly stated that he was against surrenders, citing the precedent of surrenders which his predecessor Hiteshwar Saikia had “engineered”. It was a cul de sac, Mahanta had pointed out.

Saikia, beginning March, 1992, had brought overground a large number of ULFA rebels, with the rehabilitation scheme itself putting on record names of about 3100 such youths. But while on the one hand the banks and the government lost about Rs 124crore given to those youths as soft loans to begin life afresh, a large number of the youths turned hooligans.

This until the Army and the government found a new name for it. The two surrender functions have been labelled “rehabilitation ceremonies.”

The youths now capitulating are being promised jobs in the central para-military forces, with 51 such posts already released in the CRPF and the BSF. The government cites the reason of the failure of prior attempts as lack of employment opportunities.

“A large number of boys from the villages were lured away by ULFA leaders who themselves are leading a cushy life in posh hotels in several south-east Asian cities. But more and more boys are willing to come back and take up jobs. They want a secured job if nothing else,” added Lt Gen N C Vij, GOC, IV Corps of the Army.

The ULFA leadership, meanwhile, has dismissed claims by the authorities that a large number of its cadres were willing to give up the “armed struggle.” Interestingly, the ULFA has oflate begun releasing lists of members who were declared “discharged” from the outfit. Two such lists have so far carried names of about 60 youths, with the ULFA saying the organisation no longer wanted them as they had several complaints against them.

What hinders these moves by the state from actually weakening the ULFA substantially include the fact that the Centre and the state governments are yet to come out with a definite, attractive and convincing package for those willing to come out.

Then of course the fact that common people are yet to openly oppose the ULFA’s line. “Though the majority of the people do not subscribe to the ULFA’s views they are afraid to come out openly against them (the militants) for fear of life, property and other possible harassment,” the Assam Tribune says.

Also there is the nagging doubt about the “genuineness” of these surrenders, ULFA chief Paresh Barua’s statements brushing aside the Army’s claims of discontent in the organisation notwithstanding.